From: bear@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (Bear Giles)
Subject: Re: is newage distinguishable?
Organization: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Adminstration / Boulder Labs
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 07:02:35 GMT

In article <sbuckley.714807715@sfu.ca> sbuckley@fraser.sfu.ca (Stephen Buckley) writes:
>Bear Giles writes:
>>I, for one, don't care for "cosmic systems" or "global unity focus."
>
>  cosmic systems is as broad a term as i could come up with to describe
>things like us not being individual entities, more like a butterfly in
>kansas contributes to a typhoon in japan.  basically supra-linear
>causation.  we're all interconnected [like a wilderness watershed]
>on a physical, emotion and spiritual level.  global unity is the movement
>to getting beyond petty us vs. them distinctions [evil empire soviets,
>stupid poor third world people] to a more enlightened global community,
>human race loyalty that goes beyond national boundaries.

I understand your point, and there are a lot of 'new-agers' spouting
off about how-great-life-would-be-if-we-all-just-took-a-global-view.

I don't think anyone seriously believes we should take a _more_ local
view of events.  I try to read a variety of material, and I know the
"short horizon" of most business and government leaders is on the top
of a _lot_ of gripe lists.

But some people have gone overboard in the other direction with "cosmic
systems" or "global unity focuses."  Let me ask you something: would you
trust their advice for financial investments?  For mechanical repairs?
etc.?

Meanwhile, coming up with ways of encouraging long-term planning
is challenging.  For instance, how do you balance long-term planning
with accountability?  No matter who wins the election, we'll live
with the Reagan/Bush legacy for the rest of our lives.  (The national
debt increased by $ 3,000,000,000,000; the size of the bureaucracy
grew more under Bush than Carter, while Bush stripped some important
agencies under his "competiveness council."  BTW, under Reagan era
'logic' I am a private-sector employee.  I cost the government quite
a bit more than a Civil Service employee, but I can be fired at any
time.  I use my government e-mail address rather than my academic
address (at the University of Colorado) solely because it's easier
getting all e-mail at one address).

Sorry.  I'll try to keep my political diatribes on alt.pagan.  :-)


Once again, it's a question of balance.  Some fundies follow _every_
statement of future intentions with ", the Lord willing" because
they expect the Second Coming of Christ to occur at literally any
moment.  On the other hand, some white-lighters are afraid to use
paper towels to clean their kitchen stove or refrigerator out of fear
that they are contributing to the destruction of the rain forest[1].

The answer is clearly somewhere in the middle, and from all indications
somewhere towards the "global" and/or "long-term" side.


Bear Giles
bear@fsl.noaa.gov

[1]  The best way to upset an eco-freak is to point out, after s/he
choses environmentally sound paper bags over reprehensible plastic bags,
that paper bags are _far_ more energy costly than plastic bags
(due to the incredible amount of energy required to dry paper pulp).
Xref: sparky talk.religion.newage:3986 alt.alien.visitors:6038