|
|
|
The forms of historicism include the myths of eons and
epochs. Our model leads us through this terrain, yet gives us a handle on the
mythological confusions. We live in an age when the millennial calendar of
eschatological Christianity, a very ancient
cousin of the idea of a New Age, suggests an illusory finish to our affairs that
might distract from the practical efforts demanded by problems that have no
miraculous solutions. Behind the idea of the last age lies the idea of a ‘new
age’, and the endless echoes of antique notions of epochs, ages of man, and
great cycles of nature. Ideas of a ‘new age’ braided with that of an ‘eschaton’
and its strange futures are clearly evident in the thinking of the New
Testament.
For the onset of the New Age, if this has any meaning, has
already come and gone as far as historical Grand Dramatics is concerned. Beyond
the issues of the greater future on a scale of millennia, our ‘new age’ crisis
might be very real on a scale of mere centuries: a loss of momentum or
postmodern chaotification
in the unfolding of a new phase of ‘civilization’ from its roots in the period
of the earliest modernity. Our moment, that one might wish to move ‘toward a new
enlightenment’, instead moves quickly ‘toward
a new age movement’. A further confusion lies in the idea of decline, near ideas
of the rise and fall of civilization, such as those advocated by Spengler and
Toynbee. These views cleverly find the Enlightenment the onset of the fallen
man’s last hurrah, in some hellish finish of ‘western’ civilization. But secular
thought lays the best claim to the ‘new age’.[i]
The confusions of eschatology, new ages, last ages, and
cyclical views of history are chronic, and in the recent versions, come with an
anti-modern ideological twist. The eonic effect produces a useful commentary on
the issue. We should note that the term ‘eonic’ was made a synonym for
‘intermittent’, and invokes a systems analysis metaphor (e.g. digital samplers),
but also obviously puns on the word ‘eon’, and this is both an afterthought, and
a means of seeing why myths of ‘New Ages’ are endemic to history for a reason
the eonic effect makes clear. Our ‘eonic sequence’, will elicit the confusion
over myths of the Great Year, and hopefully displace that with something else.
The great shockwave of modernism is the onset of a great
new period of history and joins the short list of two previous such
transitions, the great force of the first civilizations, and the second
great wave of change that gave birth to the classical world. One and the same
pattern of geographical differentiation followed by ‘globalizing’ integration is
clearly at work, with, however, a rising expansion of scale in each case. The
resemblance of the modernist transformation to these early cousins completes the
list of three ‘new ages’. Is any of this important? Our eonic pattern moves
through this territory, and it is good to be wary of merely recycling
archetypes. Our approach is different, purely empirical. The New Age obsession
is much ridiculed, but contains a valid impulse. An age of spiritual democracy
is clearly coming into existence amidst considerable confusion. Further, the
‘new age’ idea is an outstanding challenge to the legacy of the great religions
now challenged to a great renewal.
The issue of the New Age is simple. Everyone is observing
fragments of the eonic effect, without seeing the whole pattern, which is
‘evolutionary’ in our sense. This has nothing to do with current New Age ideas
of ‘evolution’ as personal transformation. The eonic effect grants no
foundational status to the idea of a new age, but solves the problem at once on
a de facto basis by suggesting the mistake of periodization in most efforts to
periodize New Ages. The quest for the Age of Aquarius was silly, as is the
postmodern attempt to undermine the rise of the modern with a ‘New Age’. There
is even a new myth of the ‘Second Axial Age’ appearing. The myths of the ‘New
Age’ spring from the lore of the Great Year, a total red herring, whose
astrological periodization of the precession of the equinoxes is too short and
throws everything else our of whack, leaving the field in total confusion. The
mystery of historical cycles has always haunted civilization, for reasons that
we will see. It is time to lay the issue to rest. It is hopeless question, but
we can take a chance and use our eonic model to attempt some clarification.
One reason for the importance of the idea of a New Age is
that the periodic renewal of religious formations, correctly anticipated by many
New Agers and Eastern thinkers, is a force to be reckoned with and can have
devastating impact on received religions. It is probably the case that the
religions generated in the wake of the Axial period will slowly pass away, or be
transformed into something else. The effect is very clear from the Axial period
itself, which pressed against the remains of still earlier religions, and we can
see the issue clearly in the modern world where all the old religions are
clearly falling to pieces. The place of the better idea of evolution here is
obvious, although Darwinism, due
to its reductionist account of man has, if anything, miscast the tone of
secularization which was proceeding in more intelligent fashion before the false
metaphysics of selectionist theories gave religious reaction a fresh impetus.
Consider that preeminent New Ager, Spinoza, giving birth promptly in the early
modern to Biblical Criticism. Also, please note, the Protestant Reformation, in
the mainline of our eonic sequence recycles a Christian stream. We should
therefore be wary of any predictions.
The mysterious discontinuity of the sixteenth century, and
the onset of the modern in the nineteenth are a de facto resolution of the Great
Expectation predicted, but whose secular character was not wished for. That the
early champions of revolution
and change, during the French Revolution, saw fit
to periodize a New Age in the ‘revolution’ of time by attempting to invent a new
calendar of the Year Zero is altogether apt, and not quite as ridiculous as the
swift reactions of conservatives were soon to make that seem.
Thus, the rise of the modern world has often been seen as
the beginning of a New Age, Novus Ordo Seclorum. But this falls out of
sync with the periodization of the Great Year. We can breathe a sigh of relief,
determining the onset of the Aquarian age is superfluous. But a host of ‘New
Age’ gurus, plying the ‘standard postmodern strategy’ pioneered by Spengler, find the
rise of the modern to be an aberration, and the situation to require their
ministrations, please forget the many achievements of human liberty attending
the old New Age. The new New Age requires the sacrifice of human autonomy, in
the name of spiritual guidance. We are presented with the Old Age movement, in a
flood of cults promoting archaic confusions.
The condemnation in spiritual terms of the new age of the
modern with its revolutionary struggle for freedom is currently being amplified
by the postmodern strategies of forces of reaction. In a strange irony, the West
was the last place on the planet not subject to the concealed domination of
spiritual or ‘esoteric’ mystifications. It has produced in short order the
groundwork for a new disposition of the true spiritual man, able to inherit his
autonomy as the natural freedom of his own self-consciousness. We are still
living in the future of this moment of this transition to a new era of world
history, symbolically climaxing in the generation of the French Revolution, in
the sense that our current culture came into existence very swiftly in the
century from 1750 to 1850. This greater significance of the Revolutionary period
was clearly in the mind of the philosopher Hegel
who, ideas of the ‘end of history’
apart, was inspired both to the early enthusiasm for and the reactionary
rejection of this event in its excesses, as one of its most notable observers.
As Hegel notes in his
Phenomenology of Spirit, written on the eve of
Napoleon’s approach to Jena,
as the supposed (hubristic) World Spirit on horseback:
Our epoch is a birth time, a period of transition. The spirit
of man has broken with the old order of things, and with old ways of thinking.
The spirit of the times, growing slowly and quietly ripe for the new form it is
to assume, disintegrates one piece after another of the structure of the
previous world. That it is tottering to its fall is now indicated only by
symptoms here and there...but something else is approaching. This gradual
crumbling to pieces will be interrupted by the sunrise, which in a flash and at
a single stroke, brings to view the form and structure of the new world.
Hegel is useful in one way for he restates a classic
mystical theme of the ancients, but slips in the idea of freedom. The guru
game will never be the same, and the current New Age conspiracies against human
autonomy using the postmodern strategy should soon play themselves out. Hegel,
of course, is sometimes well challenged for his version of the Freedom idea.
Indeed, is he not a sly version from the same game? His concealed occult roots
should leave us wondering. But the point is clear. Failing Hegel, the pack of
left Hegelians, New Agers in the vein of Feuerbach, rewrote the terms of the New
Age rather well, although Marxist ‘materialism’ is too constricted to handle
these issues. The terms are set, the ‘class struggle’ is very much present at
the core of religion. The Enlightenment theme of autonomy creates quiet alarm in
the spiritual authorities of antiquity. And why would that be so? The dark
rumors of the occult fascism pass through the New Age underground.
In the end, there is no theoretical basis for the New Age
concept as such in the eonic effect with its crude stages of self-organization,
but the battle of the ancients and moderns takes its place, and now takes new
forms so visible in the ‘old and new’ of the vigorous movements styled ‘New
Age’. But the new age of the modern is real enough, and connects to historical
dynamics. The postmodern swindles of the gurus attempting to displace modernity
with their own ‘New Age’ should hopefully prove transparent, and proof they have
little grasp of history.
[i] Page Smith,
A New Age Now Begins (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1976), Vol I, Introduction, and Chapter 10, “What
Then is the American, This New Man?”, John Robert,
Revolution and Improvement
(Berkeley: University of California, 1976), Chapter 7, “A New Age?”,
Forrest MacDonald, Novus Ordo
Seclorum (Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press, 1985). The
world of the Young Hegelians was the classic of all seminal New Age
Movements, the more convincing for its wild gyrations: Feuerbach, “…One
who understands the language in which the spirit of the world speaks,
cannot fail to recognize that our present is the capstone of a whole
period in the history of humanity and is precisely the starting point of
a new life.’ Quoted from Karl Lowith,
Martin Heidegger & European
Nihilism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1995). Alexander
Macfie (ed.), Eastern Influences on Western Philosophy (Edinburgh:
Edinburgh
University
Press, 2003), David Smith, Hinduism and Modernity (Malden, MA:
Blackwell, 2003).
|
|