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:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Is there an 'astrological community'? If so, what is it?
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 5:48 pm    Post subject: Is there an 'astrological community'? If so, what is it? Reply with quote

Good evening,

One occasionally sees references to a purported 'astrological community'.

Is there one? Are there several? If it or they exist, of what do they consist?

Even in the ancient Hellenistic and Mediaeval worlds there were distinct differences of opinion amongst astrological authors (who may or may not have been 'representative' of astrological practice) on certain items. Antiochus, Ptolemy, Al-Biruni and others reported such differences more or less frequently.

In modern astrology, it seems that since WW2 the linguistic gaps amongst countries have been growing as English language academia apparently have become less inclined to learn foreign languages. How many have for example heard of the contemporary Spanish astrologer Miguel Garcia, notable for his work on harmonics and for the development of the Armon astrology software?

How many are aware of the significant work of 20th century German astrologers like Herr Erich Carl Kühr who did not require hypothetical planets in his 'system'? Here is a modern astrological natal chart from AstroWiki:



Is 'astrological community' perhaps a way of referring to 'us (in) and them (out)'?

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nixx



Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 295

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would propose there are a number.

There is the umbrella one where folks meet up at conferences and share the belief abstract sky maps are a useful resource for them and the world, even if they reveal contradictory narratives. They smile at each other, listen earnestly whilst wondering if they had their chart could they date the frontal lobe lobotomy.

Then there are those who share similar concepts and values and as such tend to be linked together into schools.

Then there are those who share the above but don't speak the same language and hang out with those who do whether this is Germany or wherever. (Not sharing the same language can mean a few ideas get lost in translation).

But I think really there are 2.

The first one is composed of those who can recite verbatim the Timaues, read Culture and Cosmos when it is erraticaly printed, can guess their new neighbour's sun sign within 48 hrs of moving in, have devoured the works of Melanie Klein and call themselves Platonist Darwinists. i.e Me (''ideal monkey wise'' Razz )

Then the rest, who are time wasters.......

Have you affiliated yourself to any of the reputable 1,234 schools Lihin or are you a maverick. We was wondering......?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Geoffrey



Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Posts: 380
Location: Scottish Borders

Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2012 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To say that there are an infinite number of astrological communities would imply an infinite universe. We know that the universe is finite, so I will propose that there are astrological communities 'without number'.

What is a community? A community is a particular set of individuals who share something in common. So, the astrological community could be as loose as that group of people who have ever shown any interest in 'astrology', whatever they take that word to mean. Within that all encompassing set is a continuous spectrum of sub-sets - Western psychological astrologers, Indian 'Vedic' astrologers, traditional astrologers, amateur astrologers, professional astrologers, German astrologers, people who read the astrology columns in the popular papers...... the list is (almost) endless.

I am reminded of Humpty Dumpy's remark to Alice in Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass, "'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

That being the case, the phrase "astrological community" is probably meaningless as it stands, unqualified.

English being modern Latin, I suspect that English speaking academics in all fields are valid in their view that if a work published in another language is important enough, then sooner rather than later it will be translated into English.

Geoffrey
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul
Administrator


Joined: 23 Nov 2009
Posts: 1452

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 8:37 am    Post subject: Re: Is there an 'astrological community'? If so, what is it? Reply with quote

lihin wrote:

One occasionally sees references to a purported 'astrological community'.

Is there one? Are there several? If it or they exist, of what do they consist?

Even in the ancient Hellenistic and Mediaeval worlds there were distinct differences of opinion amongst astrological authors (who may or may not have been 'representative' of astrological practice) on certain items. Antiochus, Ptolemy, Al-Biruni and others reported such differences more or less frequently.

...

Is 'astrological community' perhaps a way of referring to 'us (in) and them (out)'?


Of course, but then this is hardly news-worthy or unique to astrologers.

How many have heard of 'the black community', 'the jewish community', 'the gay community' etc.

It is simply a way of referencing, in a general and therefore vague sense, a group of people who have something in common which is different from what is considered 'the average'.

When I was younger I remember once asking where the 'black community' actually was? One would be forgiven for thinking it a real actual place when actually it is everywhere - just like the astrological community is everwhere and nowhere at the same time.
No doubt if you were a part of any of these groups, be that jewish/black/gay/astrological you would recognise that there are sub-groups to which you affiliate more than others and a lot of people would prefer not to even be grouped in these simplistic and sometimes meaningless ways.

We don't have a "green eyed community" or a "ginger haired community" after all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1434

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For me there is an astrological communitiy consisting of people, who concern themseves with astrology. This community is divided no so much in those whose basic concept is the tropical or siderial Zodiack. The divison is rather in "Western" Astrologers and in those practicing in India or those who try to practice like the Indian astrolgogers. This is probably because of the fact that what - if at all something - I know of the Indian astrology is so strange to me.

But of course all astrologers who see a, or better: the - defined by Astrology - connection between the stars and the earth belong to the astrological community in my opinion whatever the level of the individual astrologers might be.

Without the astrological community the inspiration to concern oneself with astrology would want the base.

Johannes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1434

Posted: Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Erich Carl Kühr is more than half a century dead (February 18, 7:30 am MET, 1951) and how should someone in the world know this extraordinary astrologer, who was as to my knowledge the first to postulate and to practice the combination of 'Psychology' and traditional Astrology but whose works were never translated into English? Traditional means in the context of Erich Carl Kühr grounding on the doctrines of Jean Baptiste Morin de Villefranche, which he analysed and teached - especially in his 'Psychologische Horoskopdeutung' - in an all-time way.

As to his chart, there is a mistake: Astrowiki gives the, by Kühr himself corrected, time as 14:15 but the chart is erected for the time of 14:18.
The correct AC is 25°15´; the MC is 23°45´.

Johannes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 8:30 am    Post subject: Astrological communties Reply with quote

Good morning,

Perhaps a relevant and useful technical sub-division of the 'astrological community' might be by astrologers, past and present, who use(d) the techniques of primary directions and those who did (do) not. This would be another dimension than the usual historical classifications.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
johannes susato



Joined: 04 Jan 2009
Posts: 1434

Posted: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And there are many Astrologers even within those who apply primary directions at all, who apply these in a special way forming real sects within this group.

Thus the possibilities of divisions and subdivisions of the astrological community are innumerable yet for the orientation within the multitude of members and schools and teachings and techniques of great help.

But all these would not concern the 'astrological community' or community of astrologers in its entirety.

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


Joined: 11 Oct 2003
Posts: 3464
Location: New Jersey, USA

Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paul has it exactly right:

Quote:
It is simply a way of referencing, in a general and therefore vague sense, a group of people who have something in common which is different from what is considered 'the average'.


Dividing and categorizing this group with ever increasing specificity doesn't seem to be terribly useful, but nevertheless raises an interesting point. Astrology is not very well organized and as such said "community" has a set of beliefs that are all over the lot. Using the term "astrological community" should not be synonymous with "all astrologers agree that ..." Still at times we seem to be separated by what we have in common. I recall a written exchange where I stated the importance of the ASC in the way a traditionalist understood it significance and was immediately attacked on grounds that I considered only slightly above the understanding of Sun sign astrology. Regardless of who was right in that disagreement, the point is that we couldn't agree on the significance of what we both agreed was the most important point in the chart. That's troubling.

I'm not advocating rigid orthodoxy. The whole world is not going to see things the way I do nor should they. Yet we need more common ground if we are to get our act together.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:27 pm    Post subject: Ignoring the obvious? Reply with quote

Good evening,

Mr Tom has written:

Quote:
"... I stated the importance of the ASC in the way a traditionalist understood it significance and was immediately attacked on grounds that I considered only slightly above the understanding of Sun sign astrology."


Indeed, there is widespread disagreement amongst astrologers on nearly every basic symbol. Since astrology lost its recognition as an academic science in Europe mostly in the 18th century CE, there is no protection for it. Anyone can claim to be an astrologer, publish 'authoritative' books about it, etc. Wide segments of the general public perceive astrology as a pseudo-scientific form of infotainment.

Some - but by no means all - astrological streams say that astrological delineations refer to astronomical phenomena and are based thereon. It should be apparent to even casual observers that the faster a point is, the more individualised. From this perspective we have both Horoscopos (Ascendant) and Medium Coeli, one of which is almost always changing more quickly that the other, a fact seldom delineated, then Séléné, Hermès and Aphrodité before arriving at Helios. However, if nearly stationary both Hermès and Aphrodité may be slower than Helios in a specific event, different from the stationary state.

In mundane astrology it is occasionally argued that quickly moving planets and points are less indicative. Nevertheless, the mundane places determined by the pivots are deemed important and the quick movers considered 'timing devices' for events indicated by configurations of relatively slow movers.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juan



Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 214
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 2:14 am    Post subject: Re: Ignoring the obvious? Reply with quote

lihin wrote:
Indeed, there is widespread disagreement amongst astrologers on nearly every basic symbol. Since astrology lost its recognition as an academic science in Europe mostly in the 18th century CE, there is no protection for it. Anyone can claim to be an astrologer, publish 'authoritative' books about it, etc. Wide segments of the general public perceive astrology as a pseudo-scientific form of infotainment.

This may have been the prevalent situation way before the 18th or 17th century, critics always abounded and not everybody was a believer, and there were different schools of thought, methods, and beliefs among astrologers.

Consider the following comment of Al-Biruni in the Masudic Canon (Qanun'l-Mas'udi) in the XI Century:
Quote:
Some of the basic principles of the art of judicial astrology are presented in the form of mathematical calculations. In consequence, astrologers have a sufficiency of trouble with the principles they regard as being recognized by all of them, and with respect to which there is no controversy. As astrology is not based on intellectual necessity, differences of opinion are possible, and the methods used in it have multiplied in various ways.[ref. p.346 "The Semantic Distinction between the terms 'Astronomy' and 'Astrology' according to Al-Biruni", Shlomo Pines, Isis 55: 343-349, 1964]

note: this is only the last part of a long passage quoted (and translated) by Pines, found according to him "at the beginning of the section dealing with astrology" in Biruni's book.

Juan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 7:31 am    Post subject: Widespread disagreement also in ancient times Reply with quote

Good morning,

I concur, Mr Juan, that widespread disagreements amongst astrologers have been prevalent at all known periods, not only since the Renaissance.

This is the reason why in my humble opinion there are in reality no such things as 'traditional', 'classical' or 'Vedic' astrologies. These labels are convenient for marketing and provide feelings of stability, security and identification.

Instead there are numerous astrologies of many astrological authors during various historical periods in various languages and countries, some of whom share, however, many similar notions. We might also bear in mind that many astrological reference books considered central by later authors have not survived.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juan



Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 214
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Posted: Sat Nov 24, 2012 10:09 am    Post subject: Re: Widespread disagreement also in ancient times Reply with quote

lihin wrote:
This is the reason why in my humble opinion there are in reality no such things as 'traditional', 'classical' or 'Vedic' astrologies. These labels are convenient for marketing and provide feelings of stability, security and identification.

Yes. Some people have an idealized mythical notion of the "the one true" Astrology of the past, and this seems to be in many cases an expression of psychological needs. Like you I feel that many seek in Astrology (or use it in such a way that) the authority of tradition provides them with "stability, security and identification". Astrological practice becomes by necessity an expression of psychological, cultural and historical paradigms that often are not recognized and are mistaken for an alleged monolithic a-historical tradition.

But I think we all share something in common: the use of the same basic mathematical devices like birth charts, the zodiac divided into 12 signs, celestial longitues, 12 houses, etc. as a way of charting human life and events. What distinguishes us as a communtity is the use of these fundamental pseudo-astronomical tools, despite the multiple ways of using and even calculating them.

Juan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lihin



Joined: 14 Dec 2009
Posts: 470
Location: Mount Kailash

Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2012 7:35 am    Post subject: Diversity Reply with quote

Good morning,

Although it would be convenient, alas even on the matters Mr Juan has last mentioned there is no consensus amongst schools of astrology.

Some use other numbers of divisions of the zodiac than twelve, i. e. 10, 13, whilst still others use twelve or thirteen unequal constellations instead of equal signs. The Aalen school ('cosmobiology') uses no 'houses' at all but relies on the 'natural significators'. A good case has been made that Claudius Ptolemy did not include a house system in his Tetrabiblos.

Some astrological systems, ex. gr. ancient Babylonian, are based on the horizon coordinate system, others concentrate on the equatorial system. Some quite modern ones include the earth's magnetic co-ordinates as a fourth set of reference with or without the dipolar approximation.

Some schools of astrology even today purposely restrict themselves to the seven visible planets, Ascendant and Medium Coeli. Others, already in Hellenistic times, include the lunar nodes but neglect the nodes of the other bodies. Yet others (ex. gr. Michael Erlewine) include delineations for all nodes.

Even the assertion 'astrology is based on astronomy' does not always hold, questions of Chinese astrology left aside. Some authors rigorously attempt to base each type of delineation on an observable, verifiable astronomical or physical phenomenon including for example those of resonance and harmony. Others, ex. gr. in Indian astrology, include purely symbolic bases of astrological analyses.

Last but by far not least one can mention the extreme proliferation of astrological points (new planets, dwarf planets, centaurs, asteroids, etc.), sometimes including hypothetical ones, in most modern schools of astrology in contrast to the seven planets readily visible to unaided human sight.

The diverse situation is the similar with delineations of basic astrological symbols. One can for example compare Alfred Witte's delineation of the Sun to that of Dane Rudhyar.

Astrologers, so it appears, delight in making sceptics' work easy.

Best regards,

lihin
_________________
Non esse nihil non est.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Juan



Joined: 21 May 2007
Posts: 214
Location: San José, Costa Rica

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2012 3:07 am    Post subject: Re: Diversity Reply with quote

lihin wrote:
twelve... 10, 13 signs, twelve or thirteen unequal constellations instead of equal signs.... no 'houses'... horizon coordinate system, equatorial system... earth's magnetic co-ordinates as a fourth set of reference... restrict to the seven visible planets, lunar nodes but neglect the nodes of the other bodies. Yet others (ex. gr. Michael Erlewine) include delineations for all nodes... to base each type of delineation on an observable, verifiable astronomical or physical phenomenon, purely symbolic bases of analyses... proliferation of astrological points (new planets, dwarf planets, centaurs, asteroids, etc.)... hypothetical...

all you are doing is listing some of the many tools available in the astrological toolbox. Some astrologers prefer some tools and discard others, some use the same tools differently, but all the tools have the same basis: celestial motions, celestial coordinates, celestial reference planes, used to model human affairs.

The proliferation of theories, methods and schools is not exclusive of Astrology, you find it in Psychology and Anthropology and can make exactly the same arguments there.

Juan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
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