skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Book III of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Notes on Dorotheus III: the haylāj, Kadhkhudāh, and terms of life
by Deborah Houlding
Godfather of Modernity: The Alan Leo Legacy Vol. One - Early Astrological Journals 1890-1912, compiled by Philip M Graves
Reviewed by Deborah Houlding
Lilly's Considerations
compiled by D. Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Brian Williams NBC Nightly News talks about astrology
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
zoidsoft



Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 674
Location: Pulaski, NY

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="Ed F"]
Olivia wrote:
...

That's about right. The scary part is that even prominent astrological spokesmodels are getting it wrong in their refutations by saying that the sidereal zodiac is affected because it's based on constellations. A sad state of affairs for us fogeys - how did we fail?

- Ed


I guess it depends upon which sidereal zodiac, oh lets just invent one so that "we're right" and we don't have to admit that we goofed. ;>
_________________
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Astraea



Joined: 04 Oct 2004
Posts: 301
Location: Colorado, USA

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eddy wrote:

Olivia wrote:
On other forums, astrologers are indeed questioning the validity of the constellational boundaries, Deb. They never learnt any astronomy. For that matter, they can't read a chart that comes without an aspect grid and are shocked at those of us, who seemingly by magic, can look at a chart alone without benefit of lines or grids, and not only see aspects, but can tell whether the aspects are applying or separating.
..., but it's hard to imagine that it's that bad. This is shocking. Have they never opened an astrology book?

Yes, it really is that bad! I alluded to something similar earlier in the thread - some students of esoterica are claiming that although precession might (might!) be a fact, the present discussion points to deeper metaphysical truths that supercede even astronomy. Where astrology is concerned, astronomy and time-honored astrological procedures are seen within that group as mere historical stepping-stones on the stairway to heaven, which culminates in intuition as the final arbiter of everything.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed F



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Ipswich, MA USA

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I heard that Led Zeppelin guitar riff right as you said it!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Astraea



Joined: 04 Oct 2004
Posts: 301
Location: Colorado, USA

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ed F wrote:
I heard that Led Zeppelin guitar riff right as you said it!

LOL, Eddy!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Olivia



Joined: 15 Oct 2008
Posts: 866

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LOL.

I've gotten some odd comments from people when I mentioned that a couple of the first assignments I had to do when I started a traditional astrology course were writing a paper on the Babylonian sidereal and synodic periods and goal years, and why they're different to the modern ones.

Then it was on to Aristotle and the concept of one changing and one stable quality in elements and how that ties in to the cycle of the season.

No wonder they keep telling me I don't know anything about astrology!

Though I'm beginning to think it was a blessing that when I started, Margaret Hone's Textbook of Modern Astrology was the standard. We'll forgive the 'modern'. One thing the late Mrs Hone did was to explain how to calculate a chart, clearer than any other explanation I've since run across. I'm pretty sure that was Chapter 1 (don't have my copy anymore).

Times have changed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zoidsoft



Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 674
Location: Pulaski, NY

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ed F wrote:
A lot of us who used to do charts manually have expressed this feeling - as you say, it's a matter of engaging both perspectives, and letting it cook over the time it takes to construct a chart.

And it is that bad. In some supposedly astrological settings, to bring up the technical underpinnings of methods is to court being accused of being a scientist or mathematician - horrors!

- Ed


Schmidt argued that the origin of the different house systems is based upon misunderstanding the difference between topical houses and dynamical ones through the centuries of translation, and then this same accusation came up. Even Valens says that when the MC is in the 9th whole sign that it too gives signs for "praxis".

In primary directions, when directing Jupiter to Venus, what constitutes a conjunction? Because the two rarely actually meet on the celestial sphere, one has to define "conjunction" and each house system gives rise to a new set of primary directions. Only directions to the mc and asc have simple calculations. I would think that a mundane "in mundo" conjunction would be when the two are at their closest distance, but this is not necessarily true given different coordinate systems. A point parallel to the ecliptic is not necessarily going to give the same position parallel to the equator.

It's a real headache for programmers because it is getting to the point that we have to create a custom program for every astrologer because no two astrologers use the same techniques. This is why Schmidt said that there needs be a solid philosophical foundation laid.
_________________
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed F



Joined: 22 Jan 2008
Posts: 301
Location: Ipswich, MA USA

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

zoidsoft wrote:


In primary directions, when directing Jupiter to Venus, what constitutes a conjunction? Because the two rarely actually meet on the celestial sphere, one has to define "conjunction" and each house system gives rise to a new set of primary directions. Only directions to the mc and asc have simple calculations. I would think that a mundane "in mundo" conjunction would be when the two are at their closest distance, but this is not necessarily true given different coordinate systems. A point parallel to the ecliptic is not necessarily going to give the same position parallel to the equator.


And of course, most systems of direction use "oblique" projections to the equator or ecliptic rather than perpendicular ("right") ones.

Quote:

It's a real headache for programmers because it is getting to the point that we have to create a custom program for every astrologer because no two astrologers use the same techniques. This is why Schmidt said that there needs be a solid philosophical foundation laid.


I'm sure Rob, who authored Morinus, can relate. Though it does turn out that for primaries, most methods can use similar overall calculation approaches, provided they're not systems that take into account secondary motion, or use dynamic keys.

As to the philosophical foundation, the elephant in the room is which one?

- Ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3216
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
but it's hard to imagine that it's that bad. This is shocking. Have they never opened an astrology book?


Even if they have so what? There is more than one prominent modern astrologer who has glibly informed all who pay attention that he has studied all forms of astrology and realized none of them were right, so he changed things his way. How would a beginning student know that this statement is a load of hooey? And yes ,this is from a well known textbook by a well known modern astrologer. And I believe Dane Rudhyar said something similar.

To make matters worse, this is nothing new. Marc Edmond Jones told the story of his realization astrology was in trouble when he related the following anecdote. The astrologer, an unnamed woman, claimed she had no need of looking at the chart and instead performed a reading by simply placing her hand on the chart. When I related that story to someone, I was told he had a reading like that and it was the best ever.

I would gladly accept several different philosophical traditions and wade through them, if we didn't have to put up with the above kinds of astrologers. Part of the problem is that there are too many people who have no idea what a chart represents out there in the sky. There are all sorts of astrologers who can't grasp where retrograde motion comes from. And if you can't grasp retrograde motion, how can you hope to understand precession?

I'm afraid this is just part of the general dumbing down of society. It's estimated that over 1/3 of the adult American population cannot name the current Vice President of the United States regardless of who he is. More to the point a radio personality once went into the street and couldn't find anyone to tell him the correct number of planets in our solar system (astrologers struggle with this because we forget to count earth but add the Sun and Moon). There is a woman in the United States Congress who, on TV when looking at photos taken from the Mars Rover wanted to know if it could go to where the astronauts planted the flag.

We are not organized and disciplined and nothing like that seems to be on the horizon. The best we've been able to do is to separate into modern and traditional camps, and given the volume of sects in each that obviously isn't good enough. To the rest of the world there is no difference between Robert Zoller who has studied the subject in depth and "Nadej - Astrologist:Sees All Knows All; No appointment necessary." In the UK any reporter wanting a quote from an astrologer will more than likely go to "Mystic Meg" than to one any of a large number of highly qualified astrologers who actually know something.

So what is happening amongst our own regarding this gigantic misunderstanding is quite predictable even as it is undesirable. And no, I have no idea what to do about it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Olivia



Joined: 15 Oct 2008
Posts: 866

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The best solution I can think of is to simply call non-astrology reading - something else.

But that's not going to happen, as everyone who engages in those kinds of readings seems to be convinced they've found the holy grail of astrology.

I want to say it was 1524 - if it wasn't, it was close - when there was a triple conjunction of Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars in Pisces. The printing press had been recently invented, and the Italian charlatans had a field day being able to publish their 'build your ark now!' pamphlets and almanacs - and I'm sure they were doing all kinds of private readings as well. The professionals pretty much stayed out of it.

Yet it gave astrologers the dubious distinction of being the first profession to engage in the wholesale publication and distribution of pulp fiction.

Perhaps some things never change.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
zoidsoft



Joined: 10 Feb 2006
Posts: 674
Location: Pulaski, NY

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom wrote:
So what is happening amongst our own regarding this gigantic misunderstanding is quite predictable even as it is undesirable. And no, I have no idea what to do about it.


When companies develop bad reputations, they simply dissolve the company and form a new LLC under new management, etc...

I think that the subject is doomed to suffer an ignominious fate and perhaps it is better that it is an occult subject that shouldn't have a high profile (Valens seems to suggest that this should be the case). History has shown that people can't agree on it any more than they agree on religion. I think Christianity or Islam is similar to what astrology would become if it was accepted into the main stream, but it's already too political with many agendas. When religion succeeds to the level of becoming a mainstream belief, then there is a tendency for it to shut down rational thought.

To some people astrology comes across as a religion which says what each person is likely to become and people will fight statements like this if they aren't followers. Even the mainstream religions don't go quite this far and to some, this might seem like big brother stepping in to say how one should live one's life... I think that is at the root of skeptic emotions about this subject and why they hate it so much.

Looking at all of the people who suffered an identity crisis because of this news, those of us who care about how this subject comes across might want to re-think what it is we are doing. However if we are subject to fate as Valens would say, none of this is in our control.
_________________
Curtis Manwaring
Zoidiasoft Technologies, LLC
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mike N



Joined: 20 Sep 2010
Posts: 49

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Curtis.

Are you aware of Schmidt's position on, in the right hands, a set of Tarot cards being, or not being, able to achieve the same/similar ''outcomes'' as a Horoscope ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul
Moderator


Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 1150

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 9:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The scary part is that even prominent astrological spokesmodels are getting it wrong in their refutations by saying that the sidereal zodiac is affected because it's based on constellations.


I would imagine that they are referring to precession though, rather than Ophiuchus.

Quote:
For that matter, they can't read a chart that comes without an aspect grid and are shocked at those of us, who seemingly by magic, can look at a chart alone without benefit of lines or grids, and not only see aspects, but can tell whether the aspects are applying or separating.


The problem is that anyone can call themselves an astrologer. If they 'know' any scrap of astrology at all they can label themselves as astrologer. Imagine if that was true of doctors or scientists or lawyers.

Quote:
The astrologer, an unnamed woman, claimed she had no need of looking at the chart and instead performed a reading by simply placing her hand on the chart.


Well at least she was a hands on astrologer

Quote:
There is a woman in the United States Congress who, on TV when looking at photos taken from the Mars Rover wanted to know if it could go to where the astronauts planted the flag.


Silly, everyone knows MTV landed on the Moon.
http://theinspirationroom.com/daily/commercials/2009/8/MTV-man-on-moon.jpg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tom
Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3216
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

>I think that the subject is doomed to suffer an ignominious fate <

I posted on an astrologers' Face Book page, the following thought: that this subject had a silver lining in that it forced more knowledgeable astrologers to revisit their texts. He liked that. It also forced less knowledgeable astrologers to get some information they might not have otherwise bothered to get.

Sun sign groupies aren't going to bother to try to understand and those always looking for something new, might resent that some of us defend the worldview that allowed the creation of astrology. But to the extent that all of us were forced one way or another to explain what we know to be true it was a good thing as it served as a refresher course of some basics. I quoted this:


Quote:
"Of the four seasons of the year, spring, summer, autumn, and winter, spring exceeds in moisture on the account of its diffusion after the cold has passed and warmth is setting in; the summer, in heat, because of the nearness of the sun to the zenith, autumn more in dryness, because of the sucking up of the moisture during the hot season just past; and winter exceeds in cold, because the sun is farthest away from the zenith. For this reason, although there is no natural beginning of the zodiac, since it is a circle, they assume that the sign which begins with the vernal equinox, that of Aries, is the starting point of them all, making the excessive moisture of the spring the first part of the zodiac as thought it were a living creature and taking next in order the remaining seasons because in all creatures the earliest ages, like the spring, have a larger share of moisture and are tender and still delicate."
[emphasis added]

This is Ptolemy and he is clearly talking about the seasons not the constellations. He notes Aries begins at the vernal point not the beginning of the constellation Aries. It should settle the argument permanently, but it won't. There is too much ignorance to overcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul
Moderator


Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 1150

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tom wrote:
> It should settle the argument permanently, but it won't. There is too much ignorance to overcome.[/color]


It won't, because, perhaps fairly, the next refutation that a skeptic would make of astrology is to point out that if, by chance, astrology was instead popularised in the southern hemisphere, rather than the northern, then the other point of intersection between eclipitc and equator, which we call Libra, would in fact have taken on the 'traits' of Aries and vice versa.
Which would then beg the question as to whether the zodiac should be reversed for the southern hemisphere.

But then, from the debates I've chosen to involve myself in on certain skeptic blogs since this subject re-arose, the skeptic just moves from one point to the next, arguing that the division by 12 is arbitrary, why not 10 or even 13, and why begin at the equinox and not at the solstice, etc etc ad nauseum.

(In other words if it's not this then it's something else, sometimes people just want to refute astrology, it won't matter what logic or rationale you throw at them. Their minds have already been made up.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul
Moderator


Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 1150

Posted: Tue Jan 18, 2011 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ed F wrote:
Paul wrote:
...
I disagree, I think the 'problem' is in educating on what astrology actually is and how it works, but we'll never manage to do that when astrologers are not given an equal voice to their detractors...


But this becomes a bit difficult when even serious astrologers, who engage in critical thinking, fundamentally disagree about what astrology is and how it works.

- Ed


That's true Ed. But perhaps if astrology really was broken down into sects like Curtis described it would be better. Or would it be worse?

(btw I, for the first time, checked out those other forums and was shocked to see posts like "western astrology uses the sidereal zodiac" etc. Kudos on your simple, straight forward posts clarifying the issue. When astrologers don't know about astrology, how can we blame astronomers for not?)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 6 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated