What does a natal chart show?
Blahhh
What would you say a natal chart can tell you about a person? Can
it show such things as:
Physical beauty?
Level of intellect?
Particular talents and their level of aptitude? For a few
examples of talents: writing, painting, mathematics, music,
sculpture, dancing - and let's just throw in psi for fun... :-)
Preferred talents or hobbies?
The circumstances of wealth or poverty a person might be born
into, or eventually achieve?
The person's upbringing (even though at the time of birth, their
upbringing hasn't happened yet)?
The person's perception of their upbringing, when and after it
does happen?
The person's likely or preferred profession?
Overall happiness?
Introversion or extroversion?
Level of physical health/overall healthiness?
Physical sensitivity to medicine or drugs?
Mental illness, and the form it is likely to take?
Physical illness, and the form it is likely to take?
Morals, morality, and the form they are likely to take?
Religiousness or spirituality, and the form it is likely to take?
Anything else I'm forgetting?
Does the natal chart just show personality - pure and simple?
How do we define personality?
What might be the best ways to measure personality?
Where does personality come from? One's genes, one's upbringing?
Past lives?
Do the planets themselves somehow influence the person to be a
certain way?
Does personality change over time? Could it be a general rule
that a chart may be more likely to match a younger person better
than an older person?
Might the same chart factors have different but related
expressions for a person at different times in their life?
Can a person completely break free of "acting like their chart"?
Can we even tell when this happens, because many people tend to
have many contradictory chart factors?
I don't know if I myself will be participating much in the
discussion, but I hope you will have fun with these questions...
:-)
Best wishes,
Blahhh
------------
My websites:
http://astroblahhh.tripod.com/astrology/statistics/index.html
http://badremixer.tripod.com/
Ray Murphy
----------
In article <1113969042....@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
>Hi folks.
>
>What would you say a natal chart can tell you about a person? Can
>it show such things as:
>
>Physical beauty?
>
>Level of intellect?
>
>Particular talents and their level of aptitude? For a few
>examples of talents: writing, painting, mathematics, music,
>sculpture, dancing - and let's just throw in psi for fun... :-)
>
>Preferred talents or hobbies?
[......]
>
>I don't know if I myself will be participating much in the
>discussion, but I hope you will have fun with these questions...
RM: Those questions should keep us all going for a while.
>Blahhh
>
>------------
>My websites:
>http://astroblahhh.tripod.com/astrology/statistics/index.html
>http://badremixer.tripod.com/
RM: I couldn't see the images below the main heading on either of
those websites. It may be because I'm using an old browser.
I was anxious to see if you had any more ADB files there.
Ray
don hindenach
>five million, two hunnerd and fifty-one thousand, six hunnerd and three
questions<
um, sure!
(if you can learn where to look)
--
-don hindenach-
donh at audiosys dot com
Blahhh
[...]
> >Blahhh
> >
> >------------
> >My websites:
> >http://astroblahhh.tripod.com/astrology/statistics/index.html
> >http://badremixer.tripod.com/
>
> RM: I couldn't see the images below the main heading on either of
> those websites. It may be because I'm using an old browser.
> I was anxious to see if you had any more ADB files there.
>
> Ray
Hmm, if it's a problem related to Tripod's automatically-inserted
banners and ads, I'm not sure what I can do to fix that...
Just so you know, there aren't any AstroDatabank files on
http://badremixer.tripod.com/ , since that's my site devoted to
music-related things.
The only ADB files I have up on my Astroblahhh site are a couple
files of data belonging to LiveJournal users who listed
interests in "arguing" and/or "arguments", or "horror"; plus a file
containing those two groups as well as data for users listing an
interest in "acting" or "writing" or "fiction writing".
(I could probably make the Gauquelin data files I have up into
AstroDatabank format easily enough - for now, though, they're
just in JigSaw and plain text formats).
If you're interested in these files, you can get the zip file
of the entire contents of the Astroblahhh site here, where I've
temporarily uploaded it:
http://www.angelfire.com/stars5/solarflare/index.html
That site has a banner and ads too, but being different from
Tripod, hopefully it'll work. If not, I can try something
else. :-)
Best wishes,
Ray Murphy
----------
In article <1114009134.9...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
"Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
>Ray Murphy wrote:
>
>[...]
>
>> >Blahhh
>> >
>> >------------
>> >My websites:
>> >http://astroblahhh.tripod.com/astrology/statistics/index.html
>> >http://badremixer.tripod.com/
>>
>> RM: I couldn't see the images below the main heading on either of
>> those websites. It may be because I'm using an old browser.
>> I was anxious to see if you had any more ADB files there.
>>
>> Ray
>
>Hmm, if it's a problem related to Tripod's automatically-inserted
>banners and ads, I'm not sure what I can do to fix that...
>
[.......]
>The only ADB files I have up on my Astroblahhh site are a couple
>files of data belonging to LiveJournal users who listed
>interests in "arguing" and/or "arguments", or "horror"; plus a file
>containing those two groups as well as data for users listing an
>interest in "acting" or "writing" or "fiction writing".
RM: I haven't seen much of this type of data gathering, but it's what
we need for all areas of astrology research.
>
>(I could probably make the Gauquelin data files I have up into
>AstroDatabank format easily enough - for now, though, they're
>just in JigSaw and plain text formats).
RM: ADB can import JigSaw files.
Incidentally, thanks for doing those Gauquelin conversions for others
to share. It sure beats everyone doing their own translations year
after year.
Perhaps one day we'll have a central point for data like that in an
immediately useable format like JigSaw.
>
>If you're interested in these files, you can get the zip file
>of the entire contents of the Astroblahhh site here, where I've
>temporarily uploaded it:
>http://www.angelfire.com/stars5/solarflare/index.html
RM: Thanks.
I've downloaded the zip file, but I haven't moved it from the Mac over
to the PC yet.
[....]
>Blahhh
Ray
--
ALL ASTROLOGY ON THE NET -- INDEX
http://users.chariot.net.au/~astrocom/index2.html
A comprehensive list of frequently sought URL's
Designed for Astrologers - Tropical & Sidereal
J S
things it doesn't show, imo:
Gender, race, sexual orientation, IQ, morality.
Opinions welcomed.
~ Roger
======================================
" If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise
of fighting a foreign enemy."
~ James Madison
Blahhh
don hindenach wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:07:51 UTC, "Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >five million, two hunnerd and fifty-one thousand, six hunnerd and
three
> questions<
Hee, hee, hee. OK, maybe I should gradually try them one at a time,
then. :-)
> um, sure!
>
> (if you can learn where to look)
Questions 5,251,604 and 5,251,605:
Can we learn where to look? How might we best go about that? ;-)
Blahhh
------------
My websites:
http://astroblahhh.tripod.com/astrology/statistics/index.html
http://badremixer.tripod.com/
> --
Blahhh
J S wrote:
> I can't say what a chart definitely shows, but I'll toss out a few
> things it doesn't show, imo:
> Gender,
I'm inclined to agree - probably there are plenty of fraternal twins
of opposite genders who have approximately the same chart.
> race,
I'm inclined to agree with this too - there are probably tons of
astrotwins of different races out there.
>sexual orientation,
Again, I'm inclined to agree. But I do wonder if perhaps a tendency
or disinclination to be open and public about one's orientation (or
any other private matter) could be shown by some chart factors.
>IQ,
Hmm... tricky. :-) There really are a lot of astrological claims
about various chart factors indicating mental quickness,
inventiveness, creativity, high intelligence, a good imagination,
etc.
Yet, I doubt anyone would insist that any of these factors can be
taken as an absolute guarantee that a person will definitely have any
category of intellect (low, high, fuzzy, vague, distorted, fast, slow,
sharp, clear, etc.).
And I suppose even the same person can give a rather uneven
performance - it's quite possible for a person to seem (or be)
brilliant at one time, and then be like a blithering fool at
another... :-) For one thing, self-consciousness and nervousness can
do a lot to destroy a person's self-presentation and ability to think
clearly... and some people have test anxiety, etc.
I guess if we're talking about specifically IQ, as in IQ tests...
well, I'm sure not an expert on IQ tests, but, I'd assume that
IQ tests probably hinge a lot on education, training, accumulated
knowledge, etc.
Many astrotwins could have had very different opportunities for
acquiring these things. Or, for whatever reason, perhaps they took
very different approaches to the opportunities they did have. So,
perhaps it should be of no surprise if astrotwins wind up with
greatly differing IQ scores. Not only that, but perhaps one might be
born with brain damage, the others not... who knows. So, it looks
like I'm inclined to agree again. :-)
However, I suspect that perhaps a person's inherent ingenuity,
imagination, inventiveness, creativity, etc. may be something
different from their accumulated store of knowledge, or their ability
to do well-practiced tricks (like math problems) as a result of
training. Perhaps an IQ test might be inadequate to measure these
other qualities, and perhaps these less easy to objectively measure
qualities are what the chart might show? Or maybe not... :-) I have
no idea. :-)
But, I think a person who knows little but is very inventive in the
ways they apply what they do know, could possibly be said to be more
intelligent than a person who knows a lot, but isn't good at thinking
of anything particularly novel to do with their knowledge.
And, as demonstrated by "savants", it's quite possible for a person
to have utterly awesome retention of trivia compared to "ordinary"
people - and yet have a lot less ability than even an average person
to apply that knowledge in any particularly useful fashion, let alone
deal with the ordinary tasks of everyday life.
But, I guess it does seem rather evident, if you compare two
astrotwins such as Kim Peek, a well-known autistic savant, born Nov.
11, 1951 in Salt Lake City, Utah, and Fuzzy Zoeller, a well-known
golfer, born Nov. 11, 1951 in New Albany, Indiana, that - unless
house placements of things, or the ascendant/other angles and moon
sign and aspects, are very important in such matters - probably
intelligence or exceptional mental abilities or disabilities may be
rather difficult (or impossible) to discern clearly from a chart,
given that Fuzzy Zoeller appears not to be an autistic savant or
cognitively impaired in any way (as far as I know, which isn't far).
So, I guess that raises the question, what _do_ the various chart
factors supposed by some to relate to intellect in their chart -
Mercury in Sagittarius, Mercury aspects, etc. - actually mean for
both of them... hmm... :-) Maybe they both are renownedly blunt and
direct in speech, or something.
>morality.
Yes, I imagine there are probably plenty of criminals' astrotwins
running around, who are completely law-abiding and moral - or many
astrotwins who have vastly divergent sets of morals or values due to
the culture they were brought up in.
I think I'm inclined to agree that the precise form a person's values
or morals will take can't be seen in a chart.
But, I suppose hard Uranus aspects are sometimes thought as a rule to
mean this is a person who is prone to feel rather oppressed by
cultural mores, and to be rather rebellious and have a tendency to
try to break free of them. While hard Saturn aspects are sometimes
thought to signify a stronger tendency to self-suppression and
conformism...
But I suppose it really depends on the person's context as to
precisely how such tendencies might play out. A Victorian lady might
have thought it was shocking if she dared to hike up her skirt a few
inches above her ankles, but many people wouldn't even notice that
these days. :-)
So maybe tendencies to conform or rebel can be seen in a chart, but
not precisely what the person is conforming or rebelling against?
Umm... OK... enough of my pointless rambling. :-)
> Opinions welcomed.
I'm glad, since it seems I do have a lot of opinions when I can make up
my mind to express them. :-)
> ~ Roger
>
> ======================================
>
> " If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the
guise
> of fighting a foreign enemy."
> ~ James Madison
Thanks for your input. :-)
Blahhh
Blahhh
> ----------
> In article <1114009134.9...@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> "Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
[...]
> >The only ADB files I have up on my Astroblahhh site are a couple
> >files of data belonging to LiveJournal users who listed
> >interests in "arguing" and/or "arguments", or "horror"; plus a file
> >containing those two groups as well as data for users listing an
> >interest in "acting" or "writing" or "fiction writing".
>
> RM: I haven't seen much of this type of data gathering, but it's what
> we need for all areas of astrology research.
Eventually I'll do more.
> >(I could probably make the Gauquelin data files I have up into
> >AstroDatabank format easily enough - for now, though, they're
> >just in JigSaw and plain text formats).
>
> RM: ADB can import JigSaw files.
> Incidentally, thanks for doing those Gauquelin conversions for others
> to share. It sure beats everyone doing their own translations year
> after year.
You're welcome. :-)
> Perhaps one day we'll have a central point for data like that in an
> immediately useable format like JigSaw.
Yes. I imagine it would be fairly easy for someone to set up. Heck,
maybe I'll try it someday.
[...]
> Ray
> --
> ALL ASTROLOGY ON THE NET -- INDEX
> http://users.chariot.net.au/~astrocom/index2.html
> A comprehensive list of frequently sought URL's
> Designed for Astrologers - Tropical & Sidereal
Nice site. :-)
Blahhh
------------
My websites:
http://astroblahhh.tripod.com/苔strology/statistics/index.htm衍
http://badremixer.tripod.com/
don hindenach
>
> don hindenach wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:07:51 UTC, "Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > >five million, two hunnerd and fifty-one thousand, six hunnerd and
> three
> > questions<
>
> Hee, hee, hee. OK, maybe I should gradually try them one at a time,
> then. :-)
>
> > um, sure!
> >
> > (if you can learn where to look)
>
> Questions 5,251,604 and 5,251,605:
>
> Can we learn where to look? How might we best go about that? ;-)
>
> Blahhh
>
I took a class, then spent a few months reading portions of the library
at the Cayce Institute in Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA. Ended up
being pretty good at reading lifetime patterns from natal charts.
I remember a book or two about physical attributes, complete with
(19th-century) drawings of the various rising sign face and body types,
for example.
About any question you may formulate, some astrologer or other has most
likely wondered the same, and perhaps even written about it - some of
the tomes are crap, some are actual statistical studies, some are "I
noticed this pattern, and interpret this way, and it seems to work ...".
It's all pattern recognition, with a healthy dollop of intuition.
Blahhh
> On Mon, 2 May 2005 19:56:03 UTC, "Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > don hindenach wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:07:51 UTC, "Blahhh" <xerx...@aol.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > > >five million, two hunnerd and fifty-one thousand, six hunnerd
and
> > three
> > > questions<
> >
> > Hee, hee, hee. OK, maybe I should gradually try them one at a
time,
> > then. :-)
> >
> > > um, sure!
> > >
> > > (if you can learn where to look)
> >
> > Questions 5,251,604 and 5,251,605:
> >
> > Can we learn where to look? How might we best go about that? ;-)
> >
> > Blahhh
> >
>
>I took a class, then spent a few months reading portions of the
>library at the Cayce Institute in Virginia Beach, Virginia, USA.
Cool... :-)
> Ended up
> being pretty good at reading lifetime patterns from natal charts.
What would be the best way for a person to tell if they're good at
reading lifetime patterns from natal charts? (A question for anyone
who feels like answering).
>I remember a book or two about physical attributes, complete with
>(19th-century) drawings of the various rising sign face and body
>types, for example.
Fascinating... that's another astrological topic I should look into
more carefully.
>About any question you may formulate, some astrologer or other has
>most likely wondered the same, and perhaps even written about it
Ah, true. This reminds me, I should look more deeply into the books
available on the subject. I guess I'll have to get over my chagrin at
requesting my library to acquire some astrology books... :-)
>- some of
>the tomes are crap,
Do you (or anyone else) have any tips on telling which ones are crap?
>some are actual statistical studies, some are "I
>noticed this pattern, and interpret this way, and it seems to
>work ...".
>
>
> It's all pattern recognition, with a healthy dollop of intuition.
Thanks for your reply.
I guess perhaps I could explain my motive behind all my questions.
Coming from a background where things like astrology are very much
frowned upon, I suppose I feel very driven to try to justify my
interest in the subject by focusing mainly on what might be
scientifically verifiable.
Astrology's blurriness and subjectivity very much bothers me.
I can easily pick out ways in which a chart might seem to match
myself or others, but I always feel suspicious that confirmation
bias (defined here: http://skepdic.com/confirmbias.html ) or
the Forer effect (defined here: http://www.skepdic.com/forer.html )
or anything else on this list:
http://www.skepdic.com/hiddenpersuaders.html
...might be responsible for the possible illusion that it seems
to work. :-)
I probably need to refine precisely what I'm asking, a bit
more. I already know from experience that it's easy to look at
a chart and upon comparison to the person, believe it matches the
person and their life quite well. But I'm not sure I believe
this can necessarily prove anything about whether astrology
really works.
It seems that any given chart factor can play out in such
a wide variety of ways, or not at all, that there does seem to
be at least a grain of truth in the argument that astrology
lacks falsifiability (defined here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability ).
Hmm... maybe one way I could refine my question is, what can be
definitely known about a person based on a natal chart alone,
without seeing the person and being given the opportunity to
chalk up that person's easily apparent attributes to their
chart? (Another question for anyone who feels like answering).
Blahhh
don hindenach
>
> Hmm... maybe one way I could refine my question is, what can be
> definitely known about a person based on a natal chart alone,
> without seeing the person and being given the opportunity to
> chalk up that person's easily apparent attributes to their
> chart? (Another question for anyone who feels like answering).
>
> Blahhh
>
I decided to assume that astrology works, and proceed from that platform
and see what happens (while holding my mind open for new understanding
all the way).
Your question brings to mind the first chart I read totally blind, about
3-4 months after I got serious in astro study. You may believe or
disbelieve any of it. It was well over 30 years ago, here is what I
remember (I am sure the actual chart is long gone):
I was working cook in a bar, and the waitress asked me to look at a
friend's chart. She brought me the data, and I took it home and drew up
the chart. When I brought it into work the next day, I told her that
her friend had married for money. She had viewed the husband as a
vehicle to advance her greed, but probably had managed to discover that
he was actually a pretty nice guy. I even went on to opine that she may
well have discovered that her desire for money was actually satisfied by
handling money rather than owning it, and she could well have found
happiness helping her husband husband his resources.
The waitress told me (note please that even the experience I had was
mostly second/third hand) she passed on the <whate'er> to her friend and
the friend was flabbergasted and told her it was all true. I dunno if
the waitress was blowing smoke, but it was kinda fun. The chart,
obviously, had some interesting aspect patterns focusing on the 7th and
8th houses.
I've had a few less memorable experiences reading totally cold charts,
and cannot offer any truely scientific data pro OR con. Like I said, I
assume it works and act as if it works and find that many folks are
comforted (or challenged, as their needs may be) by the interaction.
The study works for me, the way I approach it, and it had enriched my
life and a few of the folks around me.
Perhaps you'll find this useful, tho I suspect from all the questions
you'll find it a bit frustrating. :-)
Blahhh
Hmm... very neat. :-)
>I've had a few less memorable experiences reading totally cold
>charts, and cannot offer any truely scientific data pro OR con.
Come to think of it, I myself have never attempted any blind chart
readings... I should probably try it sometime. Over the past several
years I've kept my interest in astrology largely hidden from the
people around me, which has naturally had the effect of depriving
myself of a lot of opportunities for experimentation. Gradually,
though, I guess I've kind of been edging out of "the closet"...
>Like I said, I
>assume it works and act as if it works and find that many folks are
>comforted (or challenged, as their needs may be) by the interaction.
>The study works for me, the way I approach it, and it had enriched my
>life and a few of the folks around me.
It has enriched my life too... it's a good deal less boring with such
a tantalizing mystery as trying to figure out how to objectively
demonstrate its validity. I also love puzzling over _why_ it might
work at all, and what that might say about the fundamental nature of
the universe we live in. :-)
>Perhaps you'll find this useful, tho I suspect from all the questions
>you'll find it a bit frustrating. :-)
Nahh, I enjoyed it. :-) Thanks for relating it.
Astrology frustrates me, but that's part of the fun. :-)
Hmm, in composing this message, I seem to have broken off into a major
and long tangent - I'm going to post the tangential remarks in another
post, so as not to overwhelm... :-)
Blahhh
J S
However, while I've come to have more respect for the concept of
reincarnation over the years, I must confess that I've always had
something of a problem when someone feels he was a famous individual.
For one thing, this phenomenon occurs so often that one suspects
*subconscious* (note italics:-) ego issues - not that that's the case
with you. Also, bearing in mind that the number of earth's noteworthy
people is only a minute fraction of us 6 billion plus un-famous souls,
the odds would seem prohibitive. It seems much more likely that if we've
lived before, it was probably as a more or less ordinary citizen
somewhere.
I'm more inclined to go with the theory that you have "tuned in" on
astrological factors that would allow the circumstances attributed to
Lovecraft, and probably a number of other folk.
Feeling this strong sympathy, and discovering that Lovecraft possessed
many of the same factors, it's easy to morph this into the notion that
you *were* him.
A couple of problems with this is one of specific individualized
conditions and incidents in both lives that wouldn't be explained in one
or both charts; and the fact that in many cases the two charts are no
doubt quite dissimilar; the theory being that in order to tune in, the
charts would have to be much alike. In fact while no two charts are ever
exactly the same, there are cycles in which they can be remarkably
alike, i.e., have the same sun, moon, Asc. signs, same dominant aspects
from the same signs and houses etc.
I've always wanted to compare two such charts as those you've provided,
but they're very difficult to come across - thank you for sharing them
with us! I don't have time to study them right now, but I'll get around
to them, for sure.
Finally, to cease my late night ramblings, I'm fascinated by the idea
that we keep basically the same chart in consecutive lives. It would
seem logical. I'm a Virgo with Moon/Mercury in Libra square Uranus and
that alone defines my basic character to such an extent that I almost
can't imagine ever being say, a Leo with Moon in Scorpio trine Jupiter.
But it is true that we all *do* change in some mysterious way due to the
lessons we learn in life's school; and this change would have to be
reflected in a new and different natal chart.
Thanks for provoking some thoughts!
~ Roger
Keera Ann Fox
> I already know from experience that it's easy to look at
> a chart and upon comparison to the person, believe it matches the
> person and their life quite well. But I'm not sure I believe
> this can necessarily prove anything about whether astrology
> really works.
>
> It seems that any given chart factor can play out in such
> a wide variety of ways, or not at all, that there does seem to
> be at least a grain of truth in the argument that astrology
> lacks falsifiability (defined here:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability ).
>
> Hmm... maybe one way I could refine my question is, what can be
> definitely known about a person based on a natal chart alone,
> without seeing the person and being given the opportunity to
> chalk up that person's easily apparent attributes to their
> chart? (Another question for anyone who feels like answering).
No astrology chart can be delineated accurately in a vacuum. As you say,
any given chart factor can have a variety of outcomes, and these depend
on such things as gender, race, cultural background, self-awareness -
just for starters.
You can see themes, like Saturn's condition/position in the chart
pointing to issues that cause the most pain for the native. Exactly how
it plays out for an individual, only the individual can _know_; the
chart can only tell you in which direction to look.
--
Keera in Norway ~~ Think big. Shrink to fit.
http://home.online.no/~kafox/
Ed Falis
Blaah wrote:
>> Hmm... maybe one way I could refine my question is, what can be
>> definitely known about a person based on a natal chart alone,
>> without seeing the person and being given the opportunity to
>> chalk up that person's easily apparent attributes to their
>> chart? (Another question for anyone who feels like answering).
Keera Ann Fox <skytt...@online.no> wrote:
> No astrology chart can be delineated accurately in a vacuum. As you say,
> any given chart factor can have a variety of outcomes, and these depend
> on such things as gender, race, cultural background, self-awareness -
> just for starters.
I think of it a bit differently (this is of course a metaphor of sorts):
A chart can be considered as a model for what you apply it to. Just as in
mathematical models, there are methods that can be used to manipulate the
chart (examination withing the chart: aspects, signs, midpoints ..., and
dynamics: transits, progressions, directions). These methods are
abstract, uninterpreted (in the mathematical sense) - until we apply the
model to some real-world entity. At that point, we correlate the model
and its elements to an entity and its dynamics, and we can then use the
model to hopefully better understand the entity and predict its outcomes.
This is fundamentally no different than what a scientist or engineer does
when applying mathematics to some phenomena in order to describe or
predict its behaviors. It's just that the modelling language is
different, has different rules, and involve more analogical than logical
reasoning.
Clearly, this metaphor is a position about what astrology is. There are
other positions as well.
- Ed
Ray Murphy
----------
In article <1gw3ere.1w0qxmb8wrhbvN%skytt...@online.no>,
skytt...@online.no (Keera Ann Fox) wrote:
>Blahhh <xerx...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> I already know from experience that it's easy to look at
>> a chart and upon comparison to the person, believe it matches the
>> person and their life quite well. But I'm not sure I believe
>> this can necessarily prove anything about whether astrology
>> really works.
>>
>> It seems that any given chart factor can play out in such
>> a wide variety of ways, or not at all, that there does seem to
>> be at least a grain of truth in the argument that astrology
>> lacks falsifiability (defined here:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability ).
>>
>> Hmm... maybe one way I could refine my question is, what can be
>> definitely known about a person based on a natal chart alone,
>> without seeing the person and being given the opportunity to
>> chalk up that person's easily apparent attributes to their
>> chart? (Another question for anyone who feels like answering).
>
>No astrology chart can be delineated accurately in a vacuum.
RM: Or at normal atmospheric pressure either (if we're talking
specifics) but we are not doing that; we're only pointing out themes
which are more likely to be present, and giving *examples* of common
manifestations.
[.....]
>
>--
>Keera in Norway
Blahhh
Blahhh