Talk:New Age

Where is Law of Attraction?

This article is not mentioning a very relevant principle for the New Agers, which is the Law of Attraction — the more you work on yourself, the better are the things you attract to yourself (this happens because of divine forces), and therefore it's your fault if things in your life are not going well (I don't think they like to view it that way, since they're more optimistic by seeing it as an opportunity to thrive out from the unpleasant situation they're initially in). One reference could be the book/film The Secret, by Rhonda Byme, from which other references can be derived aligned with the proper historical contextualization.

I'm sorry, I don't really have a big repertoire of references with me, but it's really not THAT hard to find this kind of material. Whenever you look on YouTube for binaural sounds subconscious work mediation for attracting better things to your life, you can see all those New Age concepts mixed with each other, you see holistic medicine of Chakras (a relevant concept in New Age, Reiki...), and money attraction through electromagnetic, radioactive, light and quantum forces, you see everything! That's a reality you see everywhere when you watch those YouTube videos, and whenever you put the word "quantum" before any random thing you search on the internet.

Many entrepreneurship courses currently use Law of Attraction for validating their success using New Age terms such as "energy", "vibration" and "frequency" so they can justify that other people can thrive in life just as they did, because the work is not just done by means of action, but most importantly through inner work, and this is how the Law of Attraction provides a phenomenon called Manifestation (the moment in which reality manifest what we've been working through our thoughts and we've been exercising with our emotional projections). Examples: Afiliagram, Tam Kaur, Lavendaire, Manifestelle, etc. On the internet, some will say you just need to think and look inwards, so you will be able to manifest anything. Others will say you need to contribute to your progress by actively acting on it (this idea is more common among entrepreneurs educators online). These entrepreneurs claim that since the feeling of shame is the lowest vibration you can see according to easy-finding online emotional energy graphs (yes, they don't use scientific-based Information), then it's necessary to make the reverse process by feeling more prideful about yourself (the emotion opposite to shame is pride). What I've been seeing lately on the internet is that the relationship between entrepreneurs who work as entrepreneurship educators through online courses and the New Age movement, both have been getting closer with each other.

So my suggestion is that researchers on the topic should get a closer look into this, and really see how those environments within such courses really operate, and how these irrational-based New Age movements have been used as an emotional pushing for common people who get into those courses to become entrepreneurs, and then make more courses telling people the same thing — that they have been working in themselves to elevate their energy to attract better things to themselves —, so that's a cycle. It's common both in USA, but also in Brazil, the country I'm from. In short, the New Age movement is closely related to the capitalist/financial relations in our digital age society. AndregustavoSoyJo (talk) 03:24, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

AndregustavoSoyJo, here on Wikipedia, it is all about accurately summarizing what reliable sources say about the topic. The Secret (Byrne book) is most definitely not a reliable source. It is a pack of pseudoscientific nonsense. So, witing four long paragraphs without identifying a single reliable source is a waste of your time and that of other editors. Reliable sources are like gold on Wikipedia. Everything else is like sand, straw and horsefeathers. Cullen328 (talk) 03:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 New Age IS made of unreliable sources. Since I'm speaking about pseudoscience, of course, I'm bringing the source they use to justify their pseudoscientific beliefs, such as this book. AndregustavoSoyJo (talk) 09:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

AndregustavoSoyJo, references to unreliable sources are forbidden everywhere on Wikipedia, except in very narrow circumstances. Coverage of fringe topics requires excellent references to indisputably reliable sources. Examples might be works by scholars who are experts in comparative religion, whose work has been published by university presses or respected peer-reviewed academic journals. Cullen328 (talk) 09:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Everything I'm saying here is that this article is missing mention about the Law of Attraction. It's widely believed among New Agers that this is a real law.

I don't have all the answers, if I had all the research I would just edit the document, instead of entering a forum on Wikipedia. I'm just making a suggestion about the orientation of your research to make this information more complete to the readers. AndregustavoSoyJo (talk) 09:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

AndregustavoSoyJo, if you want the Law of Attraction to be mentioned in this article, then the burden is on you to find a truly reliable source that explicitly makes the connection between the Law of Attraction and New Age. It is that simple. As for this talk page being a "forum", no it isn't. Please read WP:NOTAFORUM. Article talk pages are for discussing specific, actionable proposals to improve an article based on what reliable sources say". Cullen328 (talk) 19:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Authenticity Of Article

Trolling by now-blocked user
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I'm afraid this article is biased as it is against the New Age and is referring to Adventism, the belief in a redemption of a select few at the end of the world. The New Age is not like that. Please be neutral and use neutral sources whenever possible. Unitarian9999 (talk) 15:15, 17 February 2024 (UTC) By the way, you're thinking backwards. The New Age does not go by the same paradigm of thought like many of your articles into which are more accurate (like your article on archae or "archaebacteria"). If you were to use neutral sources like Melody Baker's A New Consciousness, then you have it made. Unitarian9999 (talk) 15:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC) Oh, and your article is too much information. Shorten it as much as possible. Unitarian9999 (talk) 15:37, 17 February 2024 (UTC) The article on the New Age instates a concise definition is difficult. Yes, but one person has made a solid definition. I won't reveal his name, but someone else said the New Age is a "different religion." I apologize for any hard feelings depicted on my posts. Unitarian9999 (talk) 16:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC) We like to stay neutral at Wikipedia, meaning that we report only what reliable secondary sources say. That isn’t to say that this article might not be biased - in fact it might very well be, if indeed it refers to adventism instead of actual New Age thought at some points. If you could provide some sources and some specific points that you’d like to fix you can post those here and/or make the edit. OverzealousAutocorrect (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC) Oh, don't worry about that. I am just making sure the sources are not biased. There is a book by counselor Melody Baker titled A New Consciousness: The True Spirit Of New Age, describing a nationwide survey and results from New Age Unitarians with individual stories. It turns out that the article on New Age is identical to the stereotype of New Age adherents. The Unitarians she dealt with were a stark contradiction to the popular stereotype Wikipedia describes. Unitarian9999 (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC) That's good fact checking, thank you for that. If it ends up not being the greatest source and we need another I can start the search for another if needed. OverzealousAutocorrect (talk) 02:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC) Thank you, and Godspeed. Unitarian9999 (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC) Even though the article is well-written and thoroughly comprehensive, I find the term New Age to be American slang for Taoism and the "New Age movement" of the 20th century the popularity of the Taoist faith. It died out in 2002 when Taoism became the third-largest religion on Earth at 1.1 billion. I know, because I watched it on a PBS news program on religion that announced its demise in early 2003. Now, it's 1.4 billion. This is what I call New Age in a nutshell. Ravenheart Mew (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC) Is there a specific change you’d like to make to the article? OverzealousAutocorrect (talk) 14:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC) Just a brief summary that can be understood by everyone. Other than that, no specific change. Yes, the New Age is a religion in the general sense, but due to its diversity, there's no telling who's who. I know, because I am one of them. Ravenheart Mew (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC) Where does the article refer to adventism? Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 21:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC) It doesn't. Skyerise (talk) 21:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC) A New Consciousness is from 1991, published by New Thought Pub, an obscure publisher, and written by Melodie Baker, an unknown author. With other words: totally fails WP:RS. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 21:18, 28 February 2024 (UTC) Um, no, that's not in any way how we determine whether a source is reliable. The only concern here would be if it is self-published. Is the author the owner of the press? Skyerise (talk) 21:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC) If you discover what this publisher is, then you can tell me... Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 21:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC) This article refer's to Baker's book. Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 21:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC) New Thought Publishing Co. was (is?) a Chicago publisher established around the beginning of the 20th century. It published many early New Thought authors. Not sure whether it still exists, but it still did in the 1990s. Skyerise (talk) 21:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC) Uh, Skyrise, that is referring to the older New Age magazine periodical founded in the early 20th century, but I don't think New Thought Publishing is still available. If you wish to make your articles more credible, I suggest you renew your sources once a year (after our annual pledge drive). Unitarian9999 (talk) 23:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC) Self-published? Oh, no! 😭. In reference to Eckankar, a former leader by the name of Sri Darwin Gross self-published his book We Kids as a reaction to his excommunication from Eckankar and replaced by Sri Harold Klemp. See who's the new "Living ECK master" if something happened to Klemp. Just make sure the publisher is authentic. Unitarian9999 (talk) 23:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC) Ah, I thought you didn't make much sense. Now I see it's intentional. Muted. Skyerise (talk) 23:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC) Guys, I owe you and Wikipedia an apology. I thought the article on New Age was about the religion of the same name. Instead, it described a millenarian movement of lay practitioners. I believe that the Unitarian "New Age" would be found under Holism. Practitioners of this "New Age" are also called Unitarians due to their uniqueness. Unitarian9999 (talk) 20:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

New Age Religion

Trolling by now-blocked sockpuppet of the above user
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Although the New Age is technically a religion with a different vantage, the sources of this article are obsolete and not always reliable. If possible, I propose an alternate subject being New Age (Religion). This is not to be a replacement for the article on the New Age movement but instead a separate article instating that a religion of the same name exists and sources by authors such as Carolyn Myss and Shirley MacLaine are to be validated. Just thought I'd ask. Ravenheart Mew (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC) @Ravenheart Mew, what are the aspects of New Age religion that you don't think can be adequately covered in this article? What is missing, and what are the reliable sources not included? See WP:POVFORK for the concerns about branching the article. Also, academic sources and independent sources are preferred to those written by adherents. Schazjmd (talk) 22:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC) Uh, no, that is not what I meant. I meant a separate article on the adherents of the New Age we call "Manx." It is not part of the article on the New Age movement -- into which in my honest opinion is just the popularity of the New Age religion and Eastern philosophy. The critics are just telling us ". . .not to fool around with the subject and focus on what we are most familiar with!". That means New Agers are just dabbling. You guys wrote quite an article, although I find it too lengthy to add more content in my opinion. Ravenheart Mew (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC) You'll need to provide some sources. My search on "new age manx" only returns articles about the cat. Schazjmd (talk) 22:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC) That's not the point. Even though the article on New Age covers the religion thereof, there is too much slang and jargon written in the space of the article. Please use the appropriate grammar in the English Wikipedia. The German, Spanish and Japanese Wikipedias speak of it as a religion -- and their sources are accurate. See if you can make it a Wikipedia policy to use appropriate grammar. Ravenheart Mew (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC) Could you point to some specific instances in the article? Schazjmd (talk) 22:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC) When using the word milieu or zeitgeist instead of subculture. The definition of milieu in a separate article contradicts the definition in the same article. Please correct the article by using correct grammar. Slang is often perceived as dialect or vernacular. Some users cannot understand the words used, so I'll leave it up to you if a "no slang" policy is necessary. Ravenheart Mew (talk) 22:46, 14 May 2024 (UTC) @Schazjmd: this user appears to be trolling. Possibly a sockpuppet of Unitarian9999 (talk · contribs) who was trolling in the immediately previous section. Their goal seems to be wasting other editor's time with apparently serious queries which are simply made up. There is no "New Age" "manx" - they are trolling you. Skyerise (talk) 23:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Suggestion

May I suggest something. See if you can add "literary genre consisting of" as in "New Age is a literary genre consisting of a range of religious and spiritual beliefs that emerged during the early 1970's." 2603:8081:3A00:B881:D89C:B501:DBA6:2CB6 (talk) 02:32, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Really, not a good article

Firstly, the term "New Age" has been around since the late 19th century, and was "a movement" even back then, if largely a random collection of fads.

Second: please CEASE referring to every random commercial writer as a "scholar." This is a trick of a poor writer who is attempting to manipulate the audience by pretending that every trashy pocket paperback is equivalent to scholarly texts.

And, the term "New Age" appears 500+ times, further highlighting intentional manipulation. 2001:48F8:3034:1DF5:F423:35CB:2290:5E8C (talk) 08:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)