How to effectively critique New Age ideas?

[AthianGuildmaster]

I've often wondered how to go about combating the general ideas of New Age mysticism. I guess there's no real central tenet to criticize, or unified concepts to debunk. So I guess what I'm wondering is, what's the common thread in all of that, you think? What is the main idea behind it? Something to do with their usual concept of "spirit energy", perhaps?

[KichigaiNeko]

Lloyd?

For what it is worth I would hazard a guess that people NEED to find "the sacred" and are willing to find it anywhere.

Having dabbled in "New Age" stuff myself I can only state that it appears to be an inborn need for humans to feel special, different and some how worthy of the attention from an uncaring cosmos. You will also find that the current resurgence of the Wiccan and Celtic cultural spiritualism give some hope/ back bone to those who feel oppressed but are seeking something "more"

All in all it really is a lot of gobbledygook, and mankind striving to find a crotch that he can lean on while facing the unknown. Personally I have out grown this need and am happy with the unknown.

[RonaldReagansGhost666]

One word:
Science

[Ben Davis]

...mankind striving to find a crotch that he can lean on...

I think you mean 'crutch'. Most efforts to find a crotch to lean on have nothing to do with New Age-ism.

...although I've found it useful, sometimes

[Annik]

One word:
Science

This exactly.

[jonb]

For me new ageism, is like conspiracy theorists, evidence of partial thinking.
A conspiracy nut discovers there is no god looking after him, so when stuff goes wrong presumes it must be caused by something bad wishing to harm him. Similarly the magic of the church is proved not to work, but rather than rejecting magic the new ageist looks for magic that will work.

Welcome by the way.

[Minimalist]

The Woo-Woo crowd should be asked to present evidence, just like the jesus freaks.

The thing is the new agers are not usually so obnoxious about not having any.

[NomenMihiNon]

...the magic of the church is proved not to work, but rather than rejecting magic the new ageist looks for magic that will work.

That is precisely what drew me to Wicca...well, what drew me to research magic and discover Wicca in the process. I hadn't really thought much about religion in my early teens, but the notion of gods that were symbolic representations of abstract forces seemed much more feasible to me than that of a literal pan-dimensional "person", along with the philosophy that humankind is a part of nature rather than somehow above it. But the desire to actively cast spells rather than passively praying was nonetheless my primary motivator. And the various books I read explained magic in a way that made sense to my young mind...except, of course, that there's no evidence for the existence of the forces and energies behind it. At first I was able to convince myself that the spells worked, but just not always properly (e.g. my love spell was misdirected and brought me someone completely wrong for me, as opposed to simply giving a shy kid the confidence to approach a girl he'd met only once before and just happened to know was a fellow musician). Or that maybe I just didn't have the ability, and my attempting magic was futile only in the sense of trying to teach an arthymic, tone-deaf friend to play the guitar. I guess at that point it would've felt like sour grapes to concede that magic simply isn't real.

The Woo-Woo crowd should be asked to present evidence, just like the jesus freaks.

The thing is the new agers are not usually so obnoxious about not having any.

Well, that's the thing. Christians have their "evidence", however flawed it may be, in the form of scripture and dogma. Whereas New Agers' beliefs tend to be based on an amalgam of theirs and others' speculations, which can be much harder to refute. But you're right, at least the New Age folks are more likely to actually discuss it as opposed to argue about it.

[killybob]

The Woo-Woo crowd should be asked to present evidence, just like the jesus freaks.

The thing is the new agers are not usually so obnoxious about not having any.

Well, that's the thing. Christians have their "evidence", however flawed it may be, in the form of scripture and dogma. Whereas New Agers' beliefs tend to be based on an amalgam of theirs and others' speculations, which can be much harder to refute. But you're right, at least the New Age folks are more likely to actually discuss it as opposed to argue about it.

It's not harder to refute. "I refute the so called 'evidence' produced by New Ageists". There, easy. Also, from what I've seen, the people who practice New Age crap and other superstitious shit are actually just as hard to reason with as the staunchly religious.
My mother had a delicate and almost suicidal friend, who was deeply into psychic readings and would regularly hold séances and practice spirit healing. When I tried to talk to her about her practices she got excited, but the moment she realized I was trying to ask for evidence and was a little sceptical, she immediately sunk into a defensive shell and seemed so disgruntled that I was worried I might make her suicidal condition worse, and I didn't persist any further.
She was so emotionally invested in her new age nonsense that she couldn't handle the slightest criticism.
Funnily enough, her delicate emotional condition had arisen out of her being in deep debt. The reason for this it turned out, was she that was getting financial advice from one of her "spirit guides".
I'm not sure all New Ageists are even remotely like this lady, but I do not think for a moment that they are in the least bit open minded about whether their beliefs are true or not, and very few would be bold enough to be tested in a scientific experiment.

[downbeatplumb]

The reason for this it turned out, was she that was getting financial advice from one of her "spirit guides".

Her guide was probably a banker from the 20's.