Editing Anthroposophy (section)

==Reception==

Anthroposophy's supporters include [[Saul Bellow]],<ref name=":0">{{Cite news |last=Fulford |first=Robert |date=23 October 2000 |title=Bellow: the novelist as homespun philosopher |url=http://www.robertfulford.com/SaulBellow.html |access-date=16 March 2024 |work=The National Post}}</ref> [[Selma Lagerlöf]],<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Kugler |first=Walter |title=Feindbild Steiner |date=2001 |publisher=Verl. Freies Geistesleben & Urachhaus |isbn=978-3-7725-1918-5 |publication-place=Stuttgart |page=61 |language=de}}</ref> [[Andrei Bely]],<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=Liukkonen |first=Petri |title=Andrey Bely |url=http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/bely.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20020610132804/http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/bely.htm |archive-date=2002-06-10 |website=Books and Writers (kirjasto.sci.fi) |publisher=[[Kuusankoski]] Public Library |location=Finland}}</ref><ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last=Elsworth |first=J. D. |year=1983 |title=Andrej Bely: A Critical Study of the Novels |journal=The Russian Review |volume=45 |issue=1 |pages=53–55 |jstor=129408}}</ref> [[Joseph Beuys]],<ref name=":4">{{Cite magazine |last=John F. Moffitt |date=Spring 1991 |title=Occultism in Avant-Garde Art: The Case of Joseph Beuys |magazine=Art Journal |pages=96–98 |volume=50 |number=1}}</ref> [[Owen Barfield]], architect [[Walter Burley Griffin]],<ref name=WBGriffin/> [[Wassily Kandinsky]],<ref name=":6">{{Cite magazine |last=Peg Weiss |date=Summer 1997 |title=Kandinsky and Old Russia: The Artist as Ethnographer and Shaman |magazine=The Slavic and East European Journal |pages=371–373 |volume=41 |number=2}}</ref><ref name=":7">{{Cite web |last=David Hier |title=Kandinsky: The Path to Abstraction 1908–1922 |url=http://www.artsablaze.co.uk/News/kandinsky.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131014210937/http://www.artsablaze.co.uk/News/kandinsky.htm |archive-date=2013-10-14 |access-date=2013-12-31 |website=Arts Ablaze}}</ref> [[Andrei Tarkovsky]],<ref name=":8">{{Cite web |last=Layla Alexander Garrett |title=Andrey Tarkovsky-Enigma and Mystery |url=http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~tstronds/nostalghia.com/TheTopics/Layla.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090927213535/http://www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~tstronds/nostalghia.com/TheTopics/Layla.html |archive-date=2009-09-27 |access-date=2013-12-31 |website=Nostalghia}}</ref> [[Bruno Walter]],<ref name=":9">Bruno Walter, "Mein Weg zur Anthroposophie". In: ''Das Goetheanum'' 52 (1961), 418–2</ref> [[Right Livelihood Award]] winners [[Sir George Trevelyan, 4th Baronet|Sir George Trevelyan]],<ref name=":10">B J Nesfield-Cookson, [http://www.sirgeorgetrevelyan.org.uk/mem-steiner.html "Rudolf Steiner"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924102200/http://www.sirgeorgetrevelyan.org.uk/mem-steiner.html |date=2015-09-24 }} from Sir George Trevelyan: thoughts and writings</ref> and [[Ibrahim Abouleish]],<ref name="Abouleish 2005 p. ">{{Cite book |last=Abouleish |first=Ibrahim |title=Sekem: A Sustainable Community in the Egyptian Desert |date=2005 |publisher=Floris Books |isbn=0-86315-532-4 |publication-place=Edinburgh |oclc=ocm61302498}}</ref> and child psychiatrist [[Eva Frommer]].<ref name="Frommer 1995 p. ">{{Cite book |last=Frommer |first=Eva A. |title=Voyage Through Childhood Into the Adult World – A Guide to Child Development |publisher=Rudolph Steiner Press |year=1995 |isbn=978-1-869890-59-9}}</ref><ref name=":13">Fiona Subotsky, [http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/29/5/197.1 Eva Frommer (Obituary)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161226055842/http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/29/5/197.1 |date=2016-12-26 }}, 29 April 2005. {{doi|10.1192/pb.29.5.197}}</ref>

The historian of religion [[Olav Hammer]] has termed anthroposophy "the most important esoteric society in European history."<ref name=Hammer/> However authors, scientists, and physicians including [[Michael Shermer]], Michael Ruse, [[Edzard Ernst]], [[David Gorski]], and [[Simon Singh]] have criticized anthroposophy's application in the areas of medicine, biology, agriculture, and education to be dangerous and [[pseudoscience|pseudoscientific]].<ref name="dangerous" /> Others including former Waldorf pupil Dan Dugan and historian Geoffrey Ahern have criticized anthroposophy itself as a dangerous quasi-religious movement that is fundamentally anti-rational and anti-scientific.<ref>Sources for 'anti-rational' or 'anti-scientific':{{Bulleted list|{{harvnb|Dugan|2007|pp=74–76}}|{{harvnb|Ruse|2013a|pp=128–}}|{{Cite news |last=Williams |first=Lee |date=8 November 2016 |title=steiner schools |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/steiner-schools-have-some-questionable-lessons-for-todays-children-a7402911.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210601025031/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/steiner-schools-have-some-questionable-lessons-today-s-children-a7402911.html |archive-date=1 June 2021 |access-date=29 November 2018 |work=The Independent}}|{{harvnb|Dugan|2002|p=32}}|{{harvnb|Ahern|2009}}}}</ref>

===Scientific basis===
Though Rudolf Steiner studied [[natural science]] at the Vienna Technical University at the undergraduate level, his [[doctorate]] was in epistemology and very little of his work is directly concerned with the empirical sciences. In his mature work, when he did refer to science it was often to present phenomenological or [[Goethean science]] as an alternative to what he considered the materialistic science of his contemporaries.<ref name=Hammer/>

Steiner's primary interest was in applying the methodology of science to realms of inner experience and the spiritual worlds (his appreciation that the essence of science is its method of inquiry is unusual among [[esoteric]]ists<ref name=Hammer/>), and Steiner called anthroposophy ''[[Geisteswissenschaft]]'' (science of the mind, cultural/spiritual science), a term generally used in German to refer to the [[humanities]] and [[social science]]s.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Philolex entry |url=http://www.philolex.de/geistwis.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131110222130/http://www.philolex.de/geistwis.htm |archive-date=2013-11-10 |access-date=2013-12-31 |publisher=Philolex.de}}</ref>

Whether this is a sufficient basis for anthroposophy to be considered a spiritual science has been a matter of controversy.<ref name="Willmann">{{Cite journal |last=Willmann |first=Carlo |year=2001 |title=Waldorfpädagogik: Theologische und religionspädagogische Befunde |journal=Kölner Veröffentlichungen zur Religionsgeschichte |language=de |publisher=Böhlau |publication-place=Köln Weimar Wien |volume=27 |isbn=978-3-412-16700-4 |issn=0030-9230 |postscript=Especially chapters 1.3, 1.4.}}</ref><ref name=Hammer/> As Freda Easton explained in her study of Waldorf schools, "Whether one accepts anthroposophy as a science depends upon whether one accepts Steiner's interpretation of a science that extends the consciousness and capacity of human beings to experience their inner spiritual world."<ref name="Easton 1995 p. ">{{Cite book |last=Easton |first=Freda |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kInpHAAACAAJ |title=The Waldorf Impulse in Education: Schools as Communities that Educate the Whole Child by Integrating Artistic and Academic Work |publisher=Teachers College, Columbia University |year=1995 |access-date=16 March 2024}}</ref>

[[Sven Ove Hansson]] has disputed anthroposophy's claim to a scientific basis, stating that its ideas are not empirically derived and neither reproducible nor testable.<ref name="Sven Ove" /> Carlo Willmann points out that as, on its own terms, anthroposophical methodology offers no possibility of being falsified except through its own procedures of spiritual investigation, no [[intersubjectivity|intersubjective validation]] is possible by conventional scientific methods; it thus cannot stand up to empiricist critics.<ref name="Willmann" /> Peter Schneider describes such objections as untenable, asserting that if a non-sensory, non-physical realm exists, then according to Steiner the experiences of pure thinking possible within the normal realm of consciousness would already be experiences of that, and it would be impossible to exclude the possibility of empirically grounded experiences of other supersensory content.<ref name="Schneider" />

Olav Hammer suggests that anthroposophy carries [[scientism]] "to lengths unparalleled in any other Esoteric position" due to its dependence upon claims of clairvoyant experience, its subsuming natural science under "spiritual science". Hammer also asserts that the development of what he calls "fringe" sciences such as [[anthroposophic medicine]] and [[biodynamic agriculture]] are justified partly on the basis of the ethical and ecological values they promote, rather than purely on a scientific basis.<ref name=Hammer/>

Though Steiner saw that spiritual vision itself is difficult for others to achieve, he recommended open-mindedly exploring and rationally testing the results of such research; he also urged others to follow a spiritual training that would allow them directly to apply his methods to achieve comparable results.<ref name="Schneider" />

[[Anthony Storr]] stated about Rudolf Steiner's Anthroposophy: "His belief system is so eccentric, so unsupported by evidence, so manifestly bizarre, that rational skeptics are bound to consider it delusional... But, whereas Einstein's way of perceiving the world by thought became confirmed by experiment and mathematical proof, Steiner's remained intensely subjective and insusceptible of objective confirmation."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Storr |first=Anthony |author-link=Anthony Storr |title=Feet of Clay: Saints, Sinners, and Madmen: A Study of Gurus |publisher=Free Press Paperbacks, Simon & Schuster |year=1997 |isbn=978-0-684-83495-5 |location=New York |pages=69–70 |chapter=IV. Rudolf Steiner |orig-date=1996}}</ref>

According to Dan Dugan, Steiner was a champion of the following pseudoscientific claims, also championed by Waldorf schools:

#wrong [[color theory]];<ref name="Shermer Linse 2002 p. 32" />
#obtuse criticism of the [[theory of relativity]];<ref name="Sven Ove">{{Cite journal |last=Hansson |first=Sven Ove |year=1991 |title=Is Anthroposophy Science? |trans-title=Ist die Anthroposophie eine Wissenschaft? |url=http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Hansson.html |journal=Conceptus: Zeitschrift für Philosophie |volume=XXV |issue=64 |pages=37–49 |issn=0010-5155}}</ref><ref name="Shermer Linse 2002 p. 32" />
#weird ideas about [[Celestial mechanics|motions of the planets]];<ref name="Shermer Linse 2002 p. 32" />
#supporting [[vitalism]];<ref name="Shermer Linse 2002 p. 32" />
#doubting [[germ theory]];<ref name="Shermer Linse 2002 p. 32">{{Cite book |last=Dugan |first=Dan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Gr4snwg7iaEC&pg=PA32 |title=The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience |publisher=ABC-CLIO |year=2002 |isbn=978-1-57607-653-8 |editor-last=Shermer |editor-first=Michael |pages=31–33 |quote=In physics, Steiner championed Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's color theory over Isaac Newton, and he called relativity “brilliant nonsense.” In astronomy, he taught that the motions of the planets were caused by the relationships of the spiritual beings that inhabited them. In biology, he preached vitalism and doubted germ theory. |editor-last2=Linse |editor-first2=Pat |issue=v. 1}}</ref>
#weird approach to physiological systems;<ref name="FlynnDawkins2007" />
#"the heart is not a pump".<ref name="FlynnDawkins2007">{{Cite book |last=Dugan |first=Dan |url=http://www.waldorfcritics.org/articles/Anthroposophy.html |title=The New Encyclopedia of Unbelief |publisher=Prometheus Books, Publishers |year=2007 |isbn=9781615922802 |editor-last=Flynn |editor-first=Tom |pages=74–75 |quote=Anthroposophical pseudoscience is easy to find in Waldorf schools. “Goethean science” is supposed to be based only on observation, without “dogmatic” theory. Because observations make no sense without a relationship to some hypothesis, students are subtly nudged in the direction of Steiner's explanations of the world. Typical departures from accepted science include the claim that Goethe refuted Newton's theory of color, Steiner's unique “threefold” systems in physiology, and the oft-repeated doctrine that “the heart is not a pump” (blood is said to move itself). |editor-last2=Dawkins |editor-first2=Richard |accessdate=21 June 2015}}</ref>{{sfn|Hammer|2021|p=228 fn. 102}}

===Religious nature===

Two German scholars have called Anthroposophy "the most successful form of 'alternative' religion in the [twentieth] century."{{sfn|Schnurbein|Ulbricht|2001|p=38}} Other scholars stated that Anthroposophy is "aspiring to the status of religious dogma".{{sfn|Diener|Hipolito|2013|p=78}} According to Maria Carlson, anthroposophy is a "positivistic religion" "offering a seemingly logical theology based on pseudoscience."{{sfn|Carlson|2015|p=136}}

According to Swartz, Brandt, Hammer, and Hansson, Anthroposophy ''is'' a religion.<ref name="religion">Sources for 'religion':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite book |last1=Schnurbein |first1=Stefanie von |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xHNhQgAACAAJ |title=Völkische Religion und Krisen der Moderne: Entwürfe "arteigener" Glaubenssysteme seit der Jahrhundertwende |last2=Ulbricht |first2=Justus H. |publisher=Königshausen & Neumann |year=2001 |isbn=978-3-8260-2160-2 |page=38 |language=de |access-date=8 February 2024}} apud {{cite journal | last=Staudenmaier | first=Peter | title=Race and Redemption: Racial and Ethnic Evolution in Rudolf Steiner's Anthroposophy | journal=Nova Religio | publisher=University of California Press | volume=11 | issue=3 | date=1 February 2008 | issn=1092-6690 | doi=10.1525/nr.2008.11.3.4 | pages=4–36| url=https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1078&context=hist_fac }}|{{cite journal | last1=Swartz | first1=Karen | last2=Hammer | first2=Olav | title=Soft charisma as an impediment to fundamentalist discourse: The case of the Anthroposophical Society in Sweden | journal=Approaching Religion | volume=12 | issue=2 | date=14 June 2022 | issn=1799-3121 | doi=10.30664/ar.113383 | pages=18–37 | quote=2. It can be noted that insiders routinely deny that Anthroposophy is a religion and prefer to characterise it as, for example, a philosophical perspective or a form of science. From a scholarly perspective, however, Anthroposophy has all the elements that one typically associates with a religion, for example, a charismatic founder whose status is based on claims of having direct insight into a normally invisible spiritual dimension of existence, a plethora of culturally postulated suprahuman beings that are said to influence our lives, concepts of an afterlife, canonical texts and rituals. Religions whose members deny that the movement they belong to has anything to do with religion are not uncommon in the modern age, but the reason for this is a matter that goes beyond the confines of this article.| doi-access=free }}|{{cite book | last1=Hammer | first1=Olav | last2=Swartz-Hammer | first2=Karen | title=New Religious Movements and Comparative Religion | publisher=Cambridge University Press | series=Elements in New Religious Movements | year=2024 | isbn=978-1-009-03402-9 | chapter=NRMs in Comparative Perspective | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lkn8EAAAQBAJ&pg=PA62 | access-date=2024-07-19 | page=62}}|{{cite book | last1=Brandt | first1=Katharina | last2=Hammer | first2=Olav | editor-last1=Hammer | editor-first1=Olav | editor-last2=Rothstein | editor-first2=Mikael | title=Handbook of the Theosophical Current | publisher=Brill | series=Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion | year=2013 | isbn=978-90-04-23597-7 | chapter=Rudolf Steiner and Theosophy| chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0VozAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA113 | access-date=23 January 2024 | page=113 fn. 1 | quote=From a scholar’s point of view, Anthroposophy presents characteristics typically associated with religion, and in particular concepts of suprahuman agents (such as angels), a charismatic founder with postulated insight into the suprahuman realm (Steiner himself), rituals (for instance, eurythmy), and canonical texts (Steiner’s writings). From an insider’s perspective, however, “anthroposophy is not a religion, nor is it meant to be a substitute for religion. While its insights may support, illuminate or complement religious practice, it provides no belief system” (from the Waldorf school website www.waldorfanswers.com/NotReligion1.htm, accessed 9 October 2011). The contrast between a scholarly and an insiders’ perspective on what constitutes religion is highlighted by the clinching warrant for this assertion. Although the website argues that Anthroposophy is not a religion by stating that there are no spiritual teachers and no beliefs, it does so by adding a reference to a text by Steiner, who thus functions as an unquestioned authority figure.}}|{{cite book | last1=Hammer | first1=Olav | editor-last1=Geertz | editor-first1=Armin | editor-last2=Warburg | editor-first2=Margit | title=New Religions and Globalization | publisher=Aarhus University Press | series=Renner Studies On New Religions | year=2008 | isbn=978-87-7934-681-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XdsKEAAAQBAJ&pg=PA69 | access-date=23 January 2024 | page=69 | quote=Anthroposophy is thus from an emic point of view emphatically not a religion. }}|{{cite journal | last=Hansson | first=Sven Ove | title=Anthroposophical Climate Science Denial | journal=Critical Research on Religion | publisher=SAGE Publications | volume=10 | issue=3 | date=1 July 2022 | issn=2050-3032 | doi=10.1177/20503032221075382 | pages=281–297| doi-access=free | quote=Anthroposophy has characteristics usually associated with religions, not least a belief in a large number of spiritual beings (Toncheva 2015, 73–81, 134–135). However, its adherents emphatically reject that it is a religion, claiming instead that it is a spiritual science, Geisteswissenschaft (Zander 2007, 1:867).}}|{{cite book | last1=Zander | first1=Helmut | editor-last1=Hoheisel | editor-first1=Karl | editor-last2=Hutter | editor-first2=Manfred | editor-last3=Klein | editor-first3=Wolfgang Wassilios | editor-last4=Vollmer | editor-first4=Ulrich | title=Hairesis: Festschrift für Karl Hoheisel zum 65. Geburtstag | publisher=Aschendorff | series=Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum | year=2002 | isbn=978-3-402-08120-4 | chapter=Die Anthroposophie &mdash; Eine Religion? | chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3ZrYAAAAMAAJ | language=de | access-date=2 January 2024 | page=537}}|See also {{cite book | author=International Bureau of Education | title=Organization of Special Education for Mentally Deficient Children: A Study in Comparative Education | publisher=UNESCO | issue=v. 214-220 | year=1960 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=c8MpAQAAMAAJ | access-date=9 February 2024 | page=15 | quote=anthroposophy - a religion based upon the philosophical and scientific knowledge of man}}|See also {{cite book | author=International Bureau of Education | title=Bulletin of the International Bureau of Education | publisher=International Bureau of Education | issue=v. 31, nr. 122 -v. 34, nr. 137 | year=1957 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IM6uEoh_XpcC | access-date=9 February 2024 | page=36 | quote=anthroposophy - a religion based upon the philosophical and scientific knowledge of man}}}}</ref> They also call it "settled new religious movement",{{sfn|Swartz|Hammer|2022|pp=18–37}} while [[Martin Gardner]] called it a [[cult]].<ref>Sources for 'cult' or 'sect':{{Bulleted list|{{harvnb|Gardner|1957|pp=169, 224–225}}|{{Cite book |last=Brown |first=Candy Gunther |title=Debating Yoga and Mindfulness in Public Schools |date=6 May 2019 |publisher=University of North Carolina Press |isbn=978-1-4696-4848-4 |pages=229–254 |chapter=Waldorf Methods |doi=10.5149/northcarolina/9781469648484.003.0012 |quote=premised on anthroposophy, a religious sect founded by Steiner; |s2cid=241945146}}}}</ref> Another scholar also calls it a new religious movement or a new spiritual movement.{{sfn|Toncheva|2013|pp=81–89}} Already in 1924 Anthroposophy got labeled "new religious movement" and "occultist movement".{{sfn|Clemen|1924|pp=281–292}} Other scholars agree it is a new religious movement.<ref name="newreli" /> According to {{ill|Helmut Zander|de}}, both the theory and practice of Anthroposophy display characteristics of religion, and, according to Zander, Rudolf Steiner would plead no contest.{{sfn|Zander|2002|p=537}} According to Zander, Steiner's book ''Geheimwissenschaft'' [''Occult Science''] contains Steiner's [[mythology]] about [[cosmogenesis]].{{sfn|Zander|2002|p=528}} Hammer notices that Anthroposophy is a synthesis which does include occultism.<ref name="Lewis Tøllefsen 2015 p. 57">{{Cite book |last=Hammer |first=Olav |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3tfaCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA57 |title=Handbook of Nordic New Religions |publisher=Brill |year=2015 |isbn=978-90-04-29246-8 |editor-last=Lewis |editor-first=James R. |series=Brill Handbooks on Contemporary Religion |pages=56–57 |access-date=6 February 2024 |editor-last2=Tøllefsen |editor-first2=Inga Bårdsen}}</ref> Hammer also notices that Steiner's occult doctrines bear a strong resemblance to [[Helena Blavatsky|post-Blavatskyan]] Theosophy (e.g. [[Annie Besant]] and [[Charles Webster Leadbeater]]).<ref name="Partridge 2014 p. 350">{{Cite book |last=Hammer |first=Olav |title=The Occult World |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-317-59676-9 |editor-last=Partridge |editor-first=Christopher |series=Routledge Worlds |page=350 |chapter=The Theosophical Current in the Twentieth Century |access-date=6 February 2024 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_E-2BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA350}}</ref> According to Helmut Zander, Steiner's clairvoyant insights always developed according to the same pattern. He took revised texts from theosophical literature and then passed them off as his own higher insights. Because he did not want to be an occult storyteller, but a (spiritual) scientist, he adapted his reading, which he had seen supernaturally in the world's memory, to the current state of technology. When, for example, the [[Wright brothers]] began flying with gliders and eventually with motorized aircraft in 1903, Steiner transformed the ponderous gondola airships of his Atlantis story into airplanes with elevators and rudders in 1904.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Zander |first=Helmut |title=Rudolf Steiner: Die Biografie |date=2011 |publisher=Piper |isbn=978-3-492-05448-5 |publication-place=München Zürich |pages=191ff |language=de}}</ref>

As an explicitly spiritual movement, anthroposophy has sometimes been called a religious philosophy.<ref>{{Cite encyclopedia |title=anthroposophy definition – Dictionary – MSN Encarta |url=http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561500913/anthroposophy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091125142135/http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_561500913/anthroposophy.html |archive-date=2009-11-25}}</ref> In 1998 [[PLANS (Non-profit)|People for Legal and Non-Sectarian Schools (PLANS)]] started a lawsuit alleging that anthroposophy is a religion for [[Establishment Clause]] purposes and therefore several California school districts should not be chartering Waldorf schools; the lawsuit was dismissed in 2012 for failure to show anthroposophy was a religion.<ref>{{cite court |litigants= PLANS, Inc. v. Sacramento City Unified School District|vol= |reporter= |opinion=2:98-cv-00266-FCD-EFB|pinpoint= |court=United States District Court Eastern District of California|date=November 5, 2010|url=http://waldorfanswers.org/351MemorandumAndOrder4November2010.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://waldorfanswers.org/351MemorandumAndOrder4November2010.pdf <!--|archive-date=2022-10-09--> |url-status=live |quote=}}</ref>{{Primary source inline|reason=Original research based upon court documents, find a better source.|date=April 2024}} A 2012 paper in legal science reports this verdict as being provisional, and disagrees with its result, i.e. anthroposophy was declared "not a religion" due to an outdated legal framework.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rhea |first=Michael |year=2012 |title=Denying and Defining Religion Under the First Amendment: Waldorf Education as a Lens for Advocating a Broad Definitional Approach |url=https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3075&context=lalrev |journal=Louisiana Law Review |issue=72 |issn=0024-6859}}</ref> In 2000, a French court ruled that a government minister's description of anthroposophy as a cult was defamatory.<ref>[[United States Department of State]], [https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6aa9918.html ''U.S. Department of State Country Report on Human Rights Practices 2000 – France''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191213092132/https://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6aa9918.html |date=2019-12-13 }}, 26 Feb. 2001</ref> The French governmental anti-cults agency [[MIVILUDES]] reported that it remains vigilant about Anthroposophy, especially because of its deviant medical applications and its work with underage persons, and that the works of Grégoire Perra which lambast anthroposophical medicine do not constitute defamation.<ref name="miviludes">{{Cite web |last=Mission interministérielle de vigilance et de lutte contre les dérives sectaires |author-link=MIVILUDES |date=28 April 2023 |title=Rapport d'activité 2021 |url=https://www.miviludes.interieur.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/publications/francais/MIVILUDES-RAPPORT2021_web_%2027_04_2023%20_0.pdf |pages=72–74 |language=fr |accessdate=2024-07-19 |archive-date=2024-07-21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240721001825/https://www.miviludes.interieur.gouv.fr/sites/default/files/publications/francais/MIVILUDES-RAPPORT2021_web_%2027_04_2023%20_0.pdf |url-status=dead}}</ref> Anthroposophical MDs think diseases are caused primarily by karma and demons, rather than materialistic causes.<ref name="miviludes" /> The [[Gospel of Luke]] is their main handbook of medical science; this makes them believe they have magical powers, and that medicine is essentially a form of magic.<ref name="miviludes" /> The professional French organization of Anthroposophic MDs have sued Mr. Perra for such claims; they have been condemned to pay 25,000 Euros damages for abusively suing him.<ref name="miviludes" />

Scholars state that Anthroposophy is influenced by [[Christianity|Christian]] [[Gnosticism]].<ref>Sources for 'Christian Gnosticism':{{Bulleted list|{{harvnb|Robertson|2021|p=57}}|{{harvnb|Gilmer|2021|p=41}}|{{harvnb|Quispel|1980}}|{{harvnb|Quispel|Oort|2008|p=1}}|{{harvnb|Carlson|2018|p=58}}|{{harvnb|McL. Wilson|1993|p=256}}}}</ref> The Catholic Church did in 1919 issue an edict classifying Anthroposophy as "a neognostic heresy" despite the fact that Steiner "very well respected the distinctions on which Catholic dogma insists".<ref name="Diener Hipolito 2013 p. 77">{{Cite book |last1=Diener |first1=Astrid |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2kf7DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA77 |title=The Role of Imagination in Culture and Society: Owen Barfield's Early Work |last2=Hipolito |first2=Jane |publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers |year=2013 |isbn=978-1-7252-3320-1 |page=77 |access-date=6 March 2023 |orig-date=2002}}</ref><ref name="k531">See also {{Cite book |last=DWB |title=The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church |publisher=OUP Oxford |year=2022 |isbn=978-0-19-263815-1 |editor-last=Louth |editor-first=Andrew |edition=4th |pages=76–77 |chapter=anthroposophy |access-date=18 May 2024 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3CNeEAAAQBAJ&pg=PT591 |orig-year=2005}}</ref> The secular scholar Joan Braune agrees that Anthroposophy is Gnosticism.<ref name="d182">{{cite book | last=Braune | first=Joan | title=Erich Fromm's Revolutionary Hope: Prophetic Messianism as a Critical Theory of the Future | publisher=SensePublishers | series=Imagination and Praxis: Criticality and Creativity in Education and Educational Research | year=2014 | isbn=978-94-6209-812-1 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TfibBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA52 | access-date=17 November 2024 | page=52}}</ref>

Some Baptist and mainstream academical heresiologists still appear inclined to agree with the more narrow prior edict of 1919<ref name="Ellwood Partin 2016 p.">{{Cite book |last1=Ellwood |first1=Robert |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oWN4DQAAQBAJ |title=Religious and Spiritual Groups in Modern America |last2=Partin |first2=Harry |publisher=Taylor & Francis |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-315-50723-1 |edition=2nd |page=unpaginated |quote=On the one hand, there are what might be called the Western groups, which reject the alleged extravagance and orientalism of evolved Theosophy, in favor of a serious emphasis on its metaphysics and especially its recovery of the Gnostic and Hermetic heritage. These groups feel that the love of India and its mysteries which grew up after Isis Unveiled was unfortunate for a Western group. In this category there are several Neo-Gnostic and Neo-Rosicrucian groups. The Anthroposophy of Rudolf Steiner is also in this category. On the other hand, there are what may be termed "new revelation" Theosophical schisms, generally based on new revelations from the Masters not accepted by the main traditions. In this set would be Alice Bailey's groups, "I Am," and in a sense Max Heindel's Rosicrucianism. |access-date=6 March 2023 |orig-date=1988, 1973}}</ref> on dogma and the Lutheran (Missouri Sinod) apologist and heresiologist Eldon K. Winker quoted Ron Rhodes that Steiner's Christology is very similar to [[Cerinthus]].<ref name="Winker 1994 p. ">Sources for 'Christology':{{Bulleted list|{{Cite book |last=Winker |first=Eldon K. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W90QAQAAIAAJ |title=The New Age is Lying to You |publisher=Concordia Publishing House |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-570-04637-0 |series=Concordia scholarship today |page=34 |quote=The Christology of Cerinthus is notably similar to that of Rudolf Steiner (who founded the Anthroposophical Society in 1912) and contemporary New Age writers such as David Spangler and George Trevelyan. These individuals all say the Christ descended on the human Jesus at his baptism. But they differ with Cerinthus in that they do not believe the Christ departed from Jesus prior to the crucfixion.{{sup|12}} |access-date=6 March 2023}}|{{cite book | last=Rhodes | first=Ron | title=The Counterfeit Christ of the New Age Movement | publisher=Baker Book House | series=Christian Research Institute Series | year=1990 | isbn=978-0-8010-7757-9 | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QwtBPQAACAAJ | access-date=26 October 2023 | page=19}}}}</ref> Steiner did perceive "a distinction between the human person Jesus, and Christ as the divine Logos",<ref name="Cees Christ">{{Cite book |last=Leijenhorst |first=Cees |author-link=Cees Leijenhorst |title=Dictionary of Gnosis and Western Esotericism |publisher=Brill |year=2006 |editor-last=Hanegraaff |editor-first=Wouter J. |editor-link=Wouter Hanegraaff |location=Leiden / Boston |page=84 |chapter=Antroposophy |quote=Nevertheless, he made a distinction between the human person Jesus, and Christ as the divine Logos. |editor-last2=Faivre |editor-first2=Antoine |editor-last3=Broek |editor-first3=Roelof van den |editor-last4=Brach |editor-first4=Jean-Pierre}}</ref> which could be construed as Gnostic but not [[docetism|Docetic]],<ref name="Cees Christ" /> since "they do not believe the Christ departed from Jesus prior to the crucfixion".<ref name="Winker 1994 p."/> "Steiner's Christology is discussed as a central element of his thought in Johannes Hemleben, ''Rudolf Steiner: A Documentary Biography,'' trans. Leo Twyman (East Grinstead, Sussex: Henry Goulden, 1975), pp. 96-100. From the perspective of orthodox Christianity, it may be said that Steiner combined a docetic understanding of Christ's nature with the Adoptionist heresy."<ref name="g483">{{Cite book |last=Etter |first=Brian K. |title=From Classicism to Modernism: Western Musical Culture and the Metaphysics of Order |publisher=Routledge |year=2019 |isbn=978-1-315-18576-7 |page=unpaginated. fn. 80 |chapter=Chapter Six The New Music and the Influence of Theosophy |orig-year=2001}}</ref> Older scholarship says Steiner's Christology is [[Nestorianism|Nestorian]].<ref name="k343">{{Cite book |last=Sanders |first=John Oswald |title=Cults and isms: Ancient and Modern |publisher=Zondervan |year=1962 |isbn=978-0-551-00458-0 |publication-place=Grand Rapids, Michigan |page=165 |chapter=Anthroposophy |oclc=3910997 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XPZOAQAAMAAJ |orig-year=1948}}</ref> According to Egil Asprem, "Steiner's Christology was, however, quite heterodox, and hardly compatible with official church doctrine."<ref name="aspremthesis">{{Bulleted list|{{Cite thesis |last=Asprem |first=Egil |title=The problem of disenchantment: scientific naturalism and esoteric discourse, 1900-1939. |date=2013 |degree=dr. |publisher=University of Amsterdam |url=https://pure.uva.nl/ws/files/2010817/117215_thesis.pdf |page=507}}|{{Cite book |last=Asprem |first=Egil |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2e9dDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA493 |title=The Problem of Disenchantment: Scientific Naturalism and Esoteric Discourse, 1900-1939 |publisher=State University of New York Press |year=2018 |isbn=978-1-4384-6992-8 |editor-last=Appelbaum |editor-first=David |series=SUNY series in Western Esoteric Traditions |page=493 |access-date=18 May 2024 |orig-year=2014}}}}</ref>

===Statements on race===

Rudolf Steiner was an extreme pan-German nationalist, and never disavowed such stance.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Zegers |first1=Peter |last2=Staudenmaier |first2=Peter |date=9 January 2009 |orig-date=2000 |title=Anthroposophy and its Defenders |url=https://social-ecology.org/wp/2009/01/anthroposophy-and-its-defenders-2/ |journal=Humanist |publisher=Institute for Social Ecology |issue=4}}</ref>

Some anthroposophical ideas challenged the National Socialist racialist and nationalistic agenda. In contrast, some American educators have criticized Waldorf schools for failing to equally include the fables and myths of all cultures, instead favoring European stories over African ones.

* From the mid-1930s on, National Socialist ideologues attacked the anthroposophical worldview as being opposed to Nazi racist and nationalistic principles; anthroposophy considered "Blood, Race and Folk" as primitive instincts that must be overcome.<ref>Jakob Wilhelm Hauer, 7. Februar 1935. BAD R 4901&ndash;3285.</ref><ref>Report of the SD-Hauptamtes Berlin: "Anthroposophy", May 1936, BAD Z/B I 904.</ref>
* An academic analysis of the educational approach in public schools noted that "[A] naive version of the evolution of consciousness, a theory foundational to both Steiner's anthroposophy and Waldorf education, sometimes places one race below another in one or another dimension of development. It is easy to imagine why there are disputes [...] about Waldorf educators' insisting on teaching Norse tales and Greek myths to the exclusion of African modes of discourse."<ref name="McDermott">{{Cite journal |last1=McDermott |first1=Ray |last2=Henry |first2=Mary E. |last3=Dillard |first3=Cynthia |last4=Byers |first4=Paul |last5=Easton |first5=Freda |last6=Oberman |first6=Ida |last7=Uhrmacher |first7=Bruce |date=1996 |title=Waldorf education in an inner-city public school |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02354381 |url-status=bot: unknown |journal=The Urban Review |volume=28 |issue=2 |pages=119–140 |doi=10.1007/BF02354381 |issn=0042-0972 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210601025024/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02354381 |archive-date=2021-06-01 |access-date=2021-06-01}}</ref>

In response to such critiques, the [[Anthroposophical Society]] in America published in 1998 a statement clarifying its stance:
<blockquote>We explicitly reject any racial theory that may be construed to be part of Rudolf Steiner's writings. The Anthroposophical Society in America is an open, public society and it rejects any purported spiritual or scientific theory on the basis of which the alleged superiority of one race is justified at the expense of another race.<ref>The General Council of the Anthroposophical Society in America (1998) [https://web.archive.org/web/20080106140711/http://www.anthroposophy.org/Gov/StatementOnDiversity.php Position Statement on Diversity].</ref></blockquote>

[[Tommy Wieringa]], a Dutch writer who grew among Anthroposophists, commenting upon an essay by the Anthroposophist {{ill|Désanne van Brederode|nl}}, he wrote "It was a meeting of old acquaintances: Nazi leaders such as Rudolf Hess and Heinrich Himmler already recognized a kindred spirit in Rudolf Steiner, with his theories about racial purity, esoteric medicine and biodynamic agriculture."<ref name="NRC 2021">{{Cite web |last=Wieringa |first=Tommy |date=8 May 2021 |title=Groene vingers |url=https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2021/05/08/groene-vingers-a4042900 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210507202917/https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2021/05/08/groene-vingers-a4042900 |archive-date=7 May 2021 |access-date=7 February 2023 |website=NRC |language=nl |quote=Het was een ontmoeting van oude bekenden: nazi-kopstukken als Rudolf Hess en Heinrich Himmler herkenden in Rudolf Steiner al een geestverwant, met zijn theorieën over raszuiverheid, esoterische geneeskunst en biologisch-dynamische landbouw.}}</ref><ref name="Brederode 2021">{{Cite web |last=Brederode |first=Désanne van |date=27 February 2021 |title=Désanne van Brederode is verbijsterd: corona drijft antroposofen in extreemrechtse armen |url=https://www.trouw.nl/religie-filosofie/desanne-van-brederode-is-verbijsterd-corona-drijft-antroposofen-in-extreemrechtse-armen~bb13d660/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210419072542/https://www.trouw.nl/religie-filosofie/desanne-van-brederode-is-verbijsterd-corona-drijft-antroposofen-in-extreemrechtse-armen~bb13d660/ |archive-date=19 April 2021 |access-date=7 February 2023 |website=Trouw |language=nl}}</ref>

The racism of Anthroposophy is spiritual and paternalistic (i.e. benevolent), while the racism of fascism is materialistic and often malign.<ref name="Vukadinović 2022 p. 582">{{Cite book |last=Martins |first=Ansgar |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B7efEAAAQBAJ&pg=PT582 |title=Rassismus: Von der frühen Bundesrepublik bis zur Gegenwart |publisher=De Gruyter |year=2022 |isbn=978-3-11-070278-1 |editor-last=Vukadinović |editor-first=Vojin Saša |page=unpaginated |language=de |quote=Und genau diese komfortable Situation macht es möglich, dass Anthroposophie bis heute eine ganz erstaunliche Auswahl von rassischen und Völker-Stereotypen tradiert, die in ihrer Gründerzeit anscheinend kaum als skandalös auffielen, aber heute den politischen Status des Ganzen verändern. Steiners nationalistische, antijüdische und rassistische Vorstellungen notierten um 1920 nicht einmal linke Kritiker wie Ernst Bloch Oder Siegfried Kracauer, aber sie sickern zum Beispiel auch noch in die jüngere Waldorf-Literatur ein und führen seit den 1990er Jahren periodisch zu erbitterten wissenschaftlichen, journalistischen und juristischen Auseinandersetzungen. Die Argumente Sind seit Jahrzehnten ausgetauscht, das Andauern der Debatte gleicht einem Sich wahnsinnig weiterdrehenden Hamsterrad. Anthroposophen reagieren dabei stets reaktiv auf externe Kritik. Dass Steiner Sich von den wilden Rassisten des 19. Jahrhunderts distanzierte, wird manchen seiner heutigen Anhänger zur Ausrede, um seinen eigenen, spirituell-paternalistischen Rassismus in der Gegenwart schönzureden.{{sup|4}} Einer überschaubaren Anzahl kritischer Aufsätze{{sup|5}} stehen monographische Hetzschriften gegenüber, die Kritiker des „gezielten, vorsätzlich unternommenen Rufmords"{{sup|6}} bezichtigen. Derweil sprechen Sich die anthroposophischen Dachverbände, wenn die Kritik allzu laut wird, in formelhaften Allgemeinplätzen gegen Rassismus aus und gestehen vage, zeitbedingte' Formulierungen Steiners zu.{{sup|7}} Überhaupt dreht Sich die Diskussion zu oft um Steiner. Es Sind jüngere Beiträge, die seine Stereotype in die Gegenwart transportieren. |access-date=24 February 2023}}</ref> [[Olav Hammer]], university professor expert in [[new religious movements]] and [[Western esotericism]], confirms that now the racist and anti-Semitic character of Steiner's teachings can no longer be denied, even if that is "spiritual racism".<ref name="confirm">{{Cite journal |last=Hammer |first=Olav |date=2016 |title=Between Occultism and Nazism: Anthroposophy and the Politics of Race in the Fascist Era, written by Peter Staudenmaier |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/24644844 |journal=Numen |publisher=Brill |volume=63 |issue=1 |pages=118–121 |doi=10.1163/15685276-12341412 |issn=0029-5973 |jstor=24644844 |quote=their founder or their movement has been tainted with racism or anti-Semitism. [...] Denial, it would seem, is no longer an option.}}</ref>

According to Munoz, in the materialist perspective (i.e. no reincarnations), Anthroposophy is racist, but in the spiritual perspective (i.e. reincarnations mandatory) it is not racist.{{sfn|Munoz|2016|pp=189-190}}

===Reception by Nazi regime in Germany===
Though several prominent members of the [[Nazi Party]] were supporters of anthroposophy and its movements, including agriculturalist {{interlanguage link|Erhard Bartsch|de}}, SS colonel [[List of SS personnel|Hermann Schneider]], and [[Gestapo]] chief [[Heinrich Müller (Gestapo)|Heinrich Müller]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Staudenmaier |first=Peter |date=1 April 2013 |title=Organic Farming in Nazi Germany: The Politics of Biodynamic Agriculture, 1933–1945 |journal=Environmental History |volume=18 |issue=2 |pages=383–411 |doi=10.1093/envhis/ems154}}</ref> anti-Nazis such as [[Traute Lafrenz]], a member of the [[White Rose]] resistance movement, were also followers.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cowell |first=Alan |date=March 10, 2023 |title=Traute Lafrenz, Last Survivor of Anti-Hitler Group, Dies at 103 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/10/world/europe/traute-lafrenz-page-dead.html |work=The New York Times |via=NYTimes.com}}</ref> [[Rudolf Hess]], the adjunct Führer, was a patron of Waldorf schools<ref name="Douglas-Hamilton 2012 p. 106">{{Cite book |last=Douglas-Hamilton |first=James |title=The Truth About Rudolf Hess |publisher=Mainstream Publishing |year=2012 |isbn=978-1-78057-791-3 |page=unpaginated |chapter=1 Turmoil at the Dictator's Court: 11 May 1941 |quote=Organisations which Hess had supported, such as the Rudolf Steiner schools, were closed down. |access-date=2 October 2022 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=J5SyahCctVsC&pg=PT106}}</ref><ref name="Rieppel 2016 p. 246">{{Cite book |last=Rieppel |first=Olivier |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vgN-DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA246 |title=Phylogenetic Systematics: Haeckel to Hennig |publisher=CRC Press |year=2016 |isbn=978-1-4987-5489-7 |page=246 |quote=Although in his reply, Himmler pretended to share Astel's assessment of anthroposophy as a dangerous movement, he admitted to be unable to do anything about the school of Rudolf Steiner because Rudolf Hess supported and protected it. |access-date=3 October 2022}}</ref> and a staunch defender of biodynamic agriculture.<ref name="Tucker 2018 p. 165">{{Cite book |last=Tucker |first=S.D. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2K6IDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT165 |title=False Economies: The Strangest, Least Successful and Most Audacious Financial Follies, Plans and Crazes of All Time |publisher=Amberley Publishing |year=2018 |isbn=978-1-4456-7235-9 |page=unpaginated |quote=according to Deputy Führer Rudolf Hess (1894-1987), those sceptics who criticised biodynamic methods on scientific grounds were just 'carrying out a kind of witch-trial' against Steiner's followers |access-date=3 October 2022}}</ref> "Before 1933, Himmler, Walther Darré (the future Reich Agriculture Minister), and Rudolf Höss (the future commandant of Auschwitz) had studied ariosophy and anthroposophy, belonged to the occult-inspired Artamanen movement, [...]"<ref name="Kurlander 2015 pp. 498–522">{{Cite journal |last=Kurlander |first=Eric |year=2015a |title=The Nazi Magicians' Controversy: Enlightenment, "Border Science," and Occultism in the Third Reich |url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/43965203 |journal=Central European History |publisher=[Cambridge University Press, Central European History Society] |volume=48 |issue=4 |pages=498–522 |issn=<!--00089389, -->15691616 |jstor=43965203 |access-date=19 February 2024 |quote=Before 1933, Himmler, Walther Darré (the future Reich Agriculture Minister), and Rudolf Höss (the future commandant of Auschwitz) had studied ariosophy and anthroposophy, belonged to the occult-inspired Artamanen movement, [...]}}</ref>

"One of the most insightful contributions to this area is Peter Staudenmaier's case study of Anthroposophy, which has demonstrated the ambiguous role of Anthroposophists in fascist Italy and Nazi Germany."<ref name="o691">{{Cite book |last=Strube |first=Julian |title=Hermes Explains: Thirty Questions about Western Esotericism |date=28 May 2019 |publisher=Amsterdam University Press |isbn=978-90-485-4285-7 |editor-last=Forshaw |editor-first=Peter |publication-place=Amsterdam |page=230 |chapter=Doesn’t occultism lead straight to fascism? |quote=One of the most insightful contributions to this area is Peter Staudenmaier's case study of Anthroposophy, which has demonstrated the ambiguous role of Anthroposophists in fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. |editor-last2=Hanegraaff |editor-first2=Wouter J. |editor-last3=Pasi |editor-first3=Marco |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7nGaDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA230}}</ref> According to Staudenmaier, the fascist and Nazi authorities saw occultism not as deviant, but as deeply familiar.<ref name="o691" />