# anthroposophy!  What is it?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anthroposophy-what-is-it/32681>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [September 10, 2000, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anthroposophy-what-is-it/32681 "2000-09-10T15:11:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2000, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anthroposophy-what-is-it/32681/1 "2000-09-10T15:11:58Z")

</div>

Anybody out there know about anthroposophy? A friend of mine fell into it big time, but I find his explanation of it and their literature rather vague, self-serving, and internally inconsistant. Same with their web sites. Anyone have information, opinions, or scurrilous rumor about it?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ringo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/779978/32.png) [@Ringo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ringo)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2000, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anthroposophy-what-is-it/32681/2 "2000-09-10T15:23:45Z")

</div>

_The Skeptic’s Dictionary_ has an entry on [anthroposophy, Rudolf Steiner and Waldorf Schools](http://skepdic.com/steiner.html).

Also, if you go to [http://www.dogpile.com](http://www.dogpile.com) and run a search on “anthroposophy” you’ll find a lot of stuff.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2000, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anthroposophy-what-is-it/32681/3 "2000-09-10T16:22:36Z")

</div>

Fascinating. Steiner apparently came up with “eurythmy”, leading eventually to overslick synth/pop sung by women with crewcuts. For that alone, he deserves condemnation.

Seriously, another aspect of the brand of claptrap spritualism that was in vogue at the turn of the 20th century. They were spiritual packrats, picking up wonderful-sounding concepts from the surface of many traditions, and piling the whole mess together in an uncritical heap.

At least the theosophical stuff and its offshoots were inward looking and “other worldly” enough that its adherents didn’t bother other people not inclined to believe it. In that sense, it was benign in comparison to nutcake belief systems with a social agenda.

I would say that most people can probably wade around a bit in things of this sort without taking any lasting harm, and may come out the other end the better for having at least thought about philosophy, and having worked out the inconsistencies for themselves.