Notable repost from June 1996-

Paul Schlyter wrote;

Paul, (and other cynics so inclined)
Prove that you have a working knowledge of the mechanics of delineation
of the horoscope. This will in effect remove any doubts from my mind
that you are an objective observer, and allow status as peer
reviewers-as they say, and as several scientist types have argued.
Because this will show that you have studied it thoroughly and your
opinions are construed from logical premise to the best of your ability
with integrity, honesty and true skepticism.

Comparing anything you have no knowledge of-is not possible. This is
called the "Fallacy of suppressed evidence" The requirement of a true
premises includes the proviso that the premises not ignore some
important piece of evidence that outweighs the presented evidence and
entails a very different conclusion. If an inductive argument (which is
all that anyone has here) does indeed ignore such evidence, then the
argument commits the fallacy of suppressed evidence. Now since we have
no evidence of yours or any other "arguers of science's" knowledge of
astrology-this fallacy is committed until this knowledge is included in
the argument that definitely would lead us to different conclusions
(most definitely on your part of course)-therefore please state your
status as far as astrological knowledge before I proceed.

Absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence.
This in logic is known as the fallacy of "Appeal to ignorance"
(Argumentum ad ignorantum) When the premises state that nothing has BEEN
PROVED one way or the other about something, and the conclusion then
makes a definite assertion about that thing, the argument commits "an
appeal to ignorance". The issue usually involves something that is
incapable of being proved. (At least at the present moment). Example:

"People have been trying for centuries to provide conclusive evidence
for the claims of astrology, and no one has ever succeeded. Therefore,
we must conclude that astrology is a lot of nonsense." Logic, 4th
Edition Hurley, University of San Diego, Wadsworth Publishing, 1991,
page 128, "Informal Fallacies".

Any one in the academic community would require MUCH more than this to
allow anyone to PUBLISH their works let alone debate it with those
knowledgeable in their own fields.

Otherwise your statement above has serious complications. You and other
cynics argue the "basis in fact" premise day in and day out. If you
cannot prove that you have a working knowledge of astrology then any
further statements you or any other cynic make are fallacious and
misleading based on the this defect. A fallacy is a defect in an
argument. Your conclusion is not supported by the premises. You commit
the fallacy of argument against the person (tu quoque) often. I have
demonstrated some (a little) knowledge of other disciplines. You have
demonstrated none of astrology. You attempt to make the astrology
arguers appear to be hypocritical or arguing in bad faith.

Here is the chart you must delineate;

female
1/26/57
5:00 pm lmt
Raton, New Mexico

Explain the reigning psychological need of the identity and how this was
internalized through the parental structure. Explain how needs are
reflected through identity/status, worth/extension and
thinking/perspective profiles based on aspect patterns and networks.
Demonstrate (when you get to projection techniques) how these needs and
beliefs are brought forward and reflected in actual reality experiences
(you may reference any of my works on usenet if you need help).

Please name these patterns and what sort of schema they reflect. Please
give us your evaluation of the elemental count and how this reflects
balance psychologically. Incorporate the Sun/Moon blend in this backdrop
and explain how it affects this blend. Then tie in aspect patterns,
house rulers and dispositors from this basis.
 Define the greatest fears of the identity and what type of attachment
schema ie., (F)-autonomous, (DS)- dismissing, (E)- preoccupied  and the
extent of resolution (U) possibilities (optional). Describe the
identity's energy application mode, need to prove the self, find
personal and social reflection, needs for opportunity and reward,
strategic application of the self to avoid fears through the superego
construct. Explain through planetary structures, patterns and trees how
it is reflected whether the individual inclines to extroversion or
introversion patterns and how this would be reflected on the Kiersey
Temperament sorter by the patterns seen. (optional if you are brave).

Define needs for individuation and self sacrifice and the whole law of
momentum flow as articulated throughout the self's particular
perspective. If your inclination is spiritual or karmic you may include
these ideas, but they must be tied to actual reality experiences for
verification. Explain how these deductions would be reflected in what
types of behavior. Explain how at least 5 asteroid bodies add nuance to
these initial deductions and your plan or recommendations for
remediation and further or greater articulation of this identity's self
fulfillment within the 40th year of life.

Please include major arcs, progressions and other phenomena that you
feel to be critical periods of the identity's fulfillment of self
actualization (or defeat) and explain how you have come to these
conclusions. Tie these to the current reality experience suggested at
the 40th year.

This reflects some of the initial or basic work to be done on this
client prior to meeting with the astrologer. I will not ask you for full
workups that are asked for in such tests as I took just this, although I
was not allowed to use a computer, you can. Again although I had a time
limit, there is no time limit for you (within reason).

Please identify;
Tropical or sidereal or whatever, aspect orbs, house systems, dispositor
mechanics and other pertinent mathematical measurements so there will be
no discrepancy between comparisons when your work is checked.
Refer to interpretation models that you are using so we speak the same
language. In other words the philosophical orientation of the specific
astrologer or astrologers that you are using in this delineation, i.e.
humanistic, Jungian, esoteric etc.

If any part of this task is beyond your scope of understanding (or any
other cynic foolish enough to continue this debate) I suggest that when
you come to this newsgroup it will be for an education, to ask questions
of the many qualified astrologers who post here off and on,  or to
inquire as to information to assist you in the learning of some of the
above- not for ego gratification to trash those you think
superstitious.  Thank you for your maturity in this matter.

Spinic=A disingenuous fault-finding and spin-doctoring bigot, who does
not investigate anything realistically before attempting to denigrate
it. A person who has 0 insight into their own beliefs, psychology and
defective logical thinking processes that EVOKES, and is responsible
for, 99% of their predjudice and obsession with that which they fear a
possibility.
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.      
© 2004 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Articles http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/info.htm
Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.com/TOC.htm