How was the meaning for astrological Pluto figured out or created?
Apollia
some very interesting questions.
I'll paraphrase them. Apparently one common argument for why no
one can say how the rules of astrology were devised or
discovered is because their discovery happened so long ago that
the exact process of discovery (or concoction) was never
recorded.
However, this can't be true of Pluto, since Pluto was discovered
relatively recently, and thus "Somebody, somewhere, therefore,
must have worked out the characteristic infleuences of Pluto
within living memory."
So, how was this done? And what rules, if any, were consulted
to allow this - did the "ancients" have any rules for what to
do if a new planet was discovered?
Here's a link to the original post and un-paraphrased questions:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007/06/testing-astrolo.html#c74268170
I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
----
Apollia My website: http://www.astroblahhh.com/
Birth data: -qa July 3 1981 12:50 EDT 79:59W 40:26N (Pittsburgh, PA)
CFA
>Hi. A skeptic I've been talking to at a skeptical blog raised
>some very interesting questions.
>
>I'll paraphrase them. Apparently one common argument for why no
>one can say how the rules of astrology were devised or
>discovered is because their discovery happened so long ago that
>the exact process of discovery (or concoction) was never
>recorded.
I'd say that's still true to some degree. Intuitive arts don't lend
themselves well to laboratory dissection.
People are certainly more sensitive to the feedback of the scientific
community, and yet astrology still survives. If it had no value, it
wouldn't have.
Of course, 'value' is the key word. But it's more than just
superstition or self-fulfilling prophecy. That, or everything is
self-fulfilling prophecy.
>However, this can't be true of Pluto, since Pluto was discovered
>relatively recently, and thus "Somebody, somewhere, therefore,
>must have worked out the characteristic infleuences of Pluto
>within living memory."
Just look at the astrology books of the time. It took a few years for
people to tighten the meaning.
But by WWII, people like Ebertin seem to have already defined it
pretty closely.
>So, how was this done? And what rules, if any, were consulted
>to allow this - did the "ancients" have any rules for what to
>do if a new planet was discovered?
How do you know if you've nailed a chart interpretation?
>Here's a link to the original post and un-paraphrased questions:
>http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007/06/testing-astrolo.html#c74268170
>
>I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
>speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
Shades of alt.astrology... JREF and CSICOP folks are some of the
hardest-core skeptics.
>Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
>so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
Ken
--
cfa at alt dot net
~saba gracile~
"CFA" <bo...@alt.not> skrev i melding news:13gs0k....@news.alt.net...
I know, just to mention. The people online that I did say the simplest and
the few most prominent points in their charts, they said it's like I've known them forever,
how can I say that, how the hell did I know tha etc. And all I did was take what I knew
from astrology, but most of all what I've experienced with the said placements.
Astrology works.
>
>>Here's a link to the original post and un-paraphrased questions:
>>http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007/06/testing-astrolo.html#c74268170
>>
>>I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
>>speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
>
> Shades of alt.astrology... JREF and CSICOP folks are some of the
> hardest-core skeptics.
>
>>Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
>>so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
>
> Ken
> --
> cfa at alt dot net
>
V
V2
"~saba gracile~" <vero...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
news:uPOdnQGDi-2...@telenor.com...
means that we have somehow, whether consciously or otherwise, selected a
name that resonates with the properties of the object. Most of the meaning
associated with Pluto appears to be derived from the mythology associated
with the name before it was applied to a celestial object. An alternative
view would be that in choosing a name for the object we somehow alter its
properties to fit the name. I think I prefer the former explanation,
mysterious as it may sound.
Wollmann, Edmond H.
> Hi. A skeptic I've been talking to at a skeptical blog raised
> some very interesting questions.
> I'll paraphrase them. Apparently one common argument for why no
> one can say how the rules of astrology were devised or
> discovered is because their discovery happened so long ago that
> the exact process of discovery (or concoction) was never
> recorded.
This is non-sense. We do not make these arguments. Anyone who studies
astrology can easily see that the equinoxes and solstices co-incide
with tropical astrological significators. The "meanings" are very
simply derived. As we progress through the seasons there are actual
natural issues (like spring is the beginning of plant growth etc.
therefore "first, the beginning, self assertion etc.") and then
psychological derivations then follow from that using psychological
principles.
> However, this can't be true of Pluto, since Pluto was discovered
> relatively recently, and thus "Somebody, somewhere, therefore,
> must have worked out the characteristic infleuences of Pluto
> within living memory."
Whether it was discovered now or not does not detract from its meaning
which has always been there, just like its orbit unseen until then.
When it was "discovered" we discovered its place and these things were
reflected in the system.
> So, how was this done? And what rules, if any, were consulted
> to allow this - did the "ancients" have any rules for what to
> do if a new planet was discovered?
Quite simply; Scorpio is the death of matter as the cold of winter
approaches--then psychological derivations follow.
> Here's a link to the original post and un-paraphrased questions:http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007/06/testing-astrolo.html#c7426...
> I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
> speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
> Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
> so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
They are interesting, but this quickly fades if you actually study
astrology, wherein it becomes very clear that we cannot be "outside of
or separate from" a solar system that spawned us. But rather, that we
will be reflections OF IT. Not unlike a scientist does not find it
"interesting" that we are the same composition of matter and elements
that are all over the rest of the universe.
Hope this helps.
"It is a rare mind indeed that can render the hitherto non-existent
blindingly obvious. The cry 'I could have thought of that' is a very
popular and misleading one, for the fact is that they didn't, and a
very significant and revealing fact it is too."
Douglas Adams
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
(C) 2007 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
Main http://www.edmondwollmann.com/
Articles http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/info.htm
Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.com/TOC.htm
ast...@yahoo.com
> some very interesting questions.
>
> I'll paraphrase them. Apparently one common argument for why no
> one can say how the rules of astrology were devised or
> discovered is because their discovery happened so long ago that
> the exact process of discovery (or concoction) was never
> recorded.
>
> However, this can't be true of Pluto, since Pluto was discovered
> relatively recently, and thus "Somebody, somewhere, therefore,
> must have worked out the characteristic infleuences of Pluto
> within living memory."
>
> So, how was this done? And what rules, if any, were consulted
> to allow this - did the "ancients" have any rules for what to
> do if a new planet was discovered?
>
>
> I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
> speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
>
> Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
> so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
>
> ----
>
> Apollia My website:http://www.astroblahhh.com/
>
> Birth data: -qa July 3 1981 12:50 EDT 79:59W 40:26N (Pittsburgh, PA)
Honestly I don't even know why you bother messaging at skeptical
blogs. I wouldn't. They already have their minds made up.
Also...they say stuff like Astrology is BS because astrologers use
charts without use of the outerplanets before and that discoveries of
the outerplanets shows that Astrology is inaccurate. They don't seem
to understand that like science, Astrology progresses with discoveries
and inventions.
Back in the old days, science didn't know about
chromosomes,genes,DNA,and other things ...they didn't know about
molecules,atomic articles. But the discovery of those things don't
make Science invalid.
A lot of skeptics are just as bad as religious zealots. They are very
fixed in their beliefs,views that they won't consider other
viewpoints. They tend to be patronizing and condescending when you
believe in and practice things that they disapprove of.
I know what it's like to be called idiot and other demeaning words
suggesting low intelligence for my beliefs and practices. Heck....I
was called "retard" all the time by regular school children because I
was in special education class,Dyslexia,and Dyspraxia. That was the
1970's. People thought learning disabled were retarded back then.
Just now I was called an idiot and twit in a Dyslexic forum because I
believe in Dr. Levinson's work in Dyslexia,and a lot of people think
that he's a fraud because he has controversial views about Dyslexia.
However,I read his books and they made sense to me. I felt like he was
writing all about me. I flew all the way to New York from California
to see me, and he examined me. He understood me and didn't judge me
and he had compassion for me after I told him about my psychiatric
misdiagnoses especially because of my speech irregularities. It was
his testing that I took to Veteran Affairs government neurologists
that got them to examine me and confirm my Dyslexia and Dyspraxia.
This was from 2005 to 2006.
So with that in mind, I don't go by what other people
think,believe,and practice, I look for myself. I am an independent
thinker. That's why I feel that Unitarian Universalism is the perfect
religion for me even though it's not the perfect religion for a lot of
people. I don't have the philosophy
Being on skeptic forums,blogs and talking about Astrology there and
explain it in depth is a waste of time.
Also...I feel that astrologers use mythological archetypes to
understand the nature of the outerplanets in Astrology.
My knowledge in mythology helped me to learn Astrology well.
This is from a former skeptic. I was skeptical of Astrology until
1998 at the age of almost 28 years old. I thought Astrology was B.S. I
believed that only genetics had to do with personality traits. After I
found out about moonsigns, my mind was open to Astrology and it opened
more and more. I accurately guessed the moonsigns of my mother(Moon
in Scorpio) and even my father(Moon in Pisces like me and my maternal
grandfather) who I never knew but who my mom told me about. Now I
have done free Astrology readings/reports for years since 1999. I love
Astrology! I have over 60 books, Solar Fire, Kepler,and Starlight
programs.
I am more into the modern astrology in which I keep an open mind about
asteroids,centaurs,and kuiper belt objects as well as midpoints. I am
even into the nodes of the heavenly bodies. I really like Zipporah
Dobyn's book on nodes. Eris Node is my most prominent because my
Sun is conjunct Eris South Node with 10 minutes of arc.
I am very accurate when I do Astrology readings,and so I know that
Astrology works. I don't give myself credit for the accuracy. I give
Astrology the credit. If Astrology didn't work, I would be
inaccurate.
I would like to see an astrological system that centered around the
constellation placements...I am not talking about Sidereal the equal
sign zodiac. I am talking about the uneven sign ecliptic constellation
zodiac. I have Sun in Virgo constellation even though its in Libra in
Sidereal Zodiac. My Jupiter is in Ophiuchus even though its in
Scorpio in Sidereal Zodiac.
I feel very secure about Astrology,and so I don't feel the need to
defend Astrology against skeptics like I did in my early years. If
people call me stupid and ignorant because of my belief,practices in
Astrology, I don't pay them any mind. Calling people
names,condescending,and patronizing others for their beliefs and
practices only shows that they are narrowminded bigots that have no
respect for diversity which is something I strongly believe
in ...especially with my mixed
Black,Portuguese,English,German,French,Italian,Puerto Rican,and Native
American background. I feel that believing in diversity is part of my
lifepath.
btw....I have almost exact t-square of Moon in Pisces in 6th square
the opposition of asteroid Skepticus in Sagittarius in 3rd and
retrograde Astrowizard in Gemini in 9th. It seems to finetune the
issues of my t-square of Moon in Pisces in 6th square the opposition
of Jupiter-Neptune in Sagittarius in 3rd and retrogade Saturn in
Gemini in 9th.
Raymond
ra...@expreso.co.cr
> to allow this - did the "ancients" have any rules for what to
> do if a new planet was discovered?
some more thoughts on this here:
http://www.expreso.co.cr/centaurs/posts/mundane/politics.html
an extract:
the modern use and research going on with asteroids is like stripping
Astrology naked, i.e., showing how it works and what it is made of. I
believe that what we see in the interaction between names,
mythological tales, different methods, and private or culturally
dependent interpretations that later become conventions shows how
little Astrology has to do with natural science and how much it stems
from the human imagination and from social habits.
We have been witnessing the process of ascribing or "finding" the
meaning of new and unknown, un-named distant objects, a process which
is like an accelerated repetition of what went on in the past 3
centuries after the discovery of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. The
differences I think are mainly 3:
1- now everything is happening very fast compared with how things were
even in the 1930's with Pluto.
2- now there is a lot of controversy regarding the different weight we
must give to planets as opposed to asteroids.
3- the great number of asteroids poses a problem that did not exist in
the case of Uranus, Neptune, or Pluto, which were unique.
In the case of centaurs, we have even participated in the process of
giving a name to them, a name that is later used universally by
everybody and which is tied to its meaning, or to the meaning we have
privately found.
How was the process of ascribing meaning to Uranus, Neptune, and
Pluto?
How has been the process of ascribing meaning to Chiron?
What are the differences between each of the 4 cases?
How much of this process is dependent on politics and economics?
I am convinced that this process evidences the cultural nature of
astrological knowledge and how far away it is from the perspective of
the natural sciences. If name, mythology, politics, and historical
interpretations were paramount in the formation of meaning, then the
process has very little to do with natural science. Orbital symbolism
has also been paramount... another remove from natural science. These
are all social and psychological processes and products.
The meaning of Neptune in particular, which in my opinion rules mostly
unconscious cultural/ideological differences and relativism, evidences
this sharply.
I hope someday there will be a real study of the slow and continuing
process of formation of astrological meaning of the outer planets, not
just a mention of the few facts surrounding their discovery and
naming. Name or the mythology are not the only factors involved, and
they are not necessary in many cases.
In the case of Neptune, "meaning" was given by an astrological culture
that was the result of, not independent of, a typically Western,
capitalistic, individualistic, Protestant ideology that saw the
expansion of colonialism, romanticism, and spiritualism.
In countries that have been colonized, the whole economic and social
life is forced to become a function of the colonial empowerment of the
metropolis, and this is how things still work in many places
economically speaking. For example, adopting the value systems of rich
developed and industrialized nations is a condition that is
**imposed** on foreign governments before any economic cooperation is
established. This condition has resulted in the loss of identity,
human suffering, and generalized weakening and impoverishment.
This is clearly seen in the field of astrology. Many of the usual
meanings developed by European and American astrologers are pretty
useless in these countries, because the reality with which individuals
must cope daily is very different, and often represents dimensions of
experience that are unknown to typical astrologers overseas who belong
to a very different culture. The main examples in my opinion is in the
meaning of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto.
Values and emphasis differ across cultures... this does not imply that
the traditional meanings are "wrong". It implies that those
traditional meanings are part of a larger social process of which
traditional astrologers are often not aware.
The differences seem to be more of emphasis and values, not
necessarily that the traditional views are "wrong", though often they
are inadequate or useless.
Juan Revilla
Wollmann, Edmond H.
be;
How does an artist know that mixing yellow and red will give orange?
Because he can see it, and then learns to mix and blend the colors for
the hues and tints required to "make a picture."
We use archetypes to GET the picture. The bodies act as lenses that
focus the light of these archetypes and move them through time.
Compare astrology to weather forecasting; although a science it is
often very inaccurate.
Add human insight and will to the mix and the predictability becomes
very difficult. I have outlined these ideas at http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/info.htm
and have for years pointed to the fact that it must be an art/science.
Edmond
On Jul 17, 12:39 pm, Apollia <xerxes...@aol.com> wrote:
> Hi. A skeptic I've been talking to at a skeptical blog raised
> some very interesting questions.
>
> I'll paraphrase them. Apparently one common argument for why no
> one can say how the rules of astrology were devised or
> discovered is because their discovery happened so long ago that
> the exact process of discovery (or concoction) was never
> recorded.
>
> However, this can't be true of Pluto, since Pluto was discovered
> relatively recently, and thus "Somebody, somewhere, therefore,
> must have worked out the characteristic infleuences of Pluto
> within living memory."
>
> So, how was this done? And what rules, if any, were consulted
> to allow this - did the "ancients" have any rules for what to
> do if a new planet was discovered?
>
> Here's a link to the original post and un-paraphrased questions:http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007/06/testing-astrolo.html#c7426...
Claude Latremouille
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 11:39:47 -0500, Apollia <xerx...@aol.com>
asked the question above.
*
Short Answer: In the same manner as the symbolisms of Uranus and
Neptune were arrived at.
*
Long Answer: Those who invented/discovered astrology did so using
the observable sky. Fortunately for them, the observable sky
remained *as is* for quite a long time. This allowed them to
ascribe to various celestial bodies or phenomena certain
observable events of human significance. After a few centuries of
observing certain correspondences between what was happening in
the sky and what was happening to them, they settled for a body
of knowledge which became (temporarily) permanent! ;-)
*
A few thousand years later, though, things began to change, both
in human behaviour and in the observable sky. The most clever of
astrologers began a new process of sifting through that hitherto
'permanent' knowledge database to see if some of it might not be
better ascribed to one or the other newly discovered celestial
bodies.
*
As the changes then happening to human behaviour were quite
radical and easy to observe, the first set of these changes was
ascribed to the planet which just happened to have been
discovered at the same time, namely Herschel... eeer, Uranus.
*
As astronomers were getting more and more clever, they also
figured out that Uranus was not the only hitherto unknown body in
the sky, and that another one was lurking about to be discovered.
When astrologers realized that the name of that soon-to-be
discovered planet had been found... in a dream, they immediately
began to sift once more through their body of knowledge to see
what could be ascribed to Neptune. They also included in its
symbolism further recent changes in human behaviour which could
not be ascribed to Uranus.
*
Which brings us to the next heavenly body in orbit around the Sun
and to a statement I read in an account by a German astrologer,
Fritz Brünhubner, who -- in the very early 20th century -- is
reported to have declared: 'The transneptunian planet exists and
it is called... Pluto!'
*
Problem: Pluto was only 'discovered' by astronomers in 1930 and
yet, at least one clever astrologer was already using it long
before that.
*
How was its symbolism arrived at? In the same manner as in the
two previous cases. By observing important changes in human
behaviour, sifting through the already acquired body of knowledge
left by astrology, to see what would 'fit' much better if it were
ascribed to Pluto rather than, for instance, to Neptune or to
Uranus. And, of course, by matching the (official) discovery of
Pluto with various new discoveries and events in human life.
*
In summary: 'new' planets are discovered when humans are ready to
live their symbolic meaning. For example, it does not matter if
Uranus was always there in the sky, long before its discovery,
mankind was not ready to live Uranian events, therefore Uranus
was discovered only when mankind was ready for it. Same with
Neptune, same with Pluto.
*
If this sounds too bizarre to many non-astrologers, perhaps an
analogy with the arts, music, painting, etc., might assist them
in seeing that the correspondence which they readily admit
between various time periods and various art forms also has its
astrological consequences.
*
We may not speak of classical, baroque, or romantic astrology,
but, in a sense, the various phases of its evolution are as
distinctive as can be the style of music 'invented' at various
times.
*
Have a nice day, folks!
*
Claude Latrémouille
July 20, 2007
*
=== cla...@torfree.net ===
=== CLAUDE LATRÉMOUILLE ===
===========================
Pedantus
Well, we 'create', by means of inspiration, whatever we feel we may
*need*...that's what humans do...:)
This is a useless form of reference to life cycles for one in the
tropics, and for the Southern hemisphere is is all backwards, Ed.
'Meaning' of Scorpio/Pluto, whatever, is not at all 'universal'....we
adapt to radically different environs on this planet.
The way to understand the 'meaning' of this religious/artistic
activity of the human intuition is to accept that it is *not* logical.
Our consciousness is rich in non-intellectual functioning, and occult
study is an intellectual outlet for the inspired 'thought' processes of
our inexplicable Earth-animal 'intelligence'. *All* pseudo-scientific
systems of 'explanations' are equally full of horse feathers...:)
Astrology at its best is but a well developed (and probably developing)
mental discipline which attempts to translate our ineffible human
intuitive/instictive quality. It is an ology, a 'taliking about'
exercise which is often fruitful, and I feel is always necessary when
considering the matters of my soul, and the Soul of this living world.
I am truly surprised that you are not observably more humbled by the
experience, Ed....:)
>
>> Here's a link to the original post and un-paraphrased questions:http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2007/06/testing-astrolo.html#c7426...
>
>> I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
>> speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
>
>> Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
>> so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
>
> They are interesting, but this quickly fades if you actually study
> astrology, wherein it becomes very clear that we cannot be "outside of
> or separate from" a solar system that spawned us. But rather, that we
> will be reflections OF IT. Not unlike a scientist does not find it
> "interesting" that we are the same composition of matter and elements
> that are all over the rest of the universe.
> Hope this helps.
>
> "It is a rare mind indeed that can render the hitherto non-existent
> blindingly obvious. The cry 'I could have thought of that' is a very
> popular and misleading one, for the fact is that they didn't, and a
> very significant and revealing fact it is too."
> Douglas Adams
>
> Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
> (C) 2007 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
> Main http://www.edmondwollmann.com/
> Articles http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/info.htm
> Artworks http://www.e-wollmann.com/TOC.htm
>
Rog
John Roth
wrote:
> "~saba gracile~" <veron...@frisurf.no> wrote in message
>
> news:uPOdnQGDi-2...@telenor.com...
>
>
>
> > "CFA" <bo...@alt.not> skrev i meldingnews:13gs0k....@news.alt.net...
>
> >>>I already attempted to answer, with nothing but unresearched
> >>>speculation - my answers are further down on the same page.
>
> >> Shades of alt.astrology... JREF and CSICOP folks are some of the
> >> hardest-core skeptics.
>
> >>>Anyhow, I thought these were some pretty interesting questions,
> >>>so I just thought I'd ask them here. :-)
>
> >> Ken
> >> --
> >> cfa at alt dot net
>
> > V
>
> It would appear that once a name "sticks" to a newly discovered object it
> means that we have somehow, whether consciously or otherwise, selected a
> name that resonates with the properties of the object. Most of the meaning
> associated with Pluto appears to be derived from the mythology associated
> with the name before it was applied to a celestial object. An alternative
> view would be that in choosing a name for the object we somehow alter its
> properties to fit the name. I think I prefer the former explanation,
> mysterious as it may sound.
This actually doesn't work. Uranus is an excellent case in point: the
astrological behavior of the planet is much closer to the legends of
Prometheus than to the legends of Uranus. At least according to Rob
Hand.
John Roth
EHWol...@aol.com
No, we scientists make observations and then measure them.
> This is a useless form of reference to life cycles for one in the
> tropics, and for the Southern hemisphere is is all backwards, Ed.
> 'Meaning' of Scorpio/Pluto, whatever, is not at all 'universal'....we
> adapt to radically different environs on this planet.
Only to a Mercury in Leo Roger, they have a fall just as we do, and
the death of vegitation and other deaths there occurrs just like here.
Just reversed. The planets then focus that concept with their own
particular "coloring" and hence yellow moves over red to become
orange. We then have the OBSERVATION that confirms that the planet has
the "coloring" of yellow BECAUSE of the orange we now observe.
> The way to understand the 'meaning' of this religious/artistic
> activity of the human intuition is to accept that it is *not* logical.
But the seasons are.
> Our consciousness is rich in non-intellectual functioning, and occult
> study is an intellectual outlet for the inspired 'thought' processes of
> our inexplicable Earth-animal 'intelligence'. *All* pseudo-scientific
Occult means "hidden from view", what I pointed out is clear to anyone
with eyes.
> systems of 'explanations' are equally full of horse feathers...:)
> Astrology at its best is but a well developed (and probably developing)
> mental discipline which attempts to translate our ineffible human
> intuitive/instictive quality. It is an ology, a 'taliking about'
> exercise which is often fruitful, and I feel is always necessary when
> considering the matters of my soul, and the Soul of this living world.
Nope, it is a psychological derivation of the natural functions of
beings that formed from and are in synchronous accord with, the cosmos
in which they were spawned.
> I am truly surprised that you are not observably more humbled by the
> experience, Ed....:)
Humility is a concoction of the civilization to protect the species
from extinction. True humility is recognizing that the whole of the
multiverse is pointless and that your place in it (and your flowery
arguments) is even more so.
Pedantus
You confuse Science with pseudo-science if you say astrology is the
result of 'scientific' observation.
>
>> This is a useless form of reference to life cycles for one in the
>> tropics, and for the Southern hemisphere is is all backwards, Ed.
>> 'Meaning' of Scorpio/Pluto, whatever, is not at all 'universal'....we
>> adapt to radically different environs on this planet.
>
> Only to a Mercury in Leo Roger, they have a fall just as we do, and
> the death of vegitation and other deaths there occurrs just like here.
> Just reversed. The planets then focus that concept with their own
> particular "coloring" and hence yellow moves over red to become
> orange. We then have the OBSERVATION that confirms that the planet has
> the "coloring" of yellow BECAUSE of the orange we now observe.
>
>> The way to understand the 'meaning' of this religious/artistic
>> activity of the human intuition is to accept that it is *not* logical.
>
> But the seasons are.
The hemisphere inconsistency does not seem to bother your 'logic',
that sun in Scorpio does not mean Fall and the death of plants in
Australia? Hmmm...not very 'scientific'....:|
>
>> Our consciousness is rich in non-intellectual functioning, and occult
>> study is an intellectual outlet for the inspired 'thought' processes of
>> our inexplicable Earth-animal 'intelligence'. *All* pseudo-scientific
>
> Occult means "hidden from view", what I pointed out is clear to anyone
> with eyes.
Clear only one third of the Earth's surface....an ethnocentric
minority view/"observation" only.
>
>> systems of 'explanations' are equally full of horse feathers...:)
>> Astrology at its best is but a well developed (and probably developing)
>> mental discipline which attempts to translate our ineffible human
>> intuitive/instictive quality. It is an ology, a 'taliking about'
>> exercise which is often fruitful, and I feel is always necessary when
>> considering the matters of my soul, and the Soul of this living world.
>
> Nope, it is a psychological derivation of the natural functions of
> beings that formed from and are in synchronous accord with, the cosmos
> in which they were spawned.
So are Aries natives in Australia the same a Libra natives in the
North, being that are born in the first month of Fall?
>
>> I am truly surprised that you are not observably more humbled by the
>> experience, Ed....:)
>
> Humility is a concoction of the civilization to protect the species
> from extinction.
Another blanket supposition/generalization which is impossible to
support "scientifically"...pure speculation which only *expresses* the
personal preference of the speaker (who despises humility?).
True humility is recognizing that the whole of the
> multiverse is pointless and that your place in it (and your flowery
> arguments) is even more so.
There are no explanations here which are not nebulous and "flowery"
..that's astrology, Ed.
Apollia
eventually, I'm just rather preoccupied... :-)