On 22 March 2010 18:56, Nicholas Campion <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A lot of pagans I have met regard themselves as different to and superior to
> New Agers, as if the wisdom of the latter is inherently inferior to their
> own. Just an observation.
>
> Nick
> -----Original Message-----
Jake Stratton-Kent
> Sent: 22 March 2010 11:17
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC] Time article dealing with magic at the
> state level
>
> As far as many folks are concerned we're
> all ruddy New Agers, like it or not! ;)
Observations are good, I came here for intelligent discussion after
all - so yep, I'm guilty of unreconstructed behaviour on that count.
Why might that be? Not saying it is justified, but asking if there
relevant assumptions besides the intellectual laziness.
One assumption is that all New Age is fluffy while paganism involves
ancient wisdom, but what if we consider - say - Acupuncture as New
Age? Or astrology? What is included, what is excluded by one term or
the other?
And disregarding the issue of whether there are fluffy pagans (perish
the thought) how many pagans are acquainted with said 'Ancient Wisdom'
if that is the distinction here? Is there are a thriving pagan
Neoplatonist academy I haven't been invited to?
ALWays
Jake
|