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
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.