On Spirituality & Technology

I'm not quite sure what to think of the New Age movement. I believe the "movement" is beneficial in some ways for letting us take responsibility for our own actions and letting us think for ourselves, but its "beliefs" are largely only attainable by middle-class North Americans. This concept about self-actualization, which is also placed as the utmost "being" need on Maslow's hierarchy, is a sensible "peak" goal for those who value the experience, but cannot possibly be attained by many people. When I had first heard about this hierarchy in high school, it sounded spot-on with its interpretations of what is important in life, but with critical thinking comes reconsiderations of prominent theories. In some ways, I even feel as though the priorities in this hierarchy is flawed. Majorly Westernized and individualistic.

The needs are listed as follows: physiological -> safety -> belonging -> esteem -> self-actualization. Who's to say that people without food or water cannot achieve self-actualization? Take asceticism, as an example, Buddhist monks live minimally in monasteries and often fast, yet they are capable of attaining spiritual enlightenment. People with not much security, such as beggars on the street or adventurous backpackers who have decided to travel the world living out of a rucksack, may gain lots of insight into how the world works through much experience with people from different walks of life. On the other hand, people with everything they will ever need in the world, such as Hollywood celebrities and all-star pro athletes, are often (but not always) incredibly self-absorbed and materialistic. Who is to say that they will ever attain self-actualization? Experiences are subjective I suppose, and I guess it is a matter of interpretation for subjects like these. o_O

Aldred's article talks about the New Age appropriation and commercialization of Native American spirituality. Why must people do this? It happens with all cultures though, this is not a situation in isolation. Applying "ethnic gloss" is a pathetic way to get individuals to "learn" more about a culture. Yes, maybe sometimes there is limited information to work with, but that is really no excuse for this method of exploiting a culture in order to appeal to people who may not know better. Two examples of this that I have observed are 1) tattoos of Chinese characters and 2) Abercrombie and Fitch t-shirts with stereotypical Chinese characters printed on them. I'll try not to go off tangent too much.

1) Why???? When I see people with tattoos like these who are not Chinese, I cannot help but think how sad the trend is. Not that I am trying to claim Chinese characters as our own, but the entire idea of Chinese culture and characters being so incredibly "exotic" to some is just something that really grates on me. How to explain this feeling that I have, I really don't know. My feeling is just that most people who get these think they look, for lack of a better word, "cool" -- nope, not because they appreciate the history of Chinese culture, not because of anything else. I really hate to bash people with these tattoos, but I can't help it. I often hear stories (probably fabricated) about someone asking a Chinese person about how to write a certain word (love, strength, cliche things like that) and the Chinese person giving them a completely off-the-wall word such as oh, "rapist" or "pedophile" as the real word, resulting in them getting some ridiculous tattoo. A little extreme, but you get the point.

Related link: http://www.hanzismatter.com/