1980 Lecture Notes

COMMUNITY?CLASSROOM (2)

 

 

Rudolf Steiner said in 1918, at the time of the signing of the Armistice:À ?If we desire to achieve a social understanding, as I have said in various connections, the most important thing of all is that we shall acquire an understanding of the human being, interest in human beings, a differentiated interest in persons, that we should desire to know human beings?it is this which must constitute the task of the future, the most important part of the future? (1941, p. 14) (Italics, ours). Steiner was speaking in the wake of World War I, which proved that society?s modern technology could be used to wage war. Steiner warned that technology would continue to create destructive instruments if allowed to develop an anti?social milieu. This is because the new age of individual consciousness and independence??what Steiner calls ?free thinking??is necessarily selfish, egotistical, competitive, self? assertive, independent, and so on. This œstate of independence? of the individual Ego is contrastive, as Steiner shows, with people?s state of dependency in former times: dependency on family and nation to the extent that individual survival was rendered problematic, often impossible. Thus, in former times, exile meant certainly loss of wealth and freedom, and very often below?survival living conditions.

 

In modern times, by contrast, œexile? is replaced by ?immigration? or ?colonization? or ?settlement?, etc. Opportunity for an improved life has replaced the meaning of exile, or ?being cut off?, which is then the modern expression of the new state of independence achieved by the individual Ego of the modern person. Rudolf Steiner?s warning is in connection with what he foresaw to be the consequences of technology being harnessed in the service of the individual Ego, namely anti?sociality. Steiner, at the turn of the century, and until his death in 1926, continued this theme and lectured on it in an astonishing series of 6,000 lectures in German, of which 200 published volumes in German and English have already appeared (see: Anthroposophic library, in References).

 

As indicated in our italics of the statement by Rudolf Steiner quoted above, anti?sociality engendered by the self?assertiveness of the Ego, must be counteracted through social understanding. This expresses itself as a œcounter?antisociality? consisting of the following educative strategies:

 

(i)ÀÀÀÀÀ acquiring an understanding of the human being;

(ii)ÀÀÀÀÀ acquiring an interest in human beings;

ÀÀ (iii) ÀÀÀÀ acquiring a differentiated interest in persons

 

The first strategy is a œthinking? requirement; the acquisition of a Glossary?Chart, i.e. a scientific register (method, theory, scholarship). The second strategy is a œfeeling? requirement; the acquisition of collective learning procedures, i.e. a Community?Classroom setting. The third strategy is a ?will? requirement; the acquisition of essential interdependence.

 

These three educational strategies are fundamental to the establishment and maintenance of a successful Community?Classroom milieu, as specified in the work of James and Gordon (see References). They are usually stated as œthree principles of Community?Classroom?, namely, (i) generationality; (ii) intentionality; (iii) organicity. The accompanying table shows the various correspondence of interest here.

 

 

R.À Steiner?s

TYPOLOGY for

SOCIAL UNDERSTANDING

acquiring

R. Steiner?s

TYPOLOGY for the

SOCIALIZED PERSON? S

ACTS

 

James & Gordon?s TYPOLOGY for COMMUNITY?BUILDING PRINCIPLES:

(?COMMIJNITY-CLASSROOM?)

 

PrincipleÀÀÀÀÀ Classroom Application

(i) understanding of the human being

THINKING

(sense?bound vs. free)

Principle Generationality

1.ÀÀ DRA Generational Curriculum

2.ÀÀ Collective Science Projects

3.ÀÀÀ Glossary?Chart Study

4.À Cross generationalÀÀ

ÀÀ ÀÀÀÀorientators

(ii) interest in human beings

FEELING (solitary vs. prosocial

 

Intentionality

1.ÀÀÀ OrientationÀÀ

2.ÀÀÀ Ingathering
3.ÀÀÀ Huddle?buddy
ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ (overcomingÀÀÀ

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ intimidation)

(iii) differentiated interest in persons

WILLING (imagined vs. objective ideals)

Organicity

1.ÀÀ Anti?anonymity (Registry, Dyads; Teams)

2.ÀÀ The SP Mystery

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ Play

3.ÀÀ Glossolid Art

 


 

ÀÀÀÀÀÀ It may be seen that generationality is a thinking activity. Steiner (l9xx??l9xx) carefully and painstakingly reviews and establishes the existence of two varieties of thinking. The dichotomy is known under several titles, namely, œabstract vs. concrete?, 'figurative vs. literal?, œgeneralized vs. particular?, œsymbolic vs. actual?, œtheoretical vs. practical?, and so on. In our current educational milieu, academic achievement, general intelligence, and accredited competence (?degrees? or ?license?), all depend on the variety of thinking that includes [abstract/figurative/generalized/symbolic/theoretical]. This kind of thinking activity involves processing operations that are sequential, unitized, standardized. Through these strategies, uniformity of sense?dependent operations is achieved, creating the possibility for an orderly, and regularized scientific?technological society.

 

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ Steiner warns that this societal achievement is a two?edged sword:À abstract? symbolic treatment of human needs creates an efficient but anachronistic state of affairs. That is, the technology built through abstract models provides only outdated solutions to human needs, even if the solutions provided are administered efficiently. Examples today, fifty years after Steiner?s warnings, abound, as the professional review boards have determined for our technological medical practice, for our prison administration system for desegregation, for land and energy use, and for virtually every department of public life today.

 

ÀÀÀÀÀÀ As indicated above, antisociality is a natural by?product of the socialized individual who is striving for self?assertion within a competitive social psychological milieu, Thus, the fact that the proportion of wealth spent on war production increases along with technological advancement, points to the relation that exists between antisociality (as a byproduct) and the variety of thinking represented above as a [abstract/symbolic/etc.].

 

The complementary variety of thinking that Steiner warns must needs be added to the abstract/symbolic, is the concrete/experiential, what Steiner calls ?free thinking? as contra?distinguished with ?(sense)?bound thinking.? The distinction is familiar in education today as ?cognitive? (abstract/ symbolic) vs. ?affective? (?experiential know-ledge?). As well, œgestalt? oriented approaches in social science such as œfield theory?, ?topological? and ?ecological? psychologies, ?transpersonal? and ?consciousness? investigations of late, all share an interest in clearly identifying the differences in these two modalities of thinking.

 

Steiner?s exposition of ?freedom? (in behavior, feeling, and thinking) makes it categorically important for modern humans to develop quickly the ability to think in a way that is free from œsensory logic.? Artistic and creative thinking have always been assumed to be free, unchained to pre?established fetters; or perhaps we should say that the artist and the genius strive towards that which shatters the past, thereby achieving universal feelings. The past is cast in the abstract, and the symbolic is used to select and reject, that is, to specialize and generalize. The future is thus bound to the past through the symbolic. Novelty in thinking may be fruitful, but constrained. Other points of the human constitution are neglected and wither. Human evolution is checked. But if we relinquish the insistence of sensory?bound thinking as the only legitimate modality then free thinking develops naturally, by itself.

 

In Community?Classroom, James and Gordon have interpreted, translated, and applied this analysis of freedom to the course curriculum. A textbook and lecture approach was abandoned on account that it encouraged the further restriction of thinking towards the abstract and generalized. A solution gradually evolved and now is spoken of as ?the principle of generationality.? Instructional procedures were developed to establish a living generational curriculum, and other pedagogic techniques (see table on p.____). These educational methods are inspired by the need to balance sense?bound thinking with free thinking. In this balance lies ?the understanding of the human being.?

 

Steiner?s ?interest in human beings? (the 'feeling' component of socialized humans) is translated and applied in Community?Classroom as the second principle, called ?intentionality.? Just as abstract/generalized thinking leads to a counterproductive technology (e.g., ?iatrogenesis?, pollution, crowding, etc.), in the same way solitary feeling is a process that leads to a counterproductive neutrality regarding others.

 

?Solitary feeling? is the state of isolation a socialized individual experiences when anonymity and secrecy forces the person to imagine information about others, rather than to know. Imagined ideals are counterproductive in a competitive milieu since in the absence of certainty, one is advised to play it safe, and imagine the worst. Or alternately, one is advised to be an optimistic, and to imagine the good side. Or perhaps, one is advised to follow the Golden Rule or some other mix of the two.

 


Prosocial behavior makes available objective ideals because anonymity and secrecy are specifically counteracted. Relationship is based on knowing (rather than on imagining) when the person?s state of solitary feeling is replaced by prosocial behavior in human beings? is based on a feeling experienced by an individual when engaging in prosocial behavior. In Community?Classroom, James and Gordon have translated and applied this prosocial feeling element as ?intentionality? (see table, p.____) In the natural history methodology of the daily round, the students are ?citizen?scientists? and learn to be "society's witnesses?. This activity yields a ?generational curriculum? and a study?format bound to œfree thinking?, as discussed above. The feeling/experiential element is placed in the interpersonal context, as managed by the course format. This insures that every bit and piece of free thinking element found in the ?generational curriculum? (?DRA?) undergoes community?processing.

 

?Prosocial behavior? is made to be part of the community?processing procedures required in every case a bit of work is submitted by a student. This work is read and annotated by a number of peers, whereupon the original writer reworks or reopens sections of the work, by way of response and adjustment to peer?processing, As well, students perform this role for the work of other students, This community?processing insures prosocial behavior, reduces interpersonal suspicions, and encourages the acquisition of community?based virtues and potentialities such as love, courage, reliability, objectivity, inventiveness, synchrony, morality, refinement, and complementarity.

 

Freedom in thinking and prosocial behavior as managed in Community?Class­room through generationality and intentionality, create a social milieu, which James and Gordon have characterized as ?the principle of organicity? (see table, p. ______). This principle reflects the unity that emerges through œcommon striving? (?co??= joint, common; ? ?munity? = striving, reaching). One might say, symbolically, that the cells of the liver strive together to attain a unity in the organ?as?a?whole, just as the liver, heart, etc. strive together to achieve the unity of an organism. Organ, organism, and community, are œorganicist? entities.

 

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ As it is known, false hormonal information (e.g., antibiotics & vaccines) activates organs and affect metabolism in an abnormal way. In the same manner, imagined ideals (created by anonymity & secrecy) act as false functional triggers in social exchanges, engendering ?negative emotions? and ?stand­ardized imaginings?. These abnormal symptoms of ?degenerative organicity? are eliminated when they are replaced by objective ideals based on knowledge of facts and shared presuppositions. Steiner?s ?differentiated interest in persons? is dependent on the œwill? component in the person. In Community? Classroom, this component is related to the instructional principle of ?organicity?, defined by James and Gordon as conscious of objective interdependence. This consciousness of the ?will? within the person is a psycho?spiritual activity. There arises for each generation, the possibility of awakening to community?life, that is, of concretizing evolutionary participation.

 

ÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀÀ As the individual students awaken to the conception of organicity (through generationality & intentionality), a new cultural sensation enters their experience and their awareness. As described by Barfield (197x), the individual switches from a ?representational?/sense?bound existence to a free and ?participatory? becoming in which the personal/historical is continuously integrated into the universal/symbolic. Thus, ?biography? achieves ?objectivity?, transcends the merely local, and immerses itself into the collective. Organicity brings collectivity to a level of functioning in which the individual can complete itself fully.

 

BACK TO INDEX