- Glad you asked. This is someting that should be defined, and faced head-on.
I recently left a research list because it was degenerating into a New Age
The simplest definition of New Ager would be, "so open-minded, there's a
hole in his head". New Agers would be people who are seriously getting into
all sorts of fringe-type things but who have no fundamental comittment to
As with anything, there are varying degrees. The worst i ever saw was this
man and woman who used to show up at Tesla events and insist on getting in
for free. They would be thrown out, and would sneak right back in. They
said that they were doing so much good in the world, that the Society should
let them in for free. None of the staffers could see this -- all we ever
saw was that they were annyoing people in various ways. They constantly
would take people aside and try to get them to help fund some sort of New
Age (their term) community that they were trying to start. They claimed to
be in contact with extraterrestrials as well.
Often we staffers would run into people who were deeply immersed in one or
another pseudo-science. Of course, many people are willing to correct
themselves when exposed to rational information. But the "New Age" label is
justified when someone, while claiming to be open-minded, refuses to be
corrected in regards to blatant misconceptions of various kinds.
Here are a few New Age characteristics that i have personally found troubling:
-- Automatic acceptance of information from any disembodied entity, through
-- Public claims of being in communication with extraterrestrial entities,
with no concrete proof.
-- Constant promotion of various prophecies that don't come true. After a
due date passes, immediately leaping onto the next set of prophecies.
(Worst one of those was the "Photon Belt" scare of 1991-2).
-- Blind acceptance of hypnosis as a legitimate way to accomplish anything.
-- Promoting the belief that there is "no such thing as evil".
The opposite of New Age characteristics would be a firm foundation in a
traditional religious context. Everyone on this list by now knows my own
bias in this matter, but really any religion, when sincerely followed, will
combat this kind of problematic lifestyle.
Sometimes i might incorrectly label someone in this manner. And, in the
past, one could make a case for my having been a real New Ager myself,
particularly when i would go to a Pagan ritual in a forest one day and show
up at a Mennonite church the next. An important part of personal growth is
recognition of committing a sin, confession of that sin, and repentance from
that sin. Again, this is the direct opposite of New Age. Most New Age
people who i would believe deserve the label, will be quick to tell you that
there is no such thing as a sin.
As for Beardon, he stuck to his guns at all times. Some of his concepts may
have been out there, but it was always possible to track a rational sequence
of thought that led to each concept. He did demonstrate flakiness for a
while, particularly between 1988 and 1992, when he did not show up for a few
lectures that we thought he had comitted to. And i believe his teaching
style was atrocious. But he was always very clear about his loyalties, his
scientific knowledge, and his intentions. I personally never thought of him
as a New Ager.
I hope this serves as a clarification.
At 06:07 PM 2/26/02 -0600, you wrote:
>-- Michael Riversong **
>Oh yaw... Michael you just sound like another 'New Ager' to me! Just
>but I have been curious as to the comments of you and others on the list in
>past in regards to 'New Agers' and taking your digs at them when you get the
>chance. I have been bothered by the fact that this stamp is placed so quickly
>upon some folks, who differ in their beliefs concerning the laws of
>Without a working definition of such, there would seem to be at the very least,
>a bit of confusion, if not down right intolerance of the right to decent or
>on certain physical concepts, or it would even seem at times... religious
>How do we define a 'New Ager'...? I think that it is important that the
>a good working definition of such, IMO. Maybe with a bit of discussion on
>we can arrive at an acceptable consensus definition of what a 'New Ager' means
>to the folks on this list? In all fairness to the American way... or civil
>I think that it would be meaningful to try, don't you?
>Other's who have joined the list in the past have been hastily labeled 'New
>by several folks on the list, without much or any discussion of what
>such... is Bearden a 'New Ager'? Some would think so, IMO... but he has a good
>physics and electronics background, which might tend to set him apart from the
>classical ignorant or defiant deviant? I would like to hear what a few of
>have used this term to label folks in the past, give your own personal
>the term, so I can understand a bit better when you speak out knocking those
>folks for their beliefs, however esoteric they may seem. That is fair isn't it?
Professional Harpist, Educator, and Writer **
RivEdu@... ** Phone: (307)635-0900 FAX (413)691-0399
- For real pyramid power... check these controversial facts...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ed Phillips" <evp@...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 5:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [usa-tesla] New Agers
> > That was deuterated acetone [hydrogen (H1) atoms replaced with
> > deuterium (H2) atoms]. From a preview of an article in Science I get
> > the impression that they excited the fluid simultaneously with acoustic
> > signals and neutrons, but can't tell for sure. Apparently the net
> > product was some tritium. They calculate (others seem to disagree) that
> > the shock waves in the fluid create a temperature in the tiny bubble
> > exceeds 10 million degrees C.
> > Ed
> Hmmm.... interesting indeed. Didn't know about the acetone... ouch that's
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/