causticus: trees (Default)
By: Xōtlos Mizathtēlos

Because Neo-Paganism and New-Age in general is a largely western phenomenon, it has baggage from Christian thought, Premodern Christianity had an extreme focus on ideas like "Original Sin" and over-focused on Expiation, forgiveness etc as well nonesense like "One True Faith", extreme dogmatic fideism etc. As a result, New Age religion seems to (in reaction) reject any idea of Sin as well as any conception of Dogma or even Truth. With this, it became a huge "no-judge" zone, where anyone could do anything, as long as it made them "happy". Which is itself, a result of misinterpretations of Ancient "Western", Eastern and Abrahamic conceptions of "peace" and/or esctactic union with the Divine.

Which leads to my next point: if you deny any truth and replace it with being "happy", then you essentially replace the Gods with "positive energy". The only Dogma of New Age spirituality is "don't hurt my feelings". Which drove conversation away from Truth and towards personal pleasure, personal pleasure at any cost, even if it means covering your eyes and shouting "lalalalalalala".

All of this was pushed further, by the Egoism of many New Age practitioners, who reduce all spirituality to some lower psychological "sub-conscious" thing. Which makes the source of all understanding of the Gods, the Ego. Thus, the will of the Gods is not based on Higher Principle, but instead on the whims of the Ego, and is driven not towards Unity with the Gods, but towards pleasure and "happiness". (None of this is to speak on the actual teachings of most of the early New-Agers, which were often the opposite of such a self centered world view)

I should state, I am not pro-dogmatic fideism. I am also not an enemy of happiness or psychological interpretations of the Divine. I just recognize these that there is a truth beyond the subjective experience of the Ego.
causticus: trees (Default)
A Q+A comment exchange from T and M:

Q: How in the hell is there a PhD's worth of things to learn in gender studies ?

A: There isn’t. The departments exist for universities to buy diversity without the work of real social improvement. Rather than support minorities/women and build to where there’s equal representation in serious fields, they create jobs in nonsense and leave the real fields as-is.


IMHO, this statement gets at the crux of the issue. No nefarious "Cultural Marxist" infiltration grand conspiracy is needed to explain why the humanities branch of Western academia has so thoroughly gone to hell over the past 40 years or so.

The existence and proliferation of various nonsensical ___[insert grievance here] studies___ departments at countless well-accredited universities is easily explained by bureaucratic corruption and laziness. A university administration can score quick and easy "diversity points" by simply allowing a a few unhinged radicals the opportunity to spew their ideological bile under the guise of scholarship. On the surface this is great PR for useless, overpaid administrators who are always looking to put on a "forward-thinking" face to deep-pocked donors and prospective debt serfs students. The main goal of university administrators and tenured professors is to keep the money, and thus their cushy salaries, flowing in for as long as possible.

However, on the topic of PR, it's not until now that these radical non-disciplines have gone viral and have seen their intellect-free content filter down to the general public and influence mainstream ideology. And all the regular folk are now noticing and are quite shocked about what has up until recent been lingering under the academia hood.
Page generated Jan. 9th, 2026 07:27 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios