Enter your email address to subscribe to this site and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 261 other subscribers

EnglishFrenchGermanItalianPortugueseRussianSpanish

New Age rubbish promoted in Sedona (Arizona, USA)

New Age rubbish promoted in Sedona (Arizona, USA)

Hippy-dippy evidence-free fantasies

The term ‘New Age’ has come to be a catch-all for a wide, often bizarre and mutually incompatible variety of beliefs that have become prominent since the 1960s. The term refers to the astrological Age of Aquarius, which is supposed by some to have begun in 1987, although the precise date is disputed. The Age of Aquarius began when the vernal equinox coincided with the sun entering the astrological constellation of Aquarius: the apparent position of the sun against the background of stars on a specific day varies with time, a phenomenon known as the precession of the equinoxes. It is caused by a slight wobble of the earth as it spins on its axis and as become a recurring theme in Bad Archaeology. The believers in New Age philosophies expect that their views will become dominant in the next few years as a result of changing astrological influences brought about by precession.

Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994)

Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994), the doyenne of New Age prehistorians

Within this broad grouping of New Agers there is little agreement on detail. Their basic unifying theme is that the post-Enlightenment world has become too materialistic and has lost touch with a more fundamental spirituality that lies at the root of creation, making them very similar to the creationists, although the specific spiritualities in question are very different. There is also a general belief that this is the relatively recent culmination of a long process, which came about in Europe and that patriarchal social and technological systems are implicated in the loss. New Age writers have produced a form of history according to which ‘New Age consciousness’ (meaning awareness of the earth’s supposed spiritual energies, of the healing power of crystals, the worship of a Great Cosmic Mother/The Goddess/Mother Earth and so on) was once widespread and formed the dominant paradigm under which prehistoric cultures operated. The works of some mainstream scholars (most notably the prehistorian Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994)) have unfortunately been hijacked by those promoting ‘New Age’ beliefs; there are also signs that some archaeologists working within a framework of post-modern epistemological relativism are willing to accommodate at least certain aspects of these beliefs into their interpretations of the past. Indeed, it would be surprising if there are not some archaeologists whose religious beliefs incline towards the New Age, if not endorsing it wholeheartedly.

New Age philosophies are characterised by the quest for a synthesis of all knowledge, a common feature of more general ‘alternative’ thinking. This synthesis should include material phenomena but also needs to extend to the non-material, seen as a ‘hidden reality’ with a deeper meaning and truth than the visible material world. Because New Age belief proceeds from the presumption that a non-physical reality underlies any physical entity, the usual procedures of scientific theory testing are thought to be superficial, as they cannot approach the supposed underlying reality. The true nature of the world is typically found through direct revelation, including psychic types such as channelling, in which the medium receives messages from spiritual entities. Testing the material world, according to this way of thinking, will produce only misleading results, as the ‘energies’ with which New Age practitioners deal are too subtle to register on the equipment of scientists, equipment suitable only for dealing with the coarse energies of the physical world.

Bronze casting

Bronze casting: the origin of patriarchy?

A great deal of ‘New Age’ archaeology is based around the idea that ‘masculine forces’, seen as inherently evil, have brought about a current state of patriarchy, materialism and other problems (such as industrial pollution, nuclear weapons, child abuse, machinery and capitalism). This is held in contrast to the ‘feminine forces’ of earlier ages, when the “Goddess” was dominant, allowing human cooperation, spiritual awareness and a life in harmony with the earth. The usual interpretation places the shift at the end of the Neolithic, with the growth of metal-using societies and the evidence for the rise of a new phenomenon: the individual, powerful man. A naïve correlation is often assumed with traditional biblical chronology, with the Age of the Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) coinciding with the development of mature Bronze Age societies.

Some of these ‘New Age’ beliefs are easily dismissed without recourse to attacking the spiritual aspects. The whole topic of ‘earth energies’, for instance, depends on an essentially ahistorical view of the landscape, which treats all antiquities of any age as equal evidence for understanding the remote past. Others are more problematical (such as the origins of male-dominated societies), while yet others (such as attempts to understand ancient societies’ beliefs about specific types of landform) may contain useful insights. Any system, though, that insists that it cannot be tested scientifically is immune to rational critique. If everything is to be taken on trust because it has been ‘revealed’, ‘channelled’ or ‘felt’, then it is an authoritarian, faith-based system. Moreover, none of these incompatible, directly revealed systems offers any means for non-believers to assess the relative merits of one revelation over another, as each claims to be the sole correct version. To confuse matters further, the promoters of various ‘New Age’ beliefs use each others’ work, either unaware or unconcerned about contradictions between them. They are equally happy to quarry ideas from older belief systems – including recent eclectic mishmashes such as Theosophy or The Golden Dawn as well as more established systems, such as Judaeo-Christian writings and Buddhism – by cherry-picking those details most congenial to their own beliefs.

New Age explanations for the past are a microcosm of all Bad Archaeology. They take anomalous evidence, ignoring the vast majority that is problematic for their beliefs. This evidence is identified and interpreted through various unverifiable processes. The findings (or revelations) are then presented as something new and revolutionary that will be denounced due to a conspiracy of orthodox archaeologists, not because their ideas turn out to be utter rubbish.

24 Responses to “New Age” delusions

  • NANCO says:

    Hi. I’m a little barbarian bastard willing to attack your gigantic, brilliant, enlighted fortress. I know you are going to kill me like a bug, sooner or later. But I don’t care. :) I just want to make some damage and taste your blood even if it ends being just superficial scratches on your ultra-armored, high-tech castle. I lack hygiene habits and laugh on fart and dead children jokes. If I get lucky enough, I’m gonna rape some of your cattle before you are able to kill me and put my head on a (civilized) spike.

    I crazily challenge your empire, with all the respect my hairy heart owns. If your troops have something inside their girlie pants, thrown here your best soldiers to face me sword in hand. Damn I am ugly and faily stupid, but I offer you a fair fight!!!

    Knowing your disciplined way of working, had he impression you throw a whole bunch of stuff on the same sack. Too quickly. Too unelegantly. I understand the “New Age” and “Hippy Poopy” are way old-fashioned and corrupted into a bunch of either teenage junkies Jim Morrison posers pretending to have something to say better than “huh, dude, hey… er…”, OR middle-class frustrated bitches and bastards who had not enough on psychotherapy and now go into worshipping fairies to balance the memory their parents didn’t love them.

    But still. So what, dude? I didn’t come here for you to tell me how retarded those retards are. I didn’t come here for you to tell me how clear is for you their brains are full of what my bottom is full of. That is not informative. The only information I collect from the article is that you are better, and more intelligent, than them. Well… honestly, I don’t care that much about that suppossed truth, mate.

    Do you agree the “New Age” fashion is, parallel to the “Hippism”, actually a degeneration of some purest form? Or would you claim with a gigantic testicle one in each hand, as the article apparently suggest, that it was actually a fart from the very day it was born?

    Cause that “New Age” thingy you are willing to kill in your apparently peaceful ways is just an idea in your mind. It’s not real. There’s not such thing as “New Age” but simply a bunch of people misunderstanding and grabbing the surface of something they doesn’t even know what is about. And is on that, my man, where you and them are exactly the very same.

    (I hope that one hurted a little bit. If not I don’t care, I’ll act as if hurted you. I am throwing a apeish scream at the skies by now, btw. And scratching my anus too -but that is personal and won’t expand on that-)

    I dunno what source you used to define “counsciousness” as… (I am chuckling, mate) “awareness of the earth’s supposed spiritual energies, of the healing power of crystals, the worship of a Great Cosmic Mother/The Goddess/Mother Earth and so on”. You can “so on” as much as you can but I suspect you will become more and more ridiculous on your ignorance. Where did you catch that definition? A book? A real person? A bunch of books and real persons? I just wonder, if you choose those idiots on purpose to prove your point: that this world is a world of idiots and nonsense theories. I know more than a couple of random persons who can give you a way better description that those. Now why on earth would you choose to read/listen only to those ridiculous sources? Now whot the hell is selecting evidences to fit his theory?

    (Blind charge, I know… But I also hope to have hit you once or twice) ;) (Did I?)

    BAH don’t go and throw me the spear of “ok you clever shit, then you tell me what it is”. Go to a fucking lama if you wanna get a good answer made by words, or if the tibet is not close enough to your apartment, hire a poet who can play with languaje and get close to what “consciousness” is. No shit can define it, cause it’s not an idea. But I reckon swimming in the sea of the brainless, turning off your definition of reality based on intellectual concepts and taking the risk of defining it by direct experience, is not something you are used too, am I right? See what happens? You are not a true scientific. Holy Doraemon Ball’s!!!! Indiana Jones didn’t believe on the arc’s power but still he put his ass down the catacombs willing to open it to prove his point. If you are so sure all this shamanistic crap is crap indeed, why don’t you just go there to a shaman and tell him to his face he’s a junkie monkey? A true shaman, dude, not the piece of shit pot-smoker dreamcatchers seller from the hippie shop. I mean someone with your same IQ. Someone who knows what he or she is talking about, not repeating stuff like a parrot. Wich is what all those trash arseholes you are taking for the definition of “New Age” do.

    Nah I’m not that guy, I don’t pretend I am. I am here to simply arse-rape one of your goats, and nuttkick some of your soldiers. My point is that you are aiming to people who no way correspond to what they pretend. And the fact that you believed their lie. No, you didn’t swallow their theories… but still you did swallow their claim of being people who knew what “counsciosness” is. What would you feel if I found a dumbass archeologist who defined archeology as “picking up old broken stuff from the dirt” and then wrotte a whole article, on my serious informative website, claiming archeology is made of dumbasses? Uh? What would you feel, huh?

    Yeah probably you wouldn’t give a good goddamn. But hey, you get the point, don’t you.

    Gimbutas, and “religion”, together on the same context? Are you suggesting Gimbutas started a religion? If so, mabrotha, you are so far away I cannot even smell you anymore. (Here I would writte a “lol”, what do you think?)

    “Masculine forces, seen as inherently evil” you say? Again, wonder what sources are you using to support your own theories, man… Because that is… inherently incorrect.

    “A goddess being dominant”? Lol and lol and lol. Ok I gonna throw ya a knife cause your spear is probably melted already… You pretend the rules of the game has been always the same ones, since the beginning. And nope. Mate. The game has these rules only since they game was created. And it was created in a date. Wich date? Dunno. Gimbutas offers some possibilities. Others offer others. But the game was not always the same game. You pretend to sustain the theory that mental structures on humanity have been the same since 400.000 bc to today? “Dominance” is a kind of game, man. There are many other kinds of games. Today we mostly play dominance. This our barbaric struggle is an example. But this kind of game is pretty new, let me tell you. If you think animals play chess you are wrong.

    I am not sure if you enjoyed this fight. I DID. I am gonna retire to sleep. I am glad I’m still alive (truth is I haven’t allow you to strike yet, lol). I am gonna go and grab couple of wine bottles of yours and hmm, maybe that cute little sheep. Nights are cold on the steppe, you know.

    Well, do you?

    Hairy regards.

    • Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews says:

      Dear me, a long and grumpy reply with rude words! Now that constitutes a good response .

  • I have read that this New Age thing is another effort to push a new pseudo religion onto people’s minds, to push non-rational propaganda, and as you stated, to avoid rational discussion or critique, “you are ought to believe me or join the evil forces of a male-dominant dictatorship.”

    Many of them adhere to these under the false flag of peace and love, but these same beliefs were dominant among the Golden Dawn, and its German subsidiary, Thule’s Society, which later influenced the Nazi movement. You could scrap their paraphernalia out and you would be presented with the same collectivist approach. The Nazis and communist were doing their actions for the sake of human progress at the expense of minorities or any other not thinking like them.

    I apologize for politicizing your valid entry, but I feel that it is also necessary to try to come out with an explanation why these ideas are continuously presented in the mass media. Since I was a young children, television and “literature” started broadcasting this type of content, along with ecologic concepts, and have gained a great deal of attention, and it turned into a well established industry. This is just a thesis, but one always has to follow the money.

  • NANCO says:

    The commentary I made “is awaiting moderation”… FOR OVER A MONTH.

    LOL.

    On the other side, a commentary wich absolutely fits with the blog’s author phylosophical preferences (let’s politelly call it this way) was accepted and published in a week.

    LOL and LOL and LOL.

    (Funny thing is Erasmotronic’s commentary shows more paranoid minded ways than all the idiots this blog is supposed to shoot down).

    LOL and LOL and LOL and ….. well you know.

    • Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews says:

      Comments wait for moderation because I have a life. I only check occasionally and sometimes long, rambling comments like yours bore me so much that I don’t want to waste the engergy replying to them. I have better things to do with my time, like do actual archaeological research in the field.

      LOL indeed!

  • NANCO says:

    You and I know you didn’t answer to my challenge simply cause you didn’t understand it and felt unable to put order in the chaos I throw you. Things you cannot understand makes you loose your balls. So the only way you can rationalize what you cannot rationalize is to label it as “crazy” and “inferior to you”.

    Meanwhile your mentality is easily (too) understandable.

    We get you. But you don’t get us.

    So who’s the twit here.

    • Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews says:

      Well, believe that if you find it comforting. If I don’t aways swallow the bait, it doesn’t necessarily mean that I can’t and your challenge, it’s more that I can’t be bothered to lose brain cells on a futile quest.

  • NANCO says:

    On a final note. And as a gift for the “non-answered” fight as a symbol that my attack was not meant to destroy you, but simply to have some apeish fun:

    Your theory on “New Age Gimbutish Neohippysm” reveals as a extremely wrong reconstruction made by your mind on too fragmentary and most of them badly erosioned evidences. Kinda similar to the wrong reconstruction of an Iguanodon made on the 19th century. Today we laugh at the seemingly stupid reconstructions on dinos made on that time but it’s understandable these guys made it wrong cause they had no better quality evidences at hand to build up a better description of the subject. But you do, brother. You have quality evidences around you to catch, study, experience, and then create your description. But why on the motherfucking planet would you only choose so poorly, erosed, full of shit evidences? Mostly cause they are the most abundant, and mostly, let’s be honest you fucker, cause you DO want “New Age” to be rubbish.

    And that’s all I wanted to motherfucking say.

    • Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews says:

      I don’t want “New Age” stuff to be rubbish: it just is.

      And I’ll thank you to keep your profanities to yourself. If you can’t have a debate without descending to swearing and insults, it suggests that you have nothing valid to say.

  • Tom says:

    I took a look at the Marija Gimbutas Wikipedia page, and it’s quite interesting comparing what she actually found to what the fringe CLAIMS she found*. My understanding of the issue was that her findings were considered erroneous by the community, and it’s beyond my pay grade to question said community’s judgement, but let’s assume for a moment that they were wrong and she was right.

    If there was a large matriarchial discovered culture in neolithic Europe, it would have some major implications, yes. But the things read into that fact by others? Take, for instance, the “Great Goddess”- it seems reasonable to me that these cultures would all worship similar deities, seeing as they all derived from one single culture in Europe. That fact provides no more proof of the Goddess’s realness than the similarities between the Greek and Roman pantheons. Furthermore, I have no idea where all of this “peaceful and enlightened” stuff came from- I don’t recall Gimbutas saying anything about the proposed matriarchal culture other than that it existed and was later conquered by the Kurgans. In that light, one of the proposed pieces of evidence debunking said culture seems rather silly, namely the existence of military fortifications before the Kurgan invasion: why couldn’t the “Goddess”-worshipping culture have built them itself?

    *It’s not quite as out there as, say, the Lea Line people, but I’d still kind of like to see an article on her later work and the reception thereof.

  • NANCO says:

    Sorry for the profanities but, “Nanoc” is a barbarian, you know…

    I was simply trying to call your attention. Since it worked I am relieved I can go out of character and discuss this as what I really am, one simple civilized guy more.

    I have been studying Gimbutas work for over a couple of years and honestly, I felt angered by the judgement on her theories on the article mostly cause I was reading with great interest all the other content in the site, with responses to what you consider “stupidities” that seemed quite well exposed and gave me the impression you was a disciplined stutent wich first documented yourself before throwing an opinion. My anger was out of place, but I hope you can consider it a sort of joke, more than a true attack to your person. So thanks for reading, answering, and hope it could arise at least a little smile in your face at some point.

    I consider Gimbutas’ work to be quite well documented and faithful to a true scientific method, as you could yourself check if you read his actual works, and not the rippoffs. Thing that angered me the most was the fact you seemed to ignore the original material and instead examined Gimbutas by the way she has been taken by the “New Age” community today, wich, yeah, is rubbish and silly. But Gimbutas is not guilty of that… It’s like judging Nietzsche by the way Hitler took his work; it’s a silly and twisted deformation, not the original source.

    First of all, to contrast all the twisted misinterpretations of Gimbuta’s theories, it’s the problematic issue of “mathriarchy”. As you might suspect, Feminism (as any other “socio/political” movement) was very interested on taking his work as a theorical support for their campaigns and as you might also know, Feminism has evolved quite a lot on the last century to today. The Feminism of today is quite combative, and in its most radical wing it pretends to “substitute” the pathriarchy for a mathriarchy. That is, having “queens” instead of “kings”. The theories of Gimbutas have been twisted to serve this ideology, since she NEVER EVER talked about a Neolithic ruled by “queens”. This twisting was probably made unconsciously, over a bad and too superficial reading of her work.

    What Gimbutas defended was a Neolithic with “mathristic” qualities, instead of “mathriarchal”. The diference on the words consist in “mathristic” being a society where there’s no political rulers (no male nor female) but instead a sort of “primitive communist” society where the group decides in consensus. Both sexes have equal rights to participate on the take of decisions. It’s also called a “Gylanic” kind of society.

    The “mathristic” quality relates to a huge adoration of the Goddess over the male deities, and a preeminence of possibly female priests or shamans wich would put the community in “spiritual” contact with the Goddess on the rituals. This change over the paleolithic was explained by the fact humans became sedentary and therefore the Goddess Earth became the main “spirit” to be in grace with, since harvest depend on “she” being benevolent. Male deities and minor female deities existed too, but all of them depended ultimately on the Goddess, “her living home”. The spirits of the sky were also important but not worshipped daily and commonly as the Goddess cause these sky gods were not so close to daily life of the farmers.

    So, no rulers; no “dominance” of females over males. The Goddess herself wasn’t “dominant”, her nature was nurturing, protecting, feeding, and also killing. But she wasn’t a dictator. That concept of a “dictator god” was actually a characteristic of male pathriarchal gods only.

    No supremacy of the female sexe over male either. As said, both sexes were considered equal. The only “superior” quality of the Goddess over the male goddess was the fact she had a womb and could give home to humanity on hers. That’s why pregnancy was considered a “sacred state” and women were considered fittest to become shamans than men. But apparently male shamans also existed.

    The “male energy” was never ever considered “evil” by Gimbutas. Again that is a sick and ludicrous addition of Bad Feminism. Male energy was considered simply another part of the “ying-yan” and therefore a part of the Goddess. Many crucial ritual days dedicated to the male energy existed, days where the “male god” supposedly mated with the goddess to fertilice her wound from which the next harvest will arise. Sex indeed was a pretty important theme on Neolithic, and the phallus considered sacred. It is believed communal sex was the style, since in gylanic societies the role of the “biological father” is totally unimportant, since every male on the tribe is considered the “father” of any child that comes to life and there’s no need of biological father to be the main and only responsible.

    Now, you can also see why hippism and New Age took her works as a flag. I have the impression these wasn’t probably so misanderstood and manipulated on the 60′s-70′s but the New Age which is nothing more than a ghost of original hippism, has turn Gimbutas’ memory into garbage.

    It’s also important to notice how Gimbutas’ work, which as well documented and scientifically correct it is, is of course nothing more than a theory among a lot more, has been buried and attacked by current way of thinking wich inherits Illustration and Freud as the main basis for the current mental construction. Illustration, Freudian ways, and Pathriarcal universitarian line of thinking -the dominant one- won’t accept we were quite peaceful “hippies” on the neolithic. They want to believe we were capitalistic apes, who made war and had kings. And they want to believe that to supporst their system. Understandable. But also, intolerable that “different” theories are not listened and banned simply cause they don’t like them. Specially works as serious and interesting as Gimbuta’s. Isn’t that, indeed, “bad archeology” and total lack of true discipline and proffesionality? You may agree or not, but at leas respect it! Gimbuta’s work is pretty argueable and need to be actualized, of course! But it doesn’t mean the woman was a twit. She never said any stupidity about “Annunakis” being Aliens or Dinosaurs as horses for the neanderthal man or childish fantasies like that. She was a pro.

    Her theories on the kurgans being the ones who spread Pathriarchy over Europe (meanwhile semites were doing exactly the same on the south) is easily the better theory, on my opinion, to explain the way the current civilization we live on arised. Any rest of the old “Goddess religion” was literally burnt to ashes by the christian civilization on the middleages. Only little remains of it exist today.

    Buddism, ancient original Christianity, some old “kurgan” pagan religions, and some others, maintained a little of the old “Goddess religion” to a point. That is why it is today considered “related” to Enlightment and all that stuff. This opens to a new debate on how the again fucking “New Age” twisted Buddism and all those ancient knowledges to a superficial ghost of it originally was. But in the end, “enlightment” points to a state of mind where humans are all brothers, sons of nature, connected with “her”, and one with god and the whole universe. The state of mind those ancient people supposedly lived on, and a state we supposedly lost when we decide to civilice -that is, to “domesticate” us-. That lost “original state” was the origin of all the myths of the “lost eden garden” many pathriarcal cultures developed on their early days. See Carl Jung’s and Joseph Campbell works for more info on this topic.

    Regards.

    • Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews says:

      Hi. I perhaps ought to rework the section about Marija Gimbutas, as I did not intend to criticise her scholarship. In saying that “[t]he works of some mainstream scholars (most notably the prehistorian Marija Gimbutas (1921-1994)) have contributed a great deal to ‘New Age’ beliefs”, I inadvertantly leave open room for the possibility that their work was done within a ‘New Age’ framework, which was not my intention. It would have been better to say that their works were hijacked by those pushing a ‘New Age’ agenda, so I hope you are placated by my edit.

      • NANCO says:

        Again, thanks for reading, Keith.

        Apeism and punk placated away. I assume you are totally rightful to publish an article having fun on New Age narcissistic delusions. But wouldn’t it be way more interesting -and actually informative- a respectful look onto Gimbutas scholarship to bring to light what was actually valuable on her work, and what could be argued against? What I am still specting to see is true actual archeological facts wich could contradict her hypothesis. As much as many anti-Gimbutas people exist over the net, none of them bring facts but only a kinda “boring” clinging to the hypothesis pathryarchy existed since homo sapiens was born… only cause that hypothesis is “tradition”.

        One thing that I would love to read, would be actual arguings about Gimbuta’s theories under the light of actual current archeological facts. Since her lattest works published on the early nineties (and probably written up earlier than that) many new discoveries have been made, so as said, I pretty much consider her theories need an update and an edit. I confess that was what I spected to find on your original article, cause refuting and contrasting information between two opposed experts sometimes leads to finding something closer to “truth” than just listening one single side.

        All my respects.
        C.

        • Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews says:

          Yes, an assessment of Gimbutas’s work is probably long overdue, although I suspect that I’m not the one to do it, as my expertise is not in Neolithic Europe (although I am currently excavating a Neolithic henge in Hertfordshire) and I have only read The Language of the Goddess. Perhaps this is something for a quieter time.

  • NANCO says:

    Answering to TOM, about fortress remains being found, dated before the supposed Kurgan spreading: the Kurgan invasions supposedly took millenia until they conquered the whole continent. The idea is some little hordes of invasores initially explored Europe ravaging and pillaging the Neolithic villages they found on their way, but maintained nomadic for centuries as a sort of “barbarian bullys”. It wasn’t until 1.500 bc or so the very first “kurgans” decided to stablish a pathriarcal civilization over the ashes of some beaten neolithic cultures. See the very first Acheans on Greece or the protoHitites on Anatolia. Before that, the neolithic europe had started to build fences on the fear of the nomadic kurgans to attack them any day.

    As said, this is theory, but sounds quite serious to me.

    • Tom says:

      Makes sense. But then, I’m probably not the best one to make that determination, having little knowledge of archaeology in general, much less of Neolithic Europe, and having only read a few summaries of Gimbutas’s books. I suppose it’s just my curse to be fascinated by things I know next to nothing about but…

      As a feminist, I’ve always found the “orthodox crazy” interpretation of Gimbutas’s findings (the New Age variety discussed in the article) to be more than a little problematic. The depiction of a “matriarchal” culture as peaceful, egalitarian, and connected to nature/spirituality seems to raise up traditional (European-derived?) gender roles as “good”, while reaffirming them as absolutes- can it really be called “feminist” if it encourages women to be passive and avoid material achievement to focus on tradition and family? I don’t know, I’m probably wandering more and more off topic here, but it does strike me as a bit strange.

      • NANCO says:

        I think you got it right. The original “values” have been heavily missunderstood and manipulated by the “orthodox feminism” in the way you expose. Instead to trying to find the real meaning of “home caring” as sacred as it was on the neolithic -a meaning that was eliminated by pathryarchy- “orthodox feminist” simply pretend to amputate that activity as a tumor.

        But differences on the way that activity was considered then and how is now, are huge to say the least. Meanwhile the modern woman archetype “must” be passive and sort of “asleep” (as many modern femenine myths dictate, such the infamous “sleeping beauty” waiting forever for his “blue prince” hero to awake her and become his master and owner), the original Great Goddess was actually not “passive”. She did took action on her own way, wich was different than the ways of the male, and that’s why under a “male world” perspective where her ways are not considered, she may look “passive”. That ancient Goddess wasn’t asleep at all, but quite present in everywhere and everything since she was the home for humanity and a lot of things were happening inside her, even when they weren’t so apparent on the outside. She was creating life inside of her all the time. So her activity was mostly internal. Reason why women were usually shamans since shamanism is all about “internal work” more than external (wich is the field for hunters or farmers).

        The Goddes had the most important role: the “container” for life, but an active container, alive, not dead at all, not asleep, not a carcase. So women, yes, had the responsibility for home caring but not as “slaves” but actually because they WERE that home. And the home was sacred, a temple, since it symbolized also the Great Home (the Goddess), reason why people were buried on home’s floor. The female body was also a temple (another symbol of the Goddess body wich contained us all). Also, since sex hierarchy didn’t exist yet either, women didn’t took care of the homes as a service for their husband (aka “owner”). No “good” not “bad”, cause male hunters were equally important in social terms as female home carers, each for their own reasons. Female home carers were powerful and respected. Today is a duty and in many cases, a prison sentence.

        As said, the answer to all this problematic issues flows from the missanderstanding and corruption of original ideas. Which is a main topic on the study of human culture. Many examples of corrupted ideologies can be found all over history, from religions to politics. What we take today for true is in many cases just a pale shadow of what it originally was, but we don’t know that corruption happened. Go figure about “cultural virtues” as ancient as Neolithics. Under our contaminated, “civilized” eyes, reading Gimbutas is equal to missanderstand a lot of the concepts simply by the way our minds have been “programmed” though our education. The psychological construction we humans have today is quite different than the one people had on the Neolithic, so it’s just so normal we have problems on perceiving their symbols same way they did. There are so many “errors” and “mistakes” on percepcion of reality on our modern minds that we can only be humid and admit civilization brought us many great things, but we also lost a lot on the way. In many issues we managed to become brighter than primitive people, but more blinder than them on very basic, important others.

        We nuts, ain’t we.

  • Nik Kelly says:

    Slightly off-topic for the current rant but, some years ago, friends of ours acquired a big, copper tube ‘pyramid’ to aid meditation, based on the notion that its conductive frame would shield the occupant from ‘interfering modern signals’. Given that the designer got the mesh scaling for a genuine Faraday cage wrong by a factor of 100, I merely suggested they ‘ground’ the frame to the central heating pipes…

  • Alex says:

    Yeah. New Age is a bunch of bullshit. I got this stone from a New Age store that was supposed to help with my anxiety. It didn’t work.

    • ACM1PT says:

      Thanks Alex. That’s probably the most scientific, objective and rational argument against New Age ever made by a human being.

  • Dave says:

    I know a few “New Age” practitioners and they generally make the same claim: if one approaches “New Age” beliefs with a skeptical mind one will never “feel” the truth. They tell me if I “believe with my true heart” that I can feel the Earth energies that I will, in fact, feel them and know they’re real and fact. The same goes with crystal energies, natural healing, etc. When I bring to their attentions that this sounds an awful lot like a religion they admonish me for attempting to categorize them in such a manner. These are kind, decent people, I just find them willfully deluded into some kind of magical thinking.

    • ACM1PT says:

      You keep talking about morons. That, Dave, is the definition of a bunch of delusional morons and charlatans. I am pretty sure there are retarded and charlatan archaeologists too mixed in the whole bag. How would you feel if somebody claimed archeological concepts, ideas and methods to be rubbish just because you know about them by idiot people who pretended to be archaeologists? “New Age” sadly grabbed a lot of nice theories and manipulated them into merchandise for depressed civilized people. Not the first time on history such a thing happened. Some guys did the same with the teachings of Jesus, Buda, and many others, manipulating the original material and turning it into a rippoff of what it originally was. It happenned with Nietzsche. It happened with Darwin. Etc. We live in a world of rippoffs. But you seem to not being able of knowing it’s a rippoff cause you deny it was good material on the origin.

      Anyway, is there a point at all for this debate? With all my respects, but am I wrong when I suspect all you want to hear is you are right and the rest of the people are morons?
      If so, sorry but this “either black or white” shit sounds too much teenage world for my taste.

  • Dave says:

    I never referred to anybody as “morons” in my post, and I’m quick to spot a rip-off when one comes my way, which is why I don’t own magnetic bracelets and amulets of power and healing. I do, however, have crystals but that’s because I enjoy geology. The point of my post was to share some of my experiences and hopefully demonstrate that not all people in the New Age movement are lying cheats, rather some of them truly believe what they feel, and that to me it appears as though it’s taken on a form of religion because one must “believe” and have “faith” and one will “feel” the truth. I’ve spoken with numerous born again Christians and they tell me if I “believe” the bible to be the true word of God and have “faith” that He exists that I’ll “feel” his spirit within me. I see little difference between the two.

    I see this as a willful delusion, they see this as truth. We have different points of view, and I can respect that. There are plenty of people attempting to cash in on the New Age movement, to be sure, and they have most definitely distorted and twisted theories to facilitate their endeavors, the least of which is cherry picking archaeological finds to fit into their world view. However, there are many people who truly believe in New Age theories and philosophies without attempting to make money from it or buying every new thing that comes along claiming spurious affiliation with New Age concepts.

    You asked:
    “How would you feel if somebody claimed archeological concepts, ideas and methods to be rubbish just because you know about them by idiot people who pretended to be archaeologists?”

    This question makes no sense. If somebody claimed archaeological concepts, ideas and methods were rubbish and I only knew archaeology from idiots pretending to be archaeologists I would agree with what that person was claiming, wouldn’t I? But this is beside the point because I know archaeological methodologies to be sound and based on scientific principals unlike religions and the New Age movement which are based on faith.

    You are wrong, I do not wish to hear that I am right and all other people are morons. How did you come to the conclusion that this is “either black or white” from my post? If anything it’s magenta.

    • ACM1PT says:

      “How did you come to the conclusion that this is “either black or white” from my post?”

      Cause I was wrong. I am prone to jump to conclusions and that’s what happens. Shame on me.

      No you didn’t refer to anybody as “morons” but I would still call these kind of people you describe as since they sond that way. To me. Anybody who goes saying sentences as “If you believe it with your true heart it will happen” sounds like a sentence which belongs to the mentality of a cartoon for kids. Besides I personally don’t trust anybody who needs their faith to be spread into others, It’s a highly unrespectful action. Even when they are fair and decent people and “think” they are doing good, they are actually doing the opposite. That’s why I consider them “morons”, but you may call them “willfully deluded into” whatever fanatic ideologic system. Fake “enlighted” persons are very common, and when they come to believe they are “touched” by the universal wisdom, they run to “awake” everybody else around. Pure narcissism fantasy is what that is. It’s well documented.

      My rant about the rippoffs is based on the fact that, for a rippoff to exist, an original should have existed before (we do agree on that, yes?). And my wrong conclusion on you being a “black/white guy” was based on the wrong perception that you deny the existence of the original, therefore you wouldn’t be able to recognize these “fake elinghted persons” as rippoffs, but as the one and only thing. Yes, I based my conclusion on a falacy.

      Now please allow me to correct you in the one and only point that I truly feel I can bring something worthy to the debate: what you call “delusion” is actually not. If something is felt “real”, you can be sure is real. That is, if it is REALLY felt “real” and it’s not just a person lying -to himself and to others- saying he feels it (NOW THAT would be a delusion). I start from the point that you do believe these people truly feel what they claim. Ok then. But David, then that’s not a delusion. A delusion is a pathology which, as so, comes joined by strong feelings of suffering and neurosis. Even though if this “ugly” side of the delusion is not seen by the sick person, it’s pretty obvious for anybody who stares in front of them that something “is not right with this guy”. On the other hand truly equilibrated person who appears and feels sane is not delusional, no matter if he claims to believe in aliens, gods or gremlins. You cannot fake sanity, it’s biologically impossible, we as social animals have an instinct to recognize that.

      Yes, maybe sounds contradictory that a very sane person can claim to believe in “magic”…
      Well I might be wrong but maybe you are associating the concepts of “gods, spirits, magic…” and the like to be absolutely incompatible with sanity (which is indeed a wrong conclusion). “Magic” if something is incompatible to “reason”… But another falacy is also considering “sanity” equivalent to “reason” (which is not necessary related, some crazy persons’s reasonal mind work extremely well -too well indeed, which indeed caused the sickness-).

      We modern civilized humans have evolved a highly wonderful brain which is creating new thoughts each milisecond. But when that creativity goes too fast because of stress, it becomes a sickness (called neurosis). We all suffer that once in a while, when our brain simply doesn’t shut up and won’t leave us a second of peace. The “enlighted” state is nothing more (no matter what some hippies claim) a state of mental calm and order where thoughts doesn’t jump frenetically each milisecond, and you can think clearly and focused if you need to, or simply don’t think and fully enjoy the body’s sensations if you want to. That is all. You can see it’s not so complicated.
      A dellusional person wants SO BAD to be “enlighted” simply cause they are in a highly neurotic state and therefore, suffering a lot. They taste some New Age “pill” -whatever form- and find a temporary relief of their neurotic state. Now sometimes it happens they believe they have become Buddah -simply on the fear that state to vanish- and run to claim the world they are healed, at last, and that they’ve become superior beings. When the state vanish -very very soon- the suffering comes back, and that’s when they BECOME dellusional convincing themselves they are still on that Buddah state -which is already gone-. Since convincing themselves is not enough, they need to reinforce that dellusion trying to convince others too. Usually dellusionals only can convince other dellusionals, making a sort of “unconscious” deal of not breaking the dellusion of the other.

      How common is this in today’s society?

      You can guess. VERY VERY common.

      Now, what about the original? The “enlighted” state is real, and oneself doesn’t know it until one feels it. Then there’s no doubt it’s real. One thing hat the dellusional people doesn’t know is you cannot achieve it though an ideology (reason why it cannot be a dellusion, since no “wrong idea or concept” can create it) and it cannot be achieved either trying to convince people through words. It simply contagiates. When you have somebody near you who is in that state, you sorta feel SO fine beside him/her you kinda go into that state too. When the person goes away it vanishes but may come back if you think about him/her. A moment of feeling “in peace” with the world. It’s not euphoria, and it’s not really “happiness”. It’s peace. Is just the sense that you exist and that’s ok. That’s all. Nothing more, nothing less.

      The best way to achieve this state is allowing oneself to admire BEAUTY. A person who has it inside of him/her, evocates beauty on those who are around him/her. You can also achieve it through art, music, a landscape, a kiss, dunno, whatever thing in the world that involves beauty. This is the reason people put colored glasses on church windows, or goes to museums, or listens to classic music, or loves sunrises, or watching flowers, whatever. Prehistoric people said -in their symbolic languaje- these were “sacred” objects or places, which “contained spirits or gods” cause these were so beauty the rational mind stopped creating thoughs and a sense of relief and peace filled the body of people. This was the origin of religions.

      See, religions were quite good on the origin. They twisted into rippoffs. New Age suffered the same. Every spirituality teaching suffered the same.

      But humans will always need the “sense of magic”. Point is, one must find the right way to understand and accept it. I had to go a loooooong way until I found MY own way of entering into this state (which vanishes and comes back and vanishes again), cause no stablished ideology/system ever worked for me. It simply didn’t speak in my languaje. Until I found out it will NEVER come from what one beliefs, but from what one experiences. Experiences doesn’t lie, what lies is the interpretation we give to those. The interpretations of people never worked for me, specially when they pretend to have the main, one and only truth -these are the worst fakers-.

      What I call “spirits”, “gods” or “demons”, are just word that I sometimes I use (and not very often, only when I’m poetic) to call things on life that I simply cannot name in a better way. If you ask me If I do believe in “ghosts”, I would tell you YES, ABSOLUTELY, even though I don’t believe in the sense of a horror film. Same with god, demons, spirits, magic, whatever. They exist. They are energies of life. You may call them “neutrons” or another more accurate scientific names which in my ignorance I ignore. I use symbolic names to name things REAL. Don’t think people who uses symbolic or poetic languaje are dellusional or refering to things only in their crazy heads. It’s just a different languaje.

      Said that, morons still exist.

Agree or disagree? Please comment!