Noel Tyl
Astrology => General Astrology Discussion => Topic started by: james m on August 30, 2010, 09:15:46 AM
-
i posted this in the mundane astrology section but thought some here who never seem to participate in the mundane section might be interested in this as well..
i think those interested in astrology need to have a conversation about what works and what doesn't... i am sure this conversation isn't black and white and what might work for someone might seem useless to another astrologer... we are being given a huge amount of information to consider with the easy access of data on so much.. this includes learning about astrologers approaches from the past thru 'project hindsight'... how much of it needs to be thrown in the trash can, and how much of it actually works? some astrologers seem afraid to comment on these questions or consider the validity of the techniques and tools they are using or exploring.. to me that seems counterproductive... if astrology is to express an open attitude on all the information coming available it has to also work towards articulating why something does or doesn't work...
as i see it, proof of any technique might be captured in a prediction, but they don't happen very often! most of the time it is different types of analysis of charts with accompanied techniques that others may or may not be familiar with that often fall flat as the audience must become familiar with these techniques or silently they abstain from the conversation... it is like astrologers have broken off into taking different languages where a group are conversant in 'vedic' for example, but have no knowledge on another area of astrology and vise versa... perhaps this is to be expected given the parallels with astrology and language that have been made... one can see this ''language'' gap very clearly here at noel tyls site and at most other astro sites..
if nothing else an open mind can explore the different techniques being used here, or not... too much openness leads to a cluttered mind as well perhaps, but i think it is the responsibility of any person serious about astrology to consider the different techniques in use and decide from themselves what they will use in it all .. a new student of astrology must start somewhere.. as they progress further along it may be necessary for them to throw out basic information that doesn't seem to work with their increasing knowledge of the ins and outs of this language called 'astrology'..
at any rate i find the whole issue of what works and what doesn't with regard to astro technique fascinating and thank lorenzo smerillo and ed kohout who post almost exclusively on the mundane thread here at noel tyls forum for commenting relatively directly on a topic that i think is worthy of consideration and friendly discussion..
-
Hello james m
Not much time, so pardon my brief answer....
Various people use various techniques.
Some get some rather strange ones to work. (produce reliable results that they and their clients can rely on)
Whether others can get them to work or have an ability to truly understand the technique is a totally separate consideration.
As an example, Alice McDermott is a very good astrologer, very adept at the technical. She says explicitly that Age Harmonics work. I have come to the same conclusion. Isaac, who is VERY meticulous about what we CAN and CAN'T use (reliably) in Astrology is considering including them in a newer version of Polaris. Here, we have three technically-oriented astrologers evaluating them and finding MUCH VALUE in them.
Up against that, all of Lorenzo's and Ed's poo-pooing them is worth precious little...in fact, really nothing at all.
But, I've said that before. Must we continue to restate the obvious.
Peace
OD'd
-
most of the time it is different types of analysis of charts with accompanied techniques that others may or may not be familiar with that often fall flat as the audience must become familiar with these techniques or silently they abstain from the conversation...
If "the audience" chooses to "silently abstain from the conversation" it is not necessarily because they are unfamiliar with the techniques, but rather that they have decided as the result of bitter experience that there is no point in attempting to reason with a closed mind.
-
James,
You ask an interesting question - especially related to testing techniques through prediction.
I have some strong feelings about this, because I feel it’s VERY important to factor in free will and choice. We may see measurements converging on a particular date that “should” produce results ---- and then don’t because the person underachieved or failed to live up to the measurement.
For example, very often when women are raising their children as stay at home moms, a major hit to the MC will fail to produce much because their focus is entirely on the act of mothering instead of career. Their life is very internal and behind the scenes instead of external and visible.
This happened to me when my children were very young. I had a major solar arc to my MC - with no manifestation in my life. Looking back - I can see now that I had actually given up a large part of my personal identity while I emersed myself in the role of mother. I lost a big part of my individuality during that time.... which is natural and happens to many moms.
That doesn’t mean solar arcs don’t work!
I have an artist friend with incredible talent who has embraced underachievement as her lifestyle. Her Sun is 25 Gemini. When Uranus and Saturn transited she felt a tiny stirring within -pushing her to break out of underachievement - but that’s all. Nothing changed in her life..... nothing!
That doesn’t mean transits aren’t relevant. Instead, it is a clear example that she didn’t utilize the transit.
I have many clients who want absolute prediction. Many right now with homes on the market - asking for exact dates for when their home will sell. They are stressed and afraid - and want the comfort of a future prediction.
In one of these cases a woman had SA Jupiter = Moon (ruler of her 4th) WITH other transits from the faster moving planets to back it up. In a good market, that would most likely produce the sale. In her case, there was a very interested party who looked at the property - but no offer. Her house has been on the market for 10 months - and the most interested person during the whole time the house has been on the market came right on the day when the SA was exact.
I had to remind my client that I never predicted there would absolutely be a sale at that time..... I had said there was a good chance for an offer IF the price was right - and that she’d probably see good activity at that time. The economy and housing market has made it tricky to predict sales with confidence. That doesn’t mean the technique doesn’t work.
Wisdom has to prevail in Astrological consultations.
Kathy
-
Excellent commentary, Kathy; thank you.
---I believe my essay in the Archives of "Notebook": July 31, 2008 --How the horoscoope seems to weaken-- is relevant to these observations.
Noel Tyl
-
thanks everyone for these comments..
kathy i really like what you've said here as it goes more directly into what i was hoping to discuss with some of my comments.. regarding underachievement, i think it's a user defined concept, but i know how the world likes to impose a view on this whereby someone is or isn't reaching their 'true' potential... success to me is a very personal thing which doesn't hinge on recognition outside my own view on it which i believe is the most central.. perhaps though underachievement and achievement can be seen in the chart to a degree with the natal saturn position, a focus on the midheaven, or the opposite and etc... translating artist 'talent' into something concrete is no easy matter either way and thanks for these examples..
i was also thinking along the lines of the example you gave on the solar arcs not necessarily working in the way we might have thought, so thanks for offering those examples as well.. i think anyone who is asked to make a prediction or considers the predictive process realizes just how difficult it is to offer one with high confidence unless it is given in a general manner..
one aspect of what i was hoping to discuss are the many different techniques that are in use today in astrology... many of these techniques have been around for a long time, but some are very new and still in the early stages of understanding and development.. here on the mundane thread i was introduced to the idea of using midpoints- which i have used for the past odd 25 years, but on smaller wheels then the 90 degree wheel which is all that i have worked with... i suppose this is pretty arcane to some here, but i've found the introduction to this worth more attention on my part.. harmonic charts is another area that i think is worth exploring more and i would include age harmonics in this category, although a part of the set up to these makes no sense.. older techniques that are in use, like peregrine for example make no sense to me in light of these same 'modern' techniques that offer so much detail that was never possible back when these type of techniques were in use... i suppose the same goes for the older use of distant stars which may also have been used to fill in many blanks prior to an understanding of solar arcs for example... i see this clash working itself out in the astrology community today in interesting ways, mostly in how one astrologer will come to a conclusion in a very different way then another one would.. perhaps this will be worked out over time, but i am not so sure.. maybe it doesn't matter.. perhaps it is like different tastes in music, some liking classical and others liking rap for example.. the chasm between the two seemingly so great that some might think the rules of music have been turned upside down!
what i notice in the astrology community is a willingness to work with many different techniques to get at the meaning of a chart without necessarily understanding the historical context these same techniques are coming out of or how much of these techniques might be replaced by more modern ones that reveal aspects to a chart that had never been previously considered.. transportation has changed the world in the past 100 years.. is it possible that we can consider how many of the astro techniques introduced in the past 100 odd years or less are changing the of understanding an astrology chart at present? it seems many in the astro community are content to stay firmly attached to the past without considering how the whole astro language or landscape has changed so dramatically.. the idea of questioning these older techniques will never happen if a consideration of newer ones aren't explored.. perhaps i am being too aggressive in stating all this.. i realize this is up to each individual involved in astrology to work out these things out on their own terms, but as an observer it appears as a real clash of values..the only thought i have to get beyond this observation of mine is for those who rely on a particular technique demonstrate how it works in a predictive context to give it more credence...
i like the simplicity of donna cunninghams philosophy which seems to be working with only transits for predictive purposes.. of course it's backed up with many years a long study and observation too... perhaps her work is mostly centered around natal astrology, but i like the simplicity just the same...
i suppose it is once again a case of my own journey with astrology that matters the most... what others do with the options available to them in all the techniques and systems available is up to them.. i think predictive astrology where the reasoning behind the prediction is explained would go a long way to clarifying what does or doesn't work in this area.. analyzing charts from the pov of past tense is all fine and good and necessary, but we need to do more then that i think.. thanks for the conversation here..
-
Hey James,
I like your open attitude.
i suppose it is once again a case of my own journey with astrology that matters the most...
That's certainly been true for me. Astrology has been an important element in my own evolution.
Personally, I tend not to use Astrology for prediction. Having been heavily involved in the psychic side of experience, I know that prediction of future events is possible. I've been developing a philosophical astrology that shows the 'logical' construction of 'The Self', with extensions into 'deeper' levels of existence. In my experience, consciousness is not the major part of being - just the part we're most familiar with, currently.
Whenever you deal with prediction, you're inevitably questioning 'free will'. Many people insist on the primacy of 'Self' and the importance of 'free will', even in the world of mediums and psychics, and in the same breath they'll tell you "event A will happen at time B on day C". I don't think you can have it both ways - if prediction is possible, there is no 'free will' and the conscious self is a creation of some deeper reality. Prediction is possible.
ODd, with his testing of the Polaris rectification software, seems to be on to something. If it can be shown that known birth times can be predicted from known life events, against probability, then we may have a tool for testing the reality of Astrology, and all of its components - such as house systems. (Good luck with that!). The only thing I don't like about that idea is that I didn't think of it!
My own fears centre on a fact of experience - you're dealing with a level of intelligence, and of control, that is possibly beyond understanding. Looking around the internet I see so many contradictory "this technique works" stories - purposeful confusion? Time will tell.
Henry.
-
hi big mac - thanks for your kind words.. i like your attitude as well! i especially like the idea we are only looking at the tip of an iceberg when it comes to consciousness.. i may be taking your ideas out of context but i like this analogy to consciousness.. perhaps prediction implies a loss of free will on the one hand, but it might imply another part of consciousness is moving us in a particular direction that we are either going to go along with willingly or not... a conversation on free will or fate must account for the idea we can't know everything their is to know at any time, but work with what we have on a conscious level.. what might look like '''fate'' might actually be a deeper expression of free will and vise versa... i haven't a strong clue on how this all works, but i like the idea of not getting locked into an either or position with these ideas... it is like those eternal type questions"chicken or egg first" with no clear answer in sight!
-
Kathy Rose,
I read your post re hopuse sale with interest.
In 2001 I sold amy house - a Real Agent from a reputable firm came to evaluate to sales price etc. I learned his birthday and noted his Natal Sun was conj my Jupiter which is on my Sun/Moon MP. I thought this may be a good connection.
A friendly Astrologer advised to use caution - Saturn was T my 2nd house - in engaging this Agent as he could cost me a great deal of money! After that initial visit I only heard from him once - prospective buyers wanted to make an inspection with another Agent from the same franchise. I never saw this Agent again. So this had lead me to believe Jupiter may not deliver what he promises!
A female Agent sold my home when T Venus - Ruler of my 2nd, moved to my Part of Fortune in 8th! At this time Jupiter was retro. conj N Mercury in 3rd.
water bird.
-
Hi all
I see Astrology as the study of the manifestation of solar system and universal energy on Earth. If I lived on Mars it would be the study of the manifestation of universal energy on Mars .. and so on.
This is a vast and profound field with almost infinite ways of perceiving and measuring this process.
We all have different types of minds and therefore different types of perception so we use different criteria in assessing what in astrology is of value to each of us. None of us are capable of fully comprehending this area, so we all gain from our differing approaches and the resultant discussions.
Likewise, human cultures, both ancient and modern, have used a variety of processes to observe, measure and interpret the workings of our Solar System and how it affects us here on earth. None are 'right or wrong', each describe the way the people of these cultures perceived reality.
Some of us enjoy the contemplation of large cycles of time and like to study how planetary cycles manifested in different periods - a kind of 'telescope' approach; others like to study very finely tuned manifestations - a microscope approach; quite a few of us don't care a bit about either of these approaches and prefer to observe how ordinary astrology works in individual lives within a specific culture. All are perfectly valid and all can complement each other.
We can argue forever about the various techniques available in modern and ancient astrology but it is a fool's game. People choose the type of astrology that suits their own perception of the world and can't relate to techniques that don't. Very practical and precise people can't understand why others don't like the knowledge and techniques they offer as they work so well, they tend to get very upset at what they perceive as a foolish and impractical approach to astrology. Quite often these types of people have no way of conceiving the more colorful and emotional approach of other astrologers - a bit like a green spectrum color blind person has no possible way of seeing green. Likewise the more emotional type of astrologer can't understand why the technique oriented astrologer can't seem to perceive the underlying story of the astrology and get upset at their 'denseness' ... and around and around we go!
Both approaches are absolutely necessary to the study and application of astrology. Without practical and precise techniques astrology can get lost in the vast sea of emotional perceptions, without emotional perception astrology becomes dry as dust and worthless in human life.
For myself, I present on this forum techniques that work consistently and accurately with my clients. Some of them are very new and are presented for interested astrologers to try out for themselves. I am not upset if astrologers prefer to not experiment and stick to the techniques that are tried and true, but I do find it a bit silly to reject a technique because it theoretically can't work, when it manifestly does work.
From my perception most of us are still in kindergarten or grade 1 in the study of astrology as there is so very much about the Earth, Solar System and Universe that we as yet have no knowledge, let alone comprehension. The longer I study and apply my knowledge to real life (40 years to date) the more I realize how little I know. I love the harmonic approach to astrology as it fits my mindset, the contemplation of the flow of energy from microscopic to macroscopic levels is enthralling and the possibilities within that flow are probably infinite. Yet other astrologers love the security of the 'box' type of astrology presented by medieval astrologers, where black is black and white is white, everything is fated .. end of discussion. Most astrologers are somewhere in between these two quite different ways of focus and all use techniques that generally work well for them.
Alice McDermott
-
Alice,
This was a very well-written presentation. I know what works for me (most of the time) and what doesn't work (with a comparable frequency). As I wrote to Tim Neilson a few years back, plumbers are just as important as poets.
Don Borkowski
-
Alice,
Beautiful post - well said! I totally agree with everything you've said. Thanks for sharing your wisdom.
Kathy
-
Yes Alice,
I also really appreciate your post. I think you really convey what is going on in the world of astrology in a very professional and dignified way. Thank You, Dixie Turner
-
I see Astrology as the study of the manifestation of solar system and universal energy on Earth. If I lived on Mars it would be the study of the manifestation of universal energy on Mars .. and so on.
People choose the type of astrology that suits their own perception of the world and can't relate to techniques that don't.
For myself, I present on this forum techniques that work consistently and accurately with my clients. Some of them are very new and are presented for interested astrologers to try out for themselves. I am not upset if astrologers prefer to not experiment and stick to the techniques that are tried and true, but I do find it a bit silly to reject a technique because it theoretically can't work, when it manifestly does work.
From my perception most of us are still in kindergarten or grade 1 in the study of astrology as there is so very much about the Earth, Solar System and Universe that we as yet have no knowledge, let alone comprehension. The longer I study and apply my knowledge to real life (40 years to date) the more I realize how little I know.
Hi Alice,
I totally agreed with everything you said in your post, but the sentences I've highlighted really resonated with me. I haven't been studying astrology quite as long as you, but long enough to know that the more we learn, the more we realize how little we know. But unless we try new approaches and techniques, we'll never learn anything new.
Thank you so much for your post; well said!
Pam
-
Lorenzo,
... Nuclear physics is not really very impressed by "the four elements". ... The capacity of the human individuals for self-deception is commensurable with their ignorance of the continuity of time and matter.
In my own model of Astrology, "the four elements" translate as four necessary categories in the most general (and simple) definition of topology I could devise ... and topology is right at the heart of modern theoretical physics - just ask Michio Kaku.
As for the capacity of Human beings for self-deception ... yes, indeed. I once thought I was wise enough to be free of self-deception. I was wrong then, as you are now. We all have problems seeing past the concepts and assumptions we mistake as 'facts'. But we do live and learn.
James,
hi big mac - thanks for your kind words.. i like your attitude as well! i especially like the idea we are only looking at the tip of an iceberg when it comes to consciousness.. i may be taking your ideas out of context but i like this analogy to consciousness.. perhaps prediction implies a loss of free will on the one hand, but it might imply another part of consciousness is moving us in a particular direction that we are either going to go along with willingly or not... a conversation on free will or fate must account for the idea we can't know everything their is to know at any time, but work with what we have on a conscious level.. what might look like '''fate'' might actually be a deeper expression of free will and vise versa... i haven't a strong clue on how this all works, but i like the idea of not getting locked into an either or position with these ideas... it is like those eternal type questions"chicken or egg first" with no clear answer in sight!
Yes. My own take on Astrology shows that there are non-personal elements of 'Self'. We see the reality of this in 'altruistic actions' - individuals give up time, and sometimes their whole lives, to benefit others.
Henry.
-
hi alice - you hit a home run out of the park on that one! i liked this line of yours..
"The longer I study and apply my knowledge to real life (40 years to date) the more I realize how little I know."
the saying in the tao teh ching is "the further you go, the less you know"... maintaining an open mind, essential to learning is not something everyone is inclined towards... thanks for your comments and hope you can continue to share your astrological observations specifically with regard to age harmonics as i remain uncertain about their usefulness..
bigmac - i like how you've articulated a broader concept of 'self' here... could it be that this is coming out of outer planets being tied more directly with inner planets in a persons chart? that would be my first thought..
-
How astrology does not work for humans:
1. It does not show sex
2. It does not show race
3. It does not show ethnicity
Perhaps these areas are of a more personal karma and not the conditional kind that astrology is about.
There seems to be an impetus to a greater realization of the systemic oneness of life; it is called "suffering".
-
To add to Kathys excellent post, I have only these few words to contribute.
Like the old political cliche, You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time
With regard to astrology technique: Some techniques work some of the time, but no technique works all of the time.
-
Let me add one thing about Free Will and Choice .... if free will weren't part of the equation, then people with identical horoscopes would manifest the same thing.
We have CHOICE as to how much of our potential we manifest.... and how we RESPOND to the planetary energies. We are bathed in planetary "vibes" during a solar arc or transit - and we have some degree of choice as to how we utilize the energy.
Two identical horoscopes will be triggered by a transit and may manifest two totally different realities.
This is my opinion - and it's near and dear to my heart. It's what works for me and checks out with my view of the Universe. I don't push my opinion on others - nor do I insult people if their view is different.
Kathy
-
Kathy,
I have never come across identical horoscopes for two individuals, since most twins have a time difference for first breath, so I cannot prove your premise. Have you an example for real? Is it even possible?
Mark Twain's "The Prince and the Pauper" is a nice story, as is "The Man in the Iron Mask" by Alexandre Dumas.
,Daniel
-
Even if we have two charts that are close to identical -- let's say two babies born in the same hospital within a minute or so of each other (same Asc, same MC).
My point - behind each horoscope is a SOUL. Whether reincarnation is your approach or not.... just because two horoscopes look the same (or very, very close) - the same result will not be guaranteed. I believe this is true on the natal level as well as it pertains to cycles from planetary activity. The imprint from the parents make a difference, the environment from childhood, and the choices made along the way.
I've seen this recently with the dynamic planetary activity going on now and for the last year (Pluto, Uranus, Saturn and Jupiter). I've heard from clients with natal Sun activated by this intense configuration who were nearly suicidal - experiencing devastating loss and hardship - literally wanting their experience on earth to be over. I contrast this to other clients with the Sun at the same degree who moved forward in every aspect of their life - experiencing success and expansion with this transit. This is not a judgment about how they experienced the transit.
My spiritual teacher said: "You can't teach TRUTH. Each person's truth is relative to their unique frame of reference. What you can teach are techniques that help people to find their own truth. Strive always to be exploring "truth finding," not just "truth knowing."
I think this is true for astrology. I find relevance with the system of astrology. The techniques and measurements I use allow me to have meaningful dialogue with my clients..... that's the point.
Kathy
-
kathy - i like what you are saying here... i have thought about this some too with regard to birth charts that seem very similar.. i think the imprint from parents, environment from childhood and etc do make a difference... i find the connections between parent and child quite fascinating to consider and of course even if 2 charts were close to identical the role parents play would be an important backdrop to all this... i don't think we respond equally to all parts of a chart.. perhaps cross overs with parent/child might explain some of this better... what role does heredity play in all of this and can one see this in the cross overs in the parent/child relationship? i think we can, but i am getting off track... thanks to both you and daniel for making some comments here that have been thought provoking and interesting..
-
I suggest Astrology does not work with soul or reincarnation, because they are concepts that have no basis in astrology and which are imposed from other religious systems to co-opt astrology. No soul. No ego. Just conditions. Subsume religion into astrology if you like, but astrology works without deities, nevertheless.
I can agree that there is rebirth, but that is different from reincarnation. Even our breath contains molecules of what George Washington breathed, so literally everyone is everything.
I suggest we are stuck somewhere between freewill and predestination, but we are still figuring out the metric. That fourth dimension of time is tricky being so relative and all.
,Daniel
-
daniel, i'm not sure why you say concepts on the soul and reincarnation have no basis in astrology... i think they do for this reason - these are concepts that have been around for a long time and seek a home in all areas where people are looking for a greater understanding on life in general.. i think that is what we are doing with astrology, or at least i can say that for myself!!
james k- thanks for sharing that story.. i enjoyed it!
-
James,
Could you refer me to a definition of these terms as used in western modern astrology? What objective astrological conditions refers to these concepts? Define your terms!
As close as I can determine, the ancients referred to "anima" or breath as "soul", but it is religiously based, and ends at death of the form. It is an equivocation and incorrect reasoning to say that because a concept has been around a long time, therefore it is valid. These days, the vague definition of soul or reincarnation is more like some obsolete religious verbal artifact that has become some catchall word for some vague emotional projection.
I think that if one is going to be a religious guide or minister or preacher, then be up front about that limit. Not all astrologers are religious ministers, nor do they want to be. I was for four years in NOLA (New Orleans). Maybe we need some tent revival meetings on the levee this coming UAC. However, those who are eclectic in their promotion of beliefs to suit their clients might also be guilty of pandering.
Perhaps astrology is better off for acceptance by educated and monied people if there is less religiosity, yet many an astrologer's paying clientele of poor and ignorant women 20-40 need exactly that. What to do?
"Must have been the right place, but the wrong time." as Dr. John might say.
,Daniel
-
daniel - thanks for this conversation.. i see your point and i agree with you.. i re-read your comments and believe i understand the basis for them.. you have made some really good comments here that i haven't responded to, but the one i really liked from earlier is this:There seems to be an impetus to a greater realization of the systemic oneness of life; it is called "suffering"."
is it a situation of astrology verses philosophy and where do these 2 separate? i think on some level it is.. suffering may not have an immediate connection to astrology either, but it is a part of the human experience and people seek to find ways to address it in the various areas of their work and involvement... astrology seems to have come up with the idea that suffering is somehow connected to saturn.. perhaps it is, and perhaps it isn't... does suffering have an astrological dimension to it? i think this is the same question as does the soul or reincarnation have an astro dimension to it.. i think it does, but i am being philosophical when i say this as i know not everyone shares the same interest or inclination towards philosophy..
fascinating to read your background in nola and of course i love dr john and saw him earlier this year when i was in n.o..
i think everyone has to work out a system where these philosophical ideas are either captured in some astrological angle or not depending on their perspective... the whole idea of karma and reincarnation would seem to be a neptunian or 12th house end of cycle type dynamic... and of course the indian culture traditionally has had a strong focus on these themes, so it is no surprise that it is captured in the astrology they practice... as for western astrology, i think it is constantly changing and being open or not to new and different approaches... that is my hope anyway! thinking about what does not work in astrology is very useful from my pov as well... this really was an important part of what motivated me to start the thread... is it a case of ''we see what we want to see?"" i think that with astrology it often is the case... i like the idea of separating the subjective element that we bring to astrology to something more objective and that is why i ask some of the questions that i do... sure, we are all free to arrive at the conclusions we do on why something does or doesn't work in astrology, but is their something more universal in it all that we get glimpses of from time to time, but that our 'see what we want to see' subjectivity blocks us from seeing more fully? i think this is the case.. thanks again for this conversation..
-
James,
We are born, we age, we get sick and we die. The stuff in-between is transitory. There can be suffering on all levels of existence. I think it was Isabel Hickey who wrote that manifestation on lower elemental levels of existence is a function of unresolved conflicts or challenges on higher levels.
Perhaps freedom is the flip side to suffering. To a large degree we cause our own suffering due to the consequences of our own actions. We cause suffering to our physical, emotional and mental bodies, to our loved ones, to other beings. People try to set themselves up over others; they look to themselves and let their obligations go. Often, people are loathe to let go of the very thing which causes them suffering. It is the desire for material form that keeps the cycle of rebirth going. Part of that reason is based on the mind creating false dichotomies all the time, and then getting lost in the illusions of form. Astrology shows the complex of conditions and the potential consequences of positive and negative behavior to oneself and others over time. Perhaps that is where the will to be free can be applied.
I agree about Neptune being the generic principle for religion of the mystical kind, while Uranus has the throne for occultism. None of the planets by themselves can account for suffering, but they can delineate the conditions under which it can occur. What applies is the second law of thermodynamics - the tendency to disorder and to entropy.
I once heard that a religion is a philosophy that is lived. This could be a question of spontaneous realization of Oneness. Say what you mean. Mean what you say. Take a look at www.xstarian.com (http://www.xstarian.com) for more.
,Daniel
-
thanks for the beautiful comments daniel.. i will check out the site and get back to you on it... - james
-
Kathy, James, Daniel,
Glenn Perry addressed the issue of identical twins thus: Same genetics, same horoscope, different souls. Astrologer Louisa Gonzalez, who is skilled at many metaphysical methodologies, adds, "With the exception of George Foreman's kids, the names are different, too."
Don Borkowski
-
Kathy, James, Daniel,
Glenn Perry addressed the issue of identical twins thus: Same genetics, same horoscope, different souls. Astrologer Louisa Gonzales, who is skilled at many metaphysical methodologies, adds, "With the exception of George Foreman's kids, the names are different, too."
Don Borkowski
I have an extensive article on the differences between twins, even if they are born only a couple of minutes apart here: http://aliceportman.com/?p=120
This is entirely original work with a lot of research on twins behind it. I wrote an article on it for the FAA Journal and lectured on it to the Sydney Astrological Research Society. During that talk people came with the charts of twins and I did on the spot 'blind' readings using this system. To date all work I have done with this has met with 100% agreement.
Alice McDermott
-
Alice
Thank you for the link. That is a brilliant article.
Much appreciated
Tim
-
Hello Alice,
Yours is the clearest explanation of the differences between twins (to be seen astrologically) that I have read...
I have twin girls that were born 3 minutes apart. (Yeah, I was there with timepiece like a good astrologer) ;)
In their normal natal charts (using normal systems), 3 minutes difference in time makes for two charts almost exactly the same. Using methods that rely on precision birthtimes, there are, of course, differences to be seen as to WHEN various events might transpire, but no real way to distinguish between them in terms of their natal charts.
If I have done this correctly, your "Dwad" method shows quite a difference between the two. (By the way, they are extremely different people!) Below are both charts, merely to demonstrate how two people born extremely close to each other, still have quite different charts using your presented method...
(http://www.jamesalexander.de/Jamie.png)(http://www.jamesalexander.de/Stephanie.png)
Thanks for another brilliant idea. Might I ask what led you to study the dwadashamsha?
I would be curious (since you have experience with these methods) what "stands out" to your eyes between these two charts...
Peace
OD'dOnLifeItself
-
What an opportunity for field research in your own home, OD'd. The first thing I noticed is that your girls have inherited your strong Cancer sensitivity, dramatically (Leo Moon). Could you share their natal charts for comparison to the Dwad charts?
Not knowing anything about Dwads, the emphasized MC-Mars-Mercury looks like an 'active' distinction here. Have you researched related solar arcs to see if anything significantly different comes up between the two - for example, with SA Mercury = MC-Mars-ASC very early on? With Aries on the 6th, possibly a health, fitness, or accident-related difference between the two?
-
Hello pdw,
Thank you for your reply...
Also, thanks for referring to my "Cancer sensitivity" instead of my Cancerian over-sensitivity. ;)
As for my daughters...sure...
Stephanie
9/18/92 12:16 am
Tucson, AZ
Jamie
9/18/92 12:19 am
Re: "Have you researched related solar arcs to see if anything significantly different comes up..."
Pardon my intrusion into this topic, but your question necessitates a brief sideline. Isaac and I both went over quite a few lives, especially our own, using Solar Arcs across many major events...and though we did find some amazing correspondences, there were two distinct problems. The first was that they weren't reliable in the normal sense of the word. Some major events have starkly contrasting Solar Arcs (planetary symbolism) to the event. The second is that if we use orbs that are large (1° in a directed system moving approx. 5' per month is large), allow contrary symbolism to the inherent nature of the planets relative to the event, and allow house rulership networks to tie it all together, then it is very likely that "corresponding" Solar Arcs will be found merely by chance. ie. coincidence If we throw in midpoints as normally are used in Solar Arcs, we have added 624 more points on the ecliptic (78 points with their 8th harmonic counterparts). [I realize we don't use midpoints in which the activating planet is a part, so that the number is actually a bit less] The problem is that the corresponding aspects will tend to exist whether the correct birthtime is used or not.
In earlier times, I would have looked at each of the twin's life and found Solar Arcs that line up with events and had a self-deceiving "aha" moment. Now, I realize that chance will likely have "corresponding" planets in aspect, whether we take them from the actual birthtime or whether they are randomly thrown about the zodiac.
Alexander Marr studied MANY obscure methods... many of them, Progressed Sidereal Solar Returns, precessed Lunar Returns, Secondary Progressions, Topocentric Primary Directions, transits, etc. were found to be reliable. As for Solar Arcs, based on the longitudinal movement of the Sun along the ecliptic, he said they were a completely fictitious system. Please note his choice of expression. It was not that they were "somewhat unreliable" or "need to be approached with caution", etc. "Completely fictitious" does not leave a lot of room for translation. [Please contemplate the idea that if we are likely to (by chance) have correctly themed planets in aspect, then we will keep thinking we are seeing something special (the aspect), when in fact, mathematical probabilities indicates we are likely to no matter what.] Additionally, try and use Solar Arcs to blind-rectify a birthchart with known (but hidden) birthtime. You will likely come to appreciate more what I have just said...
So, the short answer to your question, is no, I haven't really examined their Solar Arcs as I don't find the system reliable. Additionally, I have very few dated events from their lives in order to do a very thorough examination. Still, I have a few... we could look at it publicly, if you'd like. Unlike some, I am open to changing my mind, if there's enough proof. ;)
Take care, pdw
Peace
OD'd
-
Thanks for the data, OD'd. Your preferred techiques are duly noted.
Best ahead
-
alice - thanks for the link to your article on twins.. it is a good way to get at some of the differences by focusing on them this way...
as i understand them, these vedic or indian systems are all based off harmonics, but they aren't communicated this way directly..instead they have different names like navamsha,dashamsha, and etc.... i believe the 'dwad' is something much the same where the cycle of the 12 signs is caught inside of one 30 degree wedge... i thought i would mention this as i think it is important that the connections between what indian astrologers have been looking at and what harmonics is more generally needs articulating..
od'd - regarding the use of solar arc directions i have noted a lack of clarity on their use by many astrologers who are otherwise quite professional in many respects.. i'm going to do a separate post on this when i get a chance.. noel tyl has devoted some of his energy to writing a good long book on this subject..perhaps you have read it? primary directions are another more generalized name for them... one can direct the ascendant, midheaven, vertex or any other point too, but the sun seems to have special significance in an astrology chart worth exploring which is essentially what 'solar' arcs are... secondary progressions were all the rage when i was first learning about different predictive techniques in astrology back in the 70's... as a consequence i and many others overlooked what i consider a much better system of prediction.. however, without a proper understanding of how they are used they will be essentially useless to a novice or seasoned astrologer unfamiliar with a few basic guidelines around their use...
-
Hello james m,
Re: "primary directions are another more generalized name for them..."
Solar Arcs are directions, but they aren't primary. Solar Arcs are moving along the ecliptic, in longitude. Primary Directions are based on the ROTATION of the Earth.
They are also different in usage.
I had a miraculous wedding to the woman of my dreams on Dec 3, 2000.
In Solar Arcs, that is expressed by Venus4,11 semisquare Neptune9 {???} in the Radix chart (the ONLY Solar Arc within three months either side of the event.) Or, in the Epoch chart, by MC square Mars10 {???}, which is three months before the event. (also the ONLY Solar Arc within three months either side of the event)
In Topocentric Primary Directions, it is expressed by the Moon's conjunction to the Node (once-in-a-lifetime aspect, correct to the day---not to imply that they normally mature in so precise of a timeframe) in the Epoch. Or, in the Radix chart, by the Ascendant conjunction to Venus (once-in-a-lifetime aspect, within 2 days)
The two systems are indeed quite different...
(http://www.jamesalexander.de/SolarArcs_TPDs.png)
Peace
OD'dOnLifeItself
-
od'd
thanks for your comments and in particular pointing out that solar arc directions are not primary directions.. you are correct on that.. they are secondary directions... it motivated me to read up on the distinction.. here is an interesting astrologer doing some interesting work that some might enjoy reading about.. http://www.astrosoftware.com/WimVanDamArticles.htm
regarding the timing of your marriage - thanks for sharing that.. it seems some of the solar arc directions for your marriage have been left out... i don't think of solar arc directions as a stand alone system and use them in conjunction with transits.. for anything pertaining to marriage in your personal chart i'd consider saturn as it rules the descendant in your chart, while also being in the 8th house area of the chart which i associate with the legal contract of marriage... this is covered by saturn and uranus as i see it.. venus is in a wide conj to uranus and a wide opposition to saturn natally.. venus always seems to have bearing on relationships in general so i'd include it in all this too.. neptune is part of a strong square to saturn, while being part of the important grand trine in your chart which includes sun/jupiter/neptune... perhaps i complicate things more then necessary by pointing this out.. nothing is ever simple, and really all the factors of a chart contribute to the different areas of a persons life... everything is bound up together. separating is necessary though for the purpose of highlighting certain events / actions / doings... perhaps others here would appreciate your birth data which i managed to figure out off your website..
the transits for this date have uranus at 17 aquarius 30, which is where solar arc sun is 17 leo 45.. transiting saturn is at 26 taurus 21 conj natal mars 25 taurus 57... solar arc venus is at 25 virgo 45 120 to these placements.. solar arc venus is also 45/135 the natal neptune/saturn square... meanwhile solar arc uranus is at 4 libra 37 - 45 to natal venus.. perhaps most interesting of all is solar arc jupiter at 19 aries 23 - on the same degree as natal venus and having been square your natal ascendant for the general year prior to this event... i believe you're married to a person from another country and wonder if this happened over the course of your or her traveling? there is also a very close solar arc midheaven at 8 taurus 01 (coming back to taurus and it's ruler venus) which is exactly trine pluto at 8 virgo 05.. now whether mars or pluto rules the 5th house/sign scorpio, so much is going on in this chart with the solar arcs it becomes a challenge to know what to stay most focused on!!!
i find the idea of working with epoch charts very challenging for these reasons: i am not inclined to think we can get at the '''exact''' time of conception.. i know this could be an opportunity to comment on polaris (again) but frankly i find the idea of having to resort to such a system at least 2 or 3 steps removed from what one can get via other astro techniques.. my approach is to consider transits with the aid of solar arc directions.. if you find relying on epoch charts a useful way to go - all the power to you on that! thanks again for pointing out your marriage date james (od'd) as i appreciate the opportunity to examine it more closely...
-
Hello Alice,
Yours is the clearest explanation of the differences between twins (to be seen astrologically) that I have read...
I have twin girls that were born 3 minutes apart. (Yeah, I was there with timepiece like a good astrologer) ;)
In their normal natal charts (using normal systems), 3 minutes difference in time makes for two charts almost exactly the same. Using methods that rely on precision birthtimes, there are, of course, differences to be seen as to WHEN various events might transpire, but no real way to distinguish between them in terms of their natal charts.
If I have done this correctly, your "Dwad" method shows quite a difference between the two. (By the way, they are extremely different people!) Below are both charts, merely to demonstrate how two people born extremely close to each other, still have quite different charts using your presented method...
(http://www.jamesalexander.de/Jamie.png)(http://www.jamesalexander.de/Stephanie.png)
Thanks for another brilliant idea. Might I ask what led you to study the dwadashamsha?
I would be curious (since you have experience with these methods) what "stands out" to your eyes between these two charts...
Peace
OD'dOnLifeItself
Hi OD'd
It is important to include the MC IC and antiVertex in all harmonic systems, including the duad system, so I have attached in PDF their charts ( I wish I could work out how to show charts the way you do, but for some reason it doesn't seem to work with me).
Stephanie has duad Jupiter-IC in trine to duad Ascendant. Jamie has duad Mercury-Mars square duad Ascendant and quincunx duad MC as well as duad Pluto, the ruler of the duad Ascendant, in trine. This would make considerable differences in the way they present and express themselves.
In addition Stephanie has duad Vertex in Leo, conjunct duad Moon, giving a public orientation and perhaps destined contacts with Lunar types of people. Jamie has duad Vertex in Virgo, giving a different destiny orientation - more towards a technical or service orientation. Jamie has duad Neptune conjunct duad IC, giving a different home orientation to Stephanie with her duad Jupiter conjunct duad IC.
Jamie has her duad MC conjunct natal Descendant, bringing an element of partnership into her career focus. In addition it is conjunct natal Uranus, suggesting a technical or unusual orientation to her career.
... and so on.
I have worked with duads in the Tropical system for most of my astrological life. I found a little book called "The 144 doors of the Zodiac" by Thyrza Escobar in 1975 and that stimulated me to a great deal of research, since then I have included this system in most of my work. I first officially presented the Duad System from a relationship point of view during a year long Relationship Course I ran in Sydney in 1994.
I got the idea that as the duads were a little mini zodiac within each sign of the zodiac, then duad degrees would probably work. For years I calculated them by hand and calculator and this was very time consuming. Graham Dawson of Esoteric Technologies took note of my request to incorporate duad charts in Solar Fire, and when he was setting up the Vedic section of Solar Fire he made it possible to calculate Tropical duads as well.
This opened the door for research on families that was not possible previously and has led me to formulate a 'genetic astrology' process that is truly fascinating.
I first got the idea of using duad charts to determine the differences in twins after a friend who raced greyhounds asked me if I could determine a winner from a litter of puppies that was about to be born. I got him to mark each puppy and record the time of birth. The puppy with duad Jupiter conjunct duad MC was a big winner in races. I realised that if this system was so accurate for multiple births in animals, then it would be accurate for multiple births in humans.
Only after many years of working with Tropical duads did I think to check them out in the Vedic system. I have barely used them in this system as I find the Tropical system is so accurate.
Hopefully I will be able to soon publish a book on The Duad System, where you can see the number of ways it can work very, very accurately.
Alice McDermott
-
One thing in the 2 twin charts is that from a sidereal view the Part of fortune,vertex and antivertex are in different signs and houses for each daughter.
-
alice - thanks for your post on the use of dwads to answer the question on the reading of twins charts.. i admire your flexibility in not getting stuck on having to do this in sidereal as well... that shows a degree of independence often missing in the astrology community.. i was reminded of this recently when the conversation veered onto t pat davis's work who was also a trailblazer...
i wish you every success with a book on this... james m
-
alice - thanks for your post on the use of dwads to answer the question on the reading of twins charts.. i admire your flexibility in not getting stuck on having to do this in sidereal as well... that shows a degree of independence often missing in the astrology community.. i was reminded of this recently when the conversation veered onto t pat davis's work who was also a trailblazer...
i wish you every success with a book on this... james m
Hi James M
I am not at all sure that the origin of duads was through Vedic astrology, I think their history goes so far back that they are part of the origin of both forms of astrology. They have a very, very long tradition in tropical astrology, but for some reason they seemed to have gone out of fashion lately.
There really is nothing new under the Sun! I was sure that my discovery of the duad degrees and duad charts was quite original until I read some work on a medieval astrology site, where they described ancient astrologers doing just as I was - calculating the duad degrees by hand and putting them in a chart.
Thank you for your good wishes. I suffer from a strange writers block that seems to now be intermittently lifting. I find the work I have done both fascinating and very precise, so I hope others will enjoy the book.
Alice McDermott
-
alice,
regarding the duads and a question of their origin, i agree.. i was trying to find the spot where i read on duads or dwads in john addeys book 'harmonics in astrology' which i am 3/4's of the way through but couldn't find the quote i was looking for...
however, from page 121 harmonics in astrology by john addey: "the general principle itself (harmoncis) is not at all new for not only is it embodied in the shodasavargas, for example, of hindu astrology, but to give another instance, the recent introduction in the west of the so called 90 degree dial and the 45 degree dial, popularized i believe by the ebertin school of astrology, is simply an application of this principle.. in other words the 90 degree dial (in which the planetary ppositions in each 90 degree are put into one circle) has the effect of showing relationships in the 4th harmonic and the 45 degree dial, similar in the 8th harmonic."
while one can't get the same positions in the 12th harmonic that are captured in the dwadashamsha, i note many similarities.. the degree position's are identical, but the signs are not necessarily the same.. the element remains the same for each, but the sign can differ.. the sun position is always identical however...
at any rate the approach you are taking overlapping the duad chart to the natal chart is one of the main techniques used in john addeys book, which if you have read it, it would make sense, but if not, you might find it more food for thought... thanks for the additional comments.. - james
-
i don't profess to understand why some of these overlap perfectly and are the very same chart, while others have the same degree and but different sign... i am sure someone more technically minded would be able to explain it...
vedic charts in the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th harmonic are different then a straight 2nd, 3rd or 4th harmonic chart...but vedic charts for 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 are identical to harmonic charts with these same numbers... vedic charts for 10 and 12 are different sign placements then charts for 10th and 12th harmonic, but all same degree position.. the 11th has 2 different charts in vedic- one identical to the 11th harmonic, while the other one same degree positions but different sign placement... interesting... is anyone well versed on this stuff and know why the differences in sign pop up, but otherwise most all of these vedic charts have the same degree positions, excluding 2nd, 3rd and 4th vedic charts? i'm curious!
-
lorenzo - reading over your comments were helpful.. the duad/dwad/ or dwadashamsha chart that alice is working with puts emphasis on zero aries... a harmonic chart spreads it around evenly.. call me simple minded, but i think that is the major difference between some of these charts and how they are gotten...perhaps this explains the other shodasavargas that weren't the same as the harmonic numbers they are connected with.. the 'dwadashamsha' puts emphasis on zero aries and is created out of this emphasis while the 12th harmonic chart doesn't include this special emphasis but treats the chart evenly without a start position...
example of how a harmonic chart gets the degree/sign positions using the 3rd harmonic as example...
a 3rd harmonic is essentially multiplying a degree position in the 360 by 3 and subtracting 360 (or multiples of 360) off this number to get back in the range 0-360... for example - 22 leo = 142/360... 142 x 3 = 426... 426 -360= 66... 22 leo is 6 gemini in the 3rd harmonic... etc. etc..
the dwadashamsha chart is not gotten this way...the 12 harmonic is gotten the same way as described in the above example... i find it interesting how the vedic equivalents for 5-9 harmonics are the same, but how they differ for 2-4 and 10-12, with the exception of one of the 2 11th ones... interesting stuff either way.. if i think about these things long enough i understand the basis for them... thanks for your perspective on these issues as well as the history behind some of this too.. james
-
Hallo guys, allow me to make some short comments...
I suggest Astrology does not work with soul or reincarnation, because they are concepts that have no basis in astrology.....
I think that astrology's concept is about circles and recycling. After all, we, astrologers, work upon a Zodiac Cycle, don't we? Astrology says that everything is about rhythm and cycles and that idea I believe agrees with the concept of reincarnation.
I had a miraculous wedding to the woman of my dreams on Dec 3, 2000.
In Solar Arcs, that is expressed by Venus4,11 semisquare Neptune9 {???} in the Radix chart (the ONLY Solar Arc within three months either side of the event.) Or, in the Epoch chart, by MC square Mars10 {???}, which is three months before the event. (also the ONLY Solar Arc within three months either side of the event)
Didn't you notice that your solar arc Sun conjucted natal Venus on your wedding year 2000?...
-
while one can't get the same positions in the 12th harmonic that are captured in the dwadashamsha, i note many similarities.. the degree position's are identical, but the signs are not necessarily the same.. the element remains the same for each, but the sign can differ.. the sun position is always identical however...
at any rate the approach you are taking overlapping the duad chart to the natal chart is one of the main techniques used in john addeys book, which if you have read it, it would make sense, but if not, you might find it more food for thought... thanks for the additional comments.. - james
Hi James m
The duad charts are derived from dividing each sign into twelve, two and a half degree divisions, making mini signs of the zodiac within each sign. Each sign starts the duad with its own sign and then progresses in order, finishing with the sign before. e.g. Aquarius duads start with the first 2.5 degrees as Aquarius and finish with the last 2.5 degrees as Capricorn duad. The first 2.5 degrees of Pisces is the Pisces duad and the last 2.5 degrees is the Aquarius duad ... and so on.
Dwads that are based on the first 2.5 degrees as always Aries, the second always Taurus ..etc., are basically the 12th harmonic chart.
To help with the explanation I call the first method the duads and the second dwads.
The degrees in both charts will be the same, but unless the zodiac sign is Aries, the duad and dwad signs will be different as the duads are not 12th harmonic charts.
I purchased John Addey's "Harmonics in Astrology" when it first came out in 1976. If Aquarians had heroes he would be mine as I feel he has given us the very basis of astrology. I have spoken about his work at numerous lectures, workshops and classes.
When I was in Sydney I met a man who used to drive John Addey to Astrology meetings in England. John would expound on his then theory, but the man took no notice at all, he had no idea of the greatness of what was being developed. I was filled with the greenest of envy as I deeply wished I had been the driver, or even a participant in those meetings. The formulation of the theory of Harmonics in Astrology was groundbreaking and took a great deal of discussion, work and research. John was a cripple and I am told he was a rather humble man who never thought of himself as brilliant and freely shared his discoveries. He was born June 15, 1920, at 8:15 AM GDT, in Barnsley, England, 53N34; 1W28. He died on March 27, 1982, in London at only 62 years of age.
The Midheaven Extension Method clearly shows his destined career, with Venus and Sun conjunct the antiVertex and Mars trine.
Alice McDermott
-
Hello Alice.
About harmonics. I find them fascinating, but clear this for me. In each harmonic(7th, 22nd, whatever) the planets are found on new placements, considering the natal chart. What are we exactly doing to find those placements, why those exact positions and not, for example, walk everything 1º ahead, or 5º behind? I read about this and i even know the calculations requiered, but i would like to hear an explanation from you. I hope i made myself clear.
I am not quite sure what you mean by this question?
People born near the same time of day in the same place can often show quite similar interests but one might stand out - for example all these people may show skill in music but one becomes a famous singer. Different harmonics are used to determine more finely tuned characteristics in the person., so the fifth and even more finely tuned harmonics of the famous singer would probably show relevant angular connections. For example, Noel Tyl was a well known Wagnerian singer and his 5th harmonic Pluto is conjunct his natal Scorpio Vertex in the 5th house. Scorpio is very prominent in the charts of the singers whom I have researched.
Then, 2 more things. The first are the daily age harmonics. So, imagining that i am 33 years old, and that it has been 153 days since my solar return, for me to find my daily age harmonic, i would have to do the harmonic of 33,35; more or less, right?
Daily Age Harmonics require very precise calculations and an exact location to be correct. 'More or less' won't work.
I have detailed the calculation of harmonics on my website here: http://aliceportman.com/?p=248 and Daily Age Harmonics here: http://aliceportman.com/?p=274. This page shows how to calculate Daily Age Harmonics with the help of a calculator as well as with Solar Fire.
And finally, in my harmonic tests, i always use Placidus, and so i find their harmonic position, of the house cusps, as i do to find the planets, regardless if the 3rd house stays after the 8th, for example. But i see the majority of astrologers just use equal houses in the harmonics, wich i find pathetic. I think you should use my technique, the results are quite revealing. My question is, am i the only person who does this?
For years I have used the Daily Age Harmonics of the relevant house cusps in a number of systems to determine the correct house system for an individual. I have presented this technique on a number of forums, including this one, and have met with a deafening and often bewildered silence.
As Solar Fire was kind enough to include harmonic calculations facilities I asked them if they could include the harmonic calculations for house cusps, but as this takes quite a bit of work and there is not all that much interest they haven't done this to date, so I still have to calculate them with the aid of my calculator.
Harmonic house cusps can be all over the zodiac, so it is not possible to use them in a wheel - you could have the 3rd house cusp in the 8th segment of the wheel, so astrologers use the equal house wheel to place the harmonic planets. I make a note of the harmonic house cusps along the side of the chart.
Have a nice day.
Thank you. Today is the start of our great Spring Festivals - the Australian Football League Grand Final - so I hope to enjoy the day a great deal.
Alice
-
alice,
thanks for the additional comments.. i now understand the distinction you are making between duads and dwads.. they are both based off the idea behind harmonics as i see it in spite of the difference in the sign placement..
thanks for the fascinating read on john addeys influence on your astro pathway and the story of meeting his driver! it is fun to contemplate what might have been! thanks for his birth data as well.. i note 8th house uranus as a type of handle planet for the rest of his chart.. chiron is conj his midheaven, while uranus is in a 5th harmonic to his midheaven which would probably explain a good part of his professional activities.. it is interesting to see chiron conj midheaven in what is thought of as a trailblazing sign.. he periodically talks in this book about finding a wider acceptance of astrology which the scientific community has essentially shunned.. perhaps this sensitivity is coming out of the chiron position as i do think of chiron as a type of bridge between saturn on the one hand and uranus on the other.. of course saturn is also in a 5th harmonic relationship to his midheaven and we are told regularly of the association of saturn/uranus to astrology, so yes - a direct link to his midheaven is here for folks who consider such things as 5th harmonic aspects!
i note the year addey was born - 1920 is the same year as fellini... i have always enjoyed fellinis movies and think the jupiter/neptune conj in leo is a marked feature of his film making... in addeys chart this conj is rising perhaps indicative of his ability to grab something very tangible from his imagination and run with it.. imagination is a great watershed of ideas if we are open to it.. john addey certainly changed the face of astrology in many ways and his work has not really been taken up and carried on in any significant way in the astrology community as i see it.. i find this a real shame.. instead the desire to go back into the past seems to have taken a stronger hold on many astrologers imagination... saturn might look back and forward like the god janus, but it is uranus that makes way for the future which is what john addey was really advocating and i do think it is reflected in his chart... alice, thanks for your comments as always..
i just want to add that i note on page 165/166 of his book harmonics in astrology he discusses the idea of age harmonics.. it is very speculative but this idea is introduced in this book as well, about 35 years before it seems to be reaching a wider audience.. i find that fascinating, in spite of the reservations that have been expressed towards the use of age harmonics..
-
jupiterios - o'dd likes to use converse transits and directions.. perhaps he has noted a few of them for dec 3 2000 like t neptune conj venus, or t sun conj saturn as well as t pluto conj sun! in the converse solar arcs sa neptune is 45 radix venus and out by 1'.. converse sa ascendant is at an angle of 67 degrees and 16 minutes.. if one works with 16th harmonic aspects, 22.30 angles start appearing and this is one of them.. however even without the use of these, converse sa sun conj natal vertex tells us the important role the vertex plays in relationships in general and perhaps this one in particular...
-
So you're saying duads and dwads are different? I thought they were the same. Like color and colour depending on where you originate from.
And what of bounds? I've googled and googled trying to find a good graphic for bounds but haven't been able to find one. Where, like the dwads, there are divisions within the 30 degrees of a sign: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn divisions.
IE when looking at Aries....the 1st 5 degrees of Aries are Jupiter bounds then 6-12 degrees are within Venus' bounds, then 12-20 Mercury, 20-25 Mars and the rest Saturn. I believe the words bounds and terms are often interchangable too or else I totally lost the concept of what was being told to me.
I can tell from looking at a Hellenistic chart where those divisions are visually divided.
-
Duads etc.
I've invited Alice McDermott to write a guest essay on the duad-dwad concept and much, much more. She has finished the essay in her crystal-clear style; the essay is marvelous and it will be posted in the "Analytical Techniques" department on September 30.
Noel Tyl
-
So you're saying duads and dwads are different? I thought they were the same. Like color and colour depending on where you originate from.
Yes, you are right Amy the spelling has always been a bit arbitrary, often depending upon your teacher and location. For my own convenience in explaining the difference, I decided to use 'duads' to describe the first method of division and 'dwads' to describe the second. I always point out that this is my choice so people don't get too confused.
And what of bounds? I've googled and googled trying to find a good graphic for bounds but haven't been able to find one. Where, like the dwads, there are divisions within the 30 degrees of a sign: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn divisions.
IE when looking at Aries....the 1st 5 degrees of Aries are Jupiter bounds then 6-12 degrees are within Venus' bounds, then 12-20 Mercury, 20-25 Mars and the rest Saturn. I believe the words bounds and terms are often interchangable too or else I totally lost the concept of what was being told to me.
I can tell from looking at a Hellenistic chart where those divisions are visually divided.
I am surprised you can't find a graphic of 'bounds' - yes 'terms' is another name for them. Solar Fire makes a lovely mouse mat with Terms; Joys; Faces; Triplicities; Dignities, Exaltations, Detriments and Falls all clearly presented so it might be handy for you to get one of these: www.esotech.com.au
This is not my favourite form of astrology so I haven't worked with this concept very much at all.
Alice McDermott
-
i think this 12 sign story is an old way to describe ideas on cycles.. i think it has become quite rigid and not many are bothering to note any of this... as a consequence we appear to have a fixation on anything to do with the number 12 - duad, dwad, and etc etc..
in reading john addeys other book ( a compilation) -"harmonic anthology", he makes a lot of interesting comments on the difference between western and indian astrological techniques noting how in the east they've maintained a connection to harmonics, however opaque and in or out of sync with harmonic theory it is..
here is a quote from page 28
"we usually tend to think of the signs of the zodiac as being like twelve sectors or 'boxes' placed end to end along the ecliptic.. when we move out of one we are immediately in the next one and apart from the fact that we notice certain degree areas seem to have a curious connection to certain things, we generally regard the 'influence' of each sign as being uniform throughout - i.e. once the sun gets into aries it has a constant aries quality until it passes into taurus.. the possible exceptions to this are that some people believe that there is a certain amount of 'merging' at the end of one sign and the beginning of the next-and of course the presumed existence of decanate and similar influences. but suppose we stop thinking about 'boxes' and start thinking about waves-what then?"
i think it is hard to unlearn things... most people learning astrology get shown an approach to astrology which is built up around a 'box' type of approach as opposed to a 'wave' type of approach.. these are just some observations i thought i would share that i think are relevant and worth talking about..
-
the zodiac has a long history as do many basic astrological ideas...
what would happen if someone came along to alter or upend many of the cherished thoughts and notions we have on astrology? this might be similar to earlier astrologers/astronomers who had the audacity to point out the earth was not the center of the universe. here is a link which might trigger this thought process some..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism
i was mostly trying to remember who it was that said the earth is not flat, or that the earth rotates round the sun.. the idea of the world being a sphere has been around for 3000 or so years anyway but the idea of the earth rotating round the sun got galileo excommunicated which was considered a serious thing at the time!
the reason i bring this up has much to do with my continued reading of john addeys work.. i believe many traditional ideas that are expressed in both western and indian astrology continue to plague astrologers more then anything else.. i say this from reading various threads on topics popular to astrologers, especially those just starting out on a journey of learning.. many of these topics most astrologers and those interested in astrology never question..
i see john addeys work as opening up some very serious questions on many of the traditional ways astrologers have typically understood astrology, the 'wave' verses 'box' idea is a good introduction to some of the differences that i think deserve much more consideration then most give it.. some of the systems in use in 'vedic' (what i remember calling 'indian' astrology back in the 70's) are directly related to wave as opposed to box type thinking... as i pointed out in some earlier comments whether you call the chart the navamsha, or the 9th harmonic - they are identical charts (excluding the sidereal/tropical issue).. their interpretation has a long history in vedic astrology, and virtually none in western astrology.. i find this all so very interesting but to anyone reading this not familiar with some of these ideas it might be very unsettling as well. perhaps the easiest thing for most is remain settled in traditional ways of doing things within popular astrology and not question certain coincidences like this one between the navamsha and 9th harmonic chart..
either way, it's no surprise to see the pronounced uranus/saturn opposition in john addeys chart..
perhaps it is more fun to learn these ancient systems to astrology then it is to consider them having come from some dark age steeped in superstition more then anything else... i am sure there are parallels with religion and etc here too which could be made..
if astrologers don't know the basis for what they are believing in or observing then much of it will continue to be based on ignorance more then anything else..a coincidence is nothing more then that, although i have found astrologers in general are unwilling to consider this.. i am as guilty as the next astrologer in all of this.. don't consider any of my comments as pointing a finger or challenging anyone here other then myself or anyone who remains open to learning more then they already thought they knew!
-
perhaps it is more fun to learn these ancient systems to astrology then it is to consider them having come from some dark age steeped in superstition more then anything else...
We live in a civilization that is still firmly based on the ideas of Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. That triumvirate paved the way for the Hellenistic astrologers who created western astrology upon a Babylonian foundation. Through observation and computational skills the Mesopotamians and later Hellenistic astrologers did pretty impressively in recording and forecasting planetary positions, periods of retrogradation, eclipses, etc. To dismiss ancient astrology as “having come from some dark age steeped in superstition more then anything else” perhaps shows the darkness in your own knowledge of exactly what astrology is, how it was developed and how it can be used. ::) Beyond the more scientific and observational practice, they gave us a very useful and vivid system of images to work with – imagery that is still going strong two thousand years later.
About those boxes you don't seem to like – Yes, modern astrology has extensively developed meanings for the signs, making a list of keywords that we then try to remember. We now say that Cancer is the sign of such things as mothering, nurturing and family life. We say that 'Cancers' are emotional, perhaps shy, guarded, good homemakers, maybe prone to emotional scenes, or whatever else. We can regain a more flexible and workable system if we drop the reliance on those keywords and go back to the ancient idea that the 12 signs are derived from the 3 modes and 4 elements. The boxes soften up and more easily form to new shapes when we start working with the qualities assigned to the signs, such as Cancer having the qualities of cardinal, water, negative, feminine, nocturnal, phlegmatic, commanding, mute or slow of voice, fertile – with a few more thrown in for good measure. We get a much more interesting and changeable picture when we describe someone with a rising sign that is actively cardinal, yet negative; slow of voice and productively fertile or fruitful. Such a procedure gives us elements that we then must combine in varying degrees of emphasis depending on the chart in hand. It gives us the art of creating with astrology. Too often now astrologers just babble off a list of traits and characteristics: Box Astrology.
if astrologers don't know the basis for what they are believing in or observing then much of it will continue to be based on ignorance more then anything else..
Which is exactly why so many have been going back to the ancient astrological writings and methods! Maybe you belong with the traditional astrology crowd. ;)
-
kort - thanks for your reply... i don't dispute my own ignorance.. i always try to keep that valuable insight close at hand.. it can work as a means of warding off the possibility of being swallowed in much of the crazy stuff i see and read regularly on astrology boards and on astrology in general..
studying astro-history to expand ones understanding is a great idea.. i don't think that is what many of the proponents of hellenistic astrology are actually doing, so much as gloaming onto an ideal shrouded in mystery, never to be known fully or understood in the context they worked within... i prefer to move forward as opposed to backward and work with something that i understand that also works... the insights of astrologers from the deep past is forever lost and reflects a different world as i see it..
i see the triplicities and elements as coming straight out of a philosophers head.. i am not convinced of their critical relevance to astrology, but i understand the central role they have played in astrology from an historical pov... i definitely don't belong with the traditional astrology crowd.. i am looking for a balance between saturn and uranus, as opposed to a domination of saturn over uranus which is how i see this clash of old verses new at present...
i have recently read a few books that are probably from this hellenistic period.. i will list them - the houses by deborah houlding, temperament (astrology's forgotten key) by dorian gieseler greenbaum, and a few books translated by robert hand - whole sign houses, the oldest house system and 'night and day' - planetary sect in astrology... i even reviewed ptolemy's tetrabiblos in the past year, but overall find i have a much stronger interest in what i view as more cutting edge and relevant - jim lewis's work on astrocartography, which would really include the work of a number of others - david meadows, steve cozzi, martin davis and etc... i continue to believe ebertin's work which i think is referred to as cosmobiology and the use of the 90 degree wheel and etc which have a relatively recent history in relation to hellenistic astrology are much more relevant and exciting personally... this is not to say much can't be learned by spending time studying what was going on in the hellenistic period.. it just isn't my cup of cake! thanks for the conversation...
-
i also hold in high regard the work of john addey, david hamblin and others who have attempted move astrology into the present age through the use of harmonics which may be the basis for so many of the popular tenets of astrology - signs, houses, and aspects specifically... aside from developing a language around harmonics for use in western astrology john addey seems to have unraveled what i believe is the basis for much of the shodasavargas that are popular with indian astrologers.. perhaps this is common knowledge among those who use these various charts, whether they be dwads, navamsas or etc.. the french couples research work also comes to mind when i think of moving astrology forward.. i think it's hard for astrologers to ignore francoise and michel gauquelin, but then it is also difficult to integrate their findings with much of the thinking popular with astrologers which i believe has much to do with astrologers not wanting to have popularly held beliefs in use upended by statistical research...
-
i see the triplicities and elements as coming straight out of a philosophers head..
??? Sort of like delineating planetary interrelationships with charts based on such numbers as 2, 4, and 8? Someone somewhere thought that those up and gave meaning to them. Scientific laws give us planetary orbits. They don't give us harmonic astrology charts.
i have recently read a few books that are probably from this hellenistic period.. i will list them - the houses by deborah houlding, temperament (astrology's forgotten key) by dorian gieseler greenbaum, and a few books translated by robert hand. . .
Those people are currently with us – they aren't from the Hellenistic period. :o The Houlding and Greenbaum books have plenty of astrological history in them, discussing Hellenistic, medieval, and modern astrology. They may very loosely qualify as 'Hellenistic' works in that they are about Western astrology, which is still a solidly Hellenistic creation with later Persian and Arabic additions. To some extent, so is the so-called Vedic astrology of India – which is imported Hellenistic astrology with added native Indian, Persian and Arabic elements.
i continue to believe ebertin's work which i think is referred to as cosmobiology and the use of the 90 degree wheel and etc which have a relatively recent history in relation to hellenistic astrology are much more relevant and exciting personally...
The 90-degree dial focuses on conjunctions, oppositions, and squares. Nothing new there – the Hellenistic astrologers were way ahead of Mr. Ebertin. They considered those to be the strongest aspects.
i am looking for a balance between saturn and uranus, as opposed to a domination of saturn over uranus which is how i see this clash of old verses new at present...
The old is now the new. Modern astrologers, who mostly like to think of themselves as belonging to the new, have been marketing books and staging conferences for some decades now. They are the 'establishment' astrologers. The upstarts are the astrologers who have been going back to the astrological beginnings in search of clarity, explanation and possible helpful techniques. They've gone back to the old because they are fed up with the vagueness and confusion of modern astrology – along with its never-ending new techniques and illuminating insights du jour. They are people who were driven bonkers by such confusingly murky ideas as 1st house = Aries = Mars, which they've now learned is a relatively recent idea that crept in and made a mess of things through such catchy slogans as 'The Astrological Alphabet'. ;D
I came back to add: You will find very few astrologers who claim to practice a purely Hellenistic astrology. It's understood that new and useful elements have entered. And, for good or ill, we've all been influenced by our civilization's priests of psychology. But I do agree that among the traditionalist crowd there can often be an attitude of 'Give me that old-time religion'. Some don't realize – or won't accept – that we can go back only to a certain extent. On the other hand, maybe we should keep in mind the possibility that we can also move ahead only to a certain extent. After too many changes we end up with a completely new type of astrology that has probably been sloppily pieced together. Since we like to think of ourselves as having the freedom to choose and decide what works and what doesn't, what is significant and what isn't, we undoubtedly will end up with countless individual astrological systems. And that takes us back to your opening paragraph of reply #60:
"i always try to keep that valuable insight close at hand.. it can work as a means of warding off the possibility of being swallowed in much of the crazy stuff i see and read regularly on astrology boards and on astrology in general.. "
There is a very good reason for honoring, respecting and following a traditional astrological foundation. :)
-
The old is now the new. Modern astrologers, who mostly like to think of themselves as belonging to the new, have been marketing books and staging conferences for some decades now. They are the 'establishment' astrologers. The upstarts are the astrologers who have been going back to the astrological beginnings in search of clarity, explanation and possible helpful techniques. They've gone back to the old because they are fed up with the vagueness and confusion of modern astrology – along with its never-ending new techniques and illuminating insights du jour. They are people who were driven bonkers by such confusingly murky ideas as 1st house = Aries = Mars, which they've now learned is a relatively recent idea that crept in and made a mess of things through such catchy slogans as 'The Astrological Alphabet'. ;D
Oh Kort!
There is nothing confused or murky about 1st house = Aries = Mars! Just check out any family line. The one I am looking at today has the father with Sun in Taurus, the daughter with the Sun in the 2nd house and the grandson with Sun conjunct Venus.
This same family has the mother with the Moon in Cancer, the daughter with the Moon in the 4th house and the grandson with Cancer rising.
In any family that has natural births there is a consistent thread of sign, planet, house running through the generations. Medically assisted births can throw out this consistency - particularly cesarean births, which often completely destroy it.
Just because the Hellenistic astrologers didn't know this doesn't mean it is false astrology. Astrology doesn't stand still, it has discoveries and new techniques just like medicine or astronomy ... and almost all other disciplines available in the world today.
There is nothing at all vague and confusing with modern astrology, it works or it doesn't, if it doesn't work it is discarded. I would go out of business if I wasn't accurate, but I have been a professional astrologer for 40 years and so have a few others on this forum. My astrology is not peppered with vague statements or personal comforting, I give dates, times and teach my clients how to follow the flow of energy in their natal and current charts.
Most medievalists have a quarrel with psychological astrology which they do find vague and confusing, but that is just their cast of mind. I too don't like the astrology of a few 'psychic' or 'psychological' astrologers but that is my personal taste, they have a different caste of mind to me but that doesn't make either they or me 'better' or 'right'.
After too many changes we end up with a completely new type of astrology that has probably been sloppily pieced together. Since we like to think of ourselves as having the freedom to choose and decide what works and what doesn't, what is significant and what isn't, we undoubtedly will end up with countless individual astrological systems.
Yes, we are in the process of forming a completely new type of astrology. Our minds are presently stretching to understand the universe on a much deeper level than was available in the past few thousand years, and this will bring a deeper understanding of astrology itself. One of the recent major breakthroughs was the beginning of understanding of the harmonic basis of astrology as first presented by John Addey.
I am a bit sad that you have so little faith in the intelligence of your fellow astrologers that you feel the end result will be 'sloppily pieced together'.
Astrology is a huge and vast subject that has room for all the various minds and realities of all the peoples in the world, so it is certain that different cultures will approach this subject from different perspectives - as they always have in the past. These different perspectives add richness to our overall understanding of this field.
Part of this process is developing an understanding of the structures of the astrology of the ancients and for this the work of Project Hindsight has been invaluable, but to just stop there and not incorporate new discoveries seems to me to be very limiting to astrology itself. A lot of the astrology of these eras are just not applicable to Western civilizations, though they still are to many in Middle Eastern cultures as these haven't changed much over the centuries.
From my reading of your posts it seems to me you have a mind that craves structure, tradition and 'fate' so Hellenistic astrology is a good fit for you. This doesn't make astrologers who don't have this kind of mind wrong in their own understanding of astrology and its applications.
Alice McDermott
-
Hi Alice,
In any family that has natural births there is a consistent thread of sign, planet, house running through the generations. Medically assisted births can throw out this consistency - particularly cesarean births, which often completely destroy it.
??? You've got me puzzled with that one! Aren't pretty much all births these days 'medically assisted'? With the requirement of a 'natural birth' you seem to be acknowledging your experience of a certain unreliability with the house connections. And then there's the matter of which house system to use – a house system change can switch planetary house positions. I know that you find that different house systems work for different people, that individually our lives respond to a particular house system. Well, between switching house systems for different individuals and believing ourselves to be qualified to claim whether a hospital birth 45 years ago was natural or too medically assisted, we've got a pretty good way of fine-tuning the planetary house positions to display what we're looking for! If the house positions don't match we can always say that there was too much pesky medical assistance. ;)
A family connection of sign and ruling planets (and I would include the exaltation rulerships) – Yes, must of us have witnessed it. The house positions . . . there will be some connections. After all, there are only 12 houses. But a hard look will show that it just isn't much of a snug fit.
Most medievalists have a quarrel with psychological astrology which they do find vague and confusing, but that is just their cast of mind.
It goes beyond the relatively small world of astrology. Many in the whole of society find the practice of modern psychology to be of questionable value – and often questionable ethics (servants of the pharmaceutical companies). Modern astrology has linked itself to a study and profession which is slowly but surely coming under closer scrutiny.
I too don't like the astrology of a few 'psychic' or 'psychological' astrologers but that is my personal taste, they have a different caste of mind to me but that doesn't make either they or me 'better' or 'right'.
You know, we are supposed to be very accepting and non-judgmental these days. But at what point are we just being foolish? When is our necessary sense of discrimination stifled by the societal pressure to be 'nice'? All ideas are not good, useful or correct. We need to be able to say 'That is utter nonsense!' I remember hearing many years ago that playing with a Ouija Board was harmful because it allowed any passing entity to enter and have equal say – and power (who knows? :-\). Perhaps it's a similar situation if we passively let any voice with its message carry equal weight. Sure, we probably should let the voice speak, but equally surely we must be allowed to speak our criticism of what that voice has said.
I am a bit sad that you have so little faith in the intelligence of your fellow astrologers that you feel the end result will be 'sloppily pieced together'.
Nearly every astrologer and student of astrology has a computer and an Internet connection. Far fewer have adequate knowledge of astrology's foundation and underlying principles. Even fewer have the ability to create a whole system of interwoven symbolism and techniques that could be effectively used by more than one person. We most likely would end up with an astrology for each individual person.
But it does make sense. Modern astrology has been busy coming up with new ways of saying 'Yes, indeed, you are intuitive, kind, and a healer'. After so much effort has been put into giving people the chance to hear more about themselves we might as well let them take over the show by coming up with their very own astrology. Whatever. ::)
Yes, we are in the process of forming a completely new type of astrology. Our minds are presently stretching to understand the universe on a much deeper level than was available in the past few thousand years, and this will bring a deeper understanding of astrology itself.
Understand the universe? You seem to be confusing scientific understanding and its knowledge bank of facts and 'laws' with deep penetration into the human mind/spirit/soul and its perceptions of and creational involvement with the universe. That's the realm of astrology.* There's a huge world-wide resource base of mythology, philosophy and religious experience that has already provided gateways. We don't need future developments in science. The paradigm of science and its constant looking to the future and discarding of the past as outworn has deeply entered the modern mind.** It leads to a constant hunger and dissatisfaction with what is already present. That which exists already can be carefully added to and still retain its integrity and usefulness.
*However, we would do well to keep our feet firmly planted and focus our creational energy on the world around us. This flying off to glorious heights is often present in these discussions of the supposedly necessary progress and development of astrology.
**I'm referring here to the fact that science views itself as always progressing, advancing. The science of 2 years ago is outdated; that of 20 years ago is ancient and outworn. Science seldom looks back for inspiration and ideas about what it should investigate and how to proceed. It sometimes builds upon, but often replaces, what came before. It always looks ahead with confidence in gaining more knowledge (The scientist as the ever-hungry consumer?). Astrology, philosophy and the arts can and do look back at what came before in order to gain inspiration and ideas for future creation.
-
kort - it's interesting how one could perhaps make a parallel with what you refer to as "our civilization's priests of psychology" and a previous civilization's priests of philosophy... i think there's a parallel! to be clear, i'm fine with philosophy and psychology but sorting out where the astrology is in it all can get a bit confusing!
i like the simple parallel alice makes, but once again it can create confusion.. are there no differences between the 1st hours, aries and mars? i think there are... my own impression on the parallel with 1st=aries=mars train of thought has more to do with ideas around the first harmonic.. in many ways mixing these ideas all up in a blender - (pureed astrology for the newbie) brings one back to what it is we are looking at when considering a astro chart... planets have characteristics.. angles on a chart are very relevant and central to astrology. house systems are full of conjecture as i see it. we have oodles of options to go wrong with all the options available on how to read a chart... the zodiac difference sidereal verses tropical or the plenitude of house system options are only 2 of many examples where it is obvious to everyone who decides to look even casually into astrology that astrology is full of potholes and quagmires for a person new to astrology, or an advanced astrology student who continues to maintain an open mind to it all... sure, it is far easier to close the door on any number of ideas revolving round astrology and in a way it simplifies it all that much more, but i think this option is the least attractive personally..
what is it we are missing and falling to see in all of this? is there something that runs through all of astrology that we have overlooked? i think there is.. until we get down to finding out what it is, i think astrology will not be used in a way that is up to its fullest potential.. that said, we will continue on with what we have, which is like a craftsperson working with a worn tool that doesn't quite do the job... maybe that is a poor analogy, as their are so many ways astrology can be used and perhaps more then anything else it is the interaction with others that is central to it all with astrology coming into all of this only after that central fact!
on another note - alice thanks for the article on duads/dwads today.. i enjoyed reading it..
ps i have posted this prior to reading korts latest comments...
-
Hi Alice,
??? You've got me puzzled with that one! Aren't pretty much all births these days 'medically assisted'?
Almost certainly in the USA, but not so much in other countries. The disruption of natural cycles through interference of the birth process can often disconnect the person from their family energy flow. Hence the strong feeling of 'not really belonging' that many people describe.
This becomes crystal clear if you study astrological genetic flow throughout the family line.
With the requirement of a 'natural birth' you seem to be acknowledging your experience of a certain unreliability with the house connections.
Oh Kort, the study of astrology is the study of the manifestation of natural cycles within the solar system and on earth. If you interfere with these cycles of course systems will work inaccurately.
If you study the astrological flow of a family line that has had natural births, or often even births that are through forceps deliveries, you will easily see planet, sign and house connections between all members of the family, including siblings, grandparents, aunts and uncles. This is one of the ways I showed my beginner pupils how accurate astrology can be. They have all been fascinated to see these strong connections.
And then there's the matter of which house system to use – a house system change can switch planetary house positions. I know that you find that different house systems work for different people, that individually our lives respond to a particular house system. Well, between switching house systems for different individuals and believing ourselves to be qualified to claim whether a hospital birth 45 years ago was natural or too medically assisted, we've got a pretty good way of fine-tuning the planetary house positions to display what we're looking for! If the house positions don't match we can always say that there was too much pesky medical assistance. ;)
For heavens sake Kort, you must think I am a fool. I'm not, but I am an expert in genetic astrology throughout a family line. If you check planet, sign and house connections it is usually rather easy to see which house systems are accurate for a family.
I generally ask my clients to check with their mother as to their birth process. If this is not possible I do not include that client in my research.
A family connection of sign and ruling planets (and I would include the exaltation rulerships) – Yes, must of us have witnessed it. The house positions . . . there will be some connections. After all, there are only 12 houses. But a hard look will show that it just isn't much of a snug fit.
Absolutely wrong! A hard look shows there is a snug fit. I have done the work, you haven't.
There are only twelve signs as well and in your astrology, seven planets, but even with these planetary limitations you would find a consistent flow.
You know, we are supposed to be very accepting and non-judgmental these days. But at what point are we just being foolish? When is our necessary sense of discrimination stifled by the societal pressure to be 'nice'?
Well, first of all, I am yet to find a medieval astrologer who is 'nice'. These people have developed a reputation of being fundamentalists thugs through their attacks on modern astrology.
Nor am I particularly 'nice' when it comes to defending astrology. To my regret, I have lost my temper in the past and absolutely flattened scientists who criticized to my face a subject of which they knew nothing.
That being said, astrologers all understand that people see the world through a variety of lenses, we have twelve signs of the zodiac, twelve houses, numerous aspects, all describing the different realities of human beings. Therefore those who are drawn to astrology will approach the subject according to their own perception of reality. One perception is not 'better' than another. Astrologers listening to rules, theories, ideas and research can make up their own mind what they prefer.
All ideas are not good, useful or correct. We need to be able to say 'That is utter nonsense!'
Sure you can, but no one will listen to you if you say this out of prejudice. This is behaving like a scientist or a religious person, both of whom are deeply prejudiced about our field.
If you want to criticize something, study it first and also develop some understanding of what causes you to dislike the idea.
Nearly every astrologer and student of astrology has a computer and an Internet connection. Far fewer have adequate knowledge of astrology's foundation and underlying principles.
It is fascinating to study how astrologers in different eras and cultures apply astrology. However, not all astrologers are historians, many are more interested in applying astrology to their own time and culture. Both are valuable members of the astrological community.
But it does make sense. Modern astrology has been busy coming up with new ways of saying 'Yes, indeed, you are intuitive, kind, and a healer'.
Nonsense! I am a 'modern astrologer' who has had hands on experience with people of all walks of life throughout my 40 years in practice. When I look at my client list a large proportion would have been highly insulted to be called 'intuitive, kind and a healer'. Many were business people who wanted to make money; sports people who wanted to win; migrants who wanted to find a way to fit into a deeply different culture; women who wanted to be mothers and couldn't conceive; some were deeply traumatized by major tragedies .. and so on. Waffling on about sweetness and light would have been ridiculous.
After so much effort has been put into giving people the chance to hear more about themselves we might as well let them take over the show by coming up with their very own astrology. Whatever. ::)
What on earth is wrong with people wanting to understand themselves and others? Astrology is a marvelous method to do just that.
Understand the universe? You seem to be confusing scientific understanding and its knowledge bank of facts and 'laws' with deep penetration into the human mind/spirit/soul and its perceptions of and creational involvement with the universe. That's the realm of astrology.*
Scientific understanding and particularly the field of physics is leading to a very deep understanding of how human perception is part of the creation process of the universe. Maharish Mahesh Yogi fascinated me when he said "Astrology is the Mother of the sciences and Physics is the Father." He felt both forms of study gave a deep understanding of universal principles.
There's a huge world-wide resource base of mythology, philosophy and religious experience that has already provided gateways. We don't need future developments in science. The paradigm of science and its constant looking to the future and discarding of the past as outworn has deeply entered the modern mind.** It leads to a constant hunger and dissatisfaction with what is already present. That which exists already can be carefully added to and still retain its integrity and usefulness.
Of course we need science! The discoveries in science are ground breaking and very exciting. Surely you don't want us to stagnate in the cultures of the past, with their cruel gods, nasty religions and vicious people? - all echoed in their fatalistic, ruthless astrology.
Just as exciting are discoveries in modern astrology as they open the doors to a much deeper understanding of the harmonics of the universe.
*However, we would do well to keep our feet firmly planted and focus our creational energy on the world around us. This flying off to glorious heights is often present in these discussions of the supposedly necessary progress and development of astrology.
Some of us will prefer your approach, others will prefer to fly to glorious heights. Both are necessary and valuable.
[**I'm referring here to the fact that science views itself as always progressing, advancing. The science of 2 years ago is outdated; that of 20 years ago is ancient and outworn. Science seldom looks back for inspiration and ideas about what it should investigate and how to proceed.
It sometimes builds upon, but often replaces, what came before. It always looks ahead with confidence in gaining more knowledge (The scientist as the ever-hungry consumer?). Astrology, philosophy and the arts can and do look back at what came before in order to gain inspiration and ideas for future creation.
The scientists I like are cultured, courteous people who are also students of history and often get their creative ideas from past ideas that we now have the technology to built upon. Some are doing really amazing work.
Astrology is not limited to philosophy or the arts, though I understand this is the type of astrology you prefer. It incorporates all realities and has mapped our modern reality through the discoveries of Uranus, Neptune, Pluto and is giving the ability to map future realities through the discovery of farther out planets both in our solar system and in others.
Alice McDermott
-
A few replies for Alice:
The disruption of natural cycles through interference of the birth process can often disconnect the person from their family energy flow. Hence the strong feeling of 'not really belonging' that many people describe.
I just don't see how you can judge whether or not the birth process was sufficiently 'natural'. If the mother is at home in bed and starts going into labor, and then the nervous father puts her in the car and drives her to the hospital where they both go through the ordeal of hospital admission (especially notorious in the USA) – well, hasn't the 'natural' birth process already been seriously bruised? Your whole family house connection argument depends on giving yourself the chance to label the birth as having been sufficiently natural. About asking the mother what was going on at the time in order to determine whether the birth was sufficiently natural . . . a mother's attention is certainly more on herself than on what instruments and medical procedures the staff is using.
I think we can find a lot of other more appropriate reasons why a person might not feel that he or she belongs to the family – plain old narcissistic focus on oneself being high on the list!
If you check planet, sign and house connections it is usually rather easy to see which house systems are accurate for a family.
So now, by calling the birth insufficiently natural we not only have the ability to ignore the charts that don't fit the mold, we can get the charts of the family members to more easily match up by picking a house system for the family that best produces the results we want! The various house systems can cause some big changes, Campanus is notorious for that. And then there's the Whole Sign system – talk about big changes, especially at more extreme latitudes!
The family unit as a group of connected individuals exists apart from the astrologer. You seem to be saying that there are Placidus families Koch families, Regiomontanus, Campanus, Porphyry, Equal, Whole Sign, Alcabitious . . . VERY few astrologers (do any?) willingly use any and all house systems, but you seem to be saying that that is exactly what they should be doing – the family dictates what system is to be used. What if the astrologer absolutely rejects the idea of the Whole Sign system, but the charts of the family members have some very interesting match-ups when it's used? And then, of course, truly accurate chart delineation for all members of that family would mean only using the same house system for each individual member. That poor astrologer has to learn to appreciate the Whole Sign system! But if we say that a particular person resonates better to a different system (our excuse perhaps being that the individual doesn't feel that he or she truly belongs to the family and its values) and we use that system for the chart native, then we've destroyed the consistency that supposedly shows us how the charts of the various members coincide by house.
And then . . . are planets 5 degrees from the cusp being consistently counted as in the next house? Or 3 degrees? Or is no cusp degree offset being applied? There are astrologers for each method. As I said, the family stands alone as its own unit and shouldn't be labeled and grouped by this or that astrologer with his or her own methods.
Well, first of all, I am yet to find a medieval astrologer who is 'nice'. These people have developed a reputation of being fundamentalists thugs through their attacks on modern astrology.
Now Alice! :o I'm sure you've met some nice ones. Some might fit your rather harsh description (but I do have trouble imagining them as thugs). Others are just critical and point out where they think modern astrology has gone wrong and let their views be known. When we are uncomfortable after some strong criticism it's easy to retort with 'Well, you're just a fundamentalist thug'.
What on earth is wrong with people wanting to understand themselves and others? Astrology is a marvelous method to do just that.
Do we really know what we mean when we say we want to “understand” ourselves? How far do we take it? Astrology has fallen into the modern psychological obsession of staring at oneself in a mirror. So I can use astrology to contemplate myself, fixate on myself – and inevitably beat myself up for coming up short. Astrology has become a favored tool of narcissism. And if I get bored with myself I can turn it on you and start to “understand” you. The old astrologers had it right: they spent some time determining the basic character and qualities of the person and then moved on to what really mattered in people's lives – things like money, marriage, children and health. People wanted to know if, how much and when. The astrologers told them. Whether they were correct or not is another matter. But we just go on – blah, blah, blah – about ourselves and our relationships (which usually ends up still being about oneself).
Of course we need science! The discoveries in science are ground breaking and very exciting. Surely you don't want us to stagnate in the cultures of the past, with their cruel gods, nasty religions and vicious people? - all echoed in their fatalistic, ruthless astrology.
I expressed myself poorly when I wrote “We don't need future developments in science”. What I meant was that astrology and astrologers don't need future scientific developments and discoveries.
I do find it interesting that you are linking advancing scientific knowledge with more enlightened religion and better human behavior. I, for one, have been very happy to see that as we peer further and further into space and deeper into the human body mankind has been letting go of religious hatred and strife, corporate greed has all but vanished, and people are always doing such nice things for each other. The astrology was so ugly in those brutal old days. Current astrology is much more kindly and enlightened and fits nicely with our new polite and decorous behavior. And it's destined to get better. ;)
You've given me an excellent opportunity to quote myself: “This flying off to glorious heights is often present in these discussions of the supposedly necessary progress and development of astrology”. ;D
-
A few replies for Alice:
I just don't see how you can judge whether or not the birth process was sufficiently 'natural'. If the mother is at home in bed and starts going into labor, and then the nervous father puts her in the car and drives her to the hospital where they both go through the ordeal of hospital admission (especially notorious in the USA) – well, hasn't the 'natural' birth process already been seriously bruised? Your whole family house connection argument depends on giving yourself the chance to label the birth as having been sufficiently natural. About asking the mother what was going on at the time in order to determine whether the birth was sufficiently natural . . . a mother's attention is certainly more on herself than on what instruments and medical procedures the staff is using.
Well, there speaks a man! A baby comes when it comes, nothing stops the birth process and if left to proceed at its own pace, the baby is born at a time that slots beautifully into its time of conception and fits the family dynamic perfectly.
Unless she is drugged into insensibility almost every mother, including myself, knows what happened at every moment of the birth process. When asked, mothers can and do tell their children all the details of their birth. The only problem is time as it can move very slowly and very quickly at different stages and the actual moment of birth is usually so amazing that the mother rarely looks at a clock.
I think we can find a lot of other more appropriate reasons why a person might not feel that he or she belongs to the family – plain old narcissistic focus on oneself being high on the list!
Very rarely true. People who feel alien or are damaged in some way are much more likely to go in search of answers. People who feel secure and happy within the bosom of their family do not need to.
So now, by calling the birth insufficiently natural we not only have the ability to ignore the charts that don't fit the mold, we can get the charts of the family members to more easily match up by picking a house system for the family that best produces the results we want!
It seems pointless to further discuss these objections as we just seem to be going round and round. I have already said that it usually becomes clear rather quickly. Do the work and find out for yourself.
What if the astrologer absolutely rejects the idea of the Whole Sign system, but the charts of the family members have some very interesting match-ups when it's used?
If there are correlations, then consider the Whole sign system! To absolutely reject something when there is clear evidence of a possible correlation is just prejudice. However, to date I haven't found this system produces very clear results. If you do, please let me know.
But if we say that a particular person resonates better to a different system (our excuse perhaps being that the individual doesn't feel that he or she truly belongs to the family and its values) and we use that system for the chart native, then we've destroyed the consistency that supposedly shows us how the charts of the various members coincide by house.
Again just objections based on theory rather than practice and experience. A person rarely feels that they don't truly belong to a family unless there has been an interference or hitch in the birth process. They might like or dislike the family, but still feel part of it.
And then . . . are planets 5 degrees from the cusp being consistently counted as in the next house? Or 3 degrees? Or is no cusp degree offset being applied?
For general work I allow a one degree orb to the cusp to allow for minor variations during birth, however, Daily Age Harmonics usually determine the exact cusp.
There are astrologers for each method. As I said, the family stands alone as its own unit and shouldn't be labeled and grouped by this or that astrologer with his or her own methods.
Good Heavens, you are now objecting to me and others working with the family line and offering interesting information they have discovered. Who are you to say which methods are viable and which are not without studying them? Whether a person should or shouldn't use a specific technique is not for you to decide.
The astrological mapping of the dynamics of a family line, who members of the family marry, the results of that union and the new energies that are brought into play down through the generations, is truly enthralling. Interference in the birth process may break this continuity. It can start a new family dynamic as it has with Queen Elizabeth 11 who was born by cesarean section, but if each generation has the birth process interfered with then it is difficult to establish a continuous dynamic and family stability is disrupted.
Now Alice! :o I'm sure you've met some nice ones. Some might fit your rather harsh description (but I do have trouble imagining them as thugs). Others are just critical and point out where they think modern astrology has gone wrong and let their views be known. When we are uncomfortable after some strong criticism it's easy to retort with 'Well, you're just a fundamentalist thug'.
'Fundamentalist thug' wasn't my idea, I took it from an astrologer on a forum and thought that it was a very apt description. These types of astrologers just hate modern astrology and won't countenance any possibility of its accuracy. They are just like religious fundamentalists who won't countenance any religion different to their own rigid belief system and if contradicted they can become very nasty indeed.
Modern astrology hasn't 'gone wrong' it has just discovered new techniques, developed new processes and found new venues that don't fit in with ancient astrological rules and were not possible in ancient times. I don't think anyone minds if a Hellenistic astrologer mentions how astrology was mapped in that era and ways that it can be applicable to the present time, but that is rarely the case. These people go about saying "you are all wrong to do it that way because the ancients didn't"! Modern astrologers who have accurately practiced astrology for a number of years know this is nonsense.
Do we really know what we mean when we say we want to “understand” ourselves? How far do we take it? Astrology has fallen into the modern psychological obsession of staring at oneself in a mirror. So I can use astrology to contemplate myself, fixate on myself – and inevitably beat myself up for coming up short. Astrology has become a favored tool of narcissism. And if I get bored with myself I can turn it on you and start to “understand” you. The old astrologers had it right: they spent some time determining the basic character and qualities of the person and then moved on to what really mattered in people's lives – things like money, marriage, children and health. People wanted to know if, how much and when. The astrologers told them. Whether they were correct or not is another matter. But we just go on – blah, blah, blah – about ourselves and our relationships (which usually ends up still being about oneself).
Well, I do sympathize with you here! I feel much the same. I dislike people using astrology to beat up others or try to have power over others and some practitioners of some forms of 'psychological astrology' do just that. Some beginner astrologers do become very self obsessed; I liken them to student doctors who often feel they have whatever disorder they are studying. Usually they grow out of it and start to see the other benefits astrology offers.
That being said, if you are working with your fellow human beings it is important that an astrologer is self aware so a few years learning about yourself and your interaction with others is valuable. If at first this involves endless discussions about yourself and others, then look on it as the first grade in the school of astrology.
I expressed myself poorly when I wrote “We don't need future developments in science”. What I meant was that astrology and astrologers don't need future scientific developments and discoveries.
And I think quite the contrary. I think an astrologer needs to consider and incorporate all the realities in their culture. In ours this includes scientific discoveries.
I do find it interesting that you are linking advancing scientific knowledge with more enlightened religion and better human behavior.
Well, sort of. I am well aware of the varied nature of the human being, which can plumb the most disgusting depths and reach the most exalted heights. I do think that the more healthy, educated and prosperous people are the kinder they tend to become. Scientific discoveries have already given us a culture that can at least aim for the greater health and happiness of the majority of people.
Alice McDermott
-
Some more replies for Alice:
Well, there speaks a man! A baby comes when it comes, nothing stops the birth process and if left to proceed at its own pace, the baby is born at a time that slots beautifully into its time of conception and fits the family dynamic perfectly.
Unless she is drugged into insensibility almost every mother, including myself, knows what happened at every moment of the birth process. When asked, mothers can and do tell their children all the details of their birth. The only problem is time as it can move very slowly and very quickly at different stages and the actual moment of birth is usually so amazing that the mother rarely looks at a clock.
I certainly can't speak from experience, but I have heard otherwise. I can imagine the woman being intensely aware of her experience but I do have a problem with the idea of her keeping an eagle eye on the staff, their procedures and the instruments they may be using.
When asked, mothers can and do tell their children all the details of their birth.
Just 'mothers'? ??? That doesn't give us clearly specific information. All mothers? Most mothers? Many? Some? The vagueness of it serves to imply that all, or at least most, mothers can and do narrate all the details down through the years (at no risk of forgotten details or embellishments, I'm sure ;)).
I was working with this idea of the natural birth process. What is it, exactly? If the woman is already comfortably in bed and has to get up, get dressed, walk to the car, watch her husband run around in circles and nearly drive the car into the laurel hedge, walk into the hospital and answer the question 'Insurance?' – couldn't we legitimately say 'Sorry, the natural flow of birth has already been disrupted'? And a 'natural' birth process, as we know, is what your whole thesis depends on. A personal definition of the natural birth process and the opportunity to say which births qualify allows for too much ability to throw out the charts that don't fit the pattern, or to keep the ones that fit in nicely.
Again just objections based on theory rather than practice and experience.
You've made a few such statements now, saying that I don't and can't know because I haven't studied the astrological connections of families. How do you know that? :-\ You are saying that the person on the other side of the fence is wrong because you are presuming he has no experience in the matter. I may actually have a fair amount of experience. I may have discussed it with others who have plenty of experience, or have read about their ideas and discoveries. You don't know. Keep in mind that it's possible to be disagreeing with you because of such experience and knowledge! To be honest, my personal experience is less than yours, but not non-existent
A person rarely feels that they don't truly belong to a family unless there has been an interference or hitch in the birth process.
It's sure hard to imagine anyone having the courage – and audacity – to say: “You feel you don't belong to your family? That's because there was a hitch in your birth process.” This is taking the popular cause-and-effect explanation to a simplistic extreme. How about the idea of the daimon, that something that enters life with us and wants to steer us in certain directions? The book to read is 'The Soul's Code' by James Hillman. In it he talks about his acorn theory – as the acorn contains the future oak tree within it, we enter life with a seed image of ourselves and our life (I'm sorry, Mr. Hillman, for so brutally simplifying it). It could be that what we are witnessing in the alienated person are the promptings of something like an inner guide, driver or helmsman rather than the results of a birth process gone awry. It could be an inner voice saying that there needs to be a distancing from the family in order for that acorn to develop, but not necessarily a complete severing from the family. Ultimately, suggesting to someone that they perhaps aren't sufficiently living out their own deepest needs and the life image they brought with them at birth is much more helpful and useful than giving them the dry and rather useless reason and explanation that something went awry at birth.
Quote
There are astrologers for each method. As I said, the family stands alone as its own unit and shouldn't be labeled and grouped by this or that astrologer with his or her own methods.
Good Heavens, you are now objecting to me and others working with the family line and offering interesting information they have discovered. Who are you to say which methods are viable and which are not without studying them? Whether a person should or shouldn't use a specific technique is not for you to decide.
My point was that the family exists already without astrologers. Common themes among the individual members are already present whether an astrologer notes them or not. I see chaos and nonsense in astrologer A coming along with Placidus houses and 5-degree cusp offsets and judging whether the births were sufficiently natural, with astrologer B following behind with Equal houses and 1-degree offsets and making his decisions as to which are natural births. Both astrologers are then to somehow show us that, yes indeed, families do have similar planetary house placements. Once again, I have no problem with sign and planet connections between family members. It's this maneuvering around to get shared house positions that has me completely unimpressed. Let's face it – we are absolutely not going to agree on this.
I think an astrologer needs to consider and incorporate all the realities in their culture. In ours this includes scientific discoveries.
Please tell us why we need to incorporate into our astrological understanding the latest developments in stem cell research. How would one even go about it? ::)
Astrologers don't NEED to consider and incorporate all of the culture and its scientific discoveries. Those things can add to the palette of symbols and metaphors and can become very effective images but there is no need and requirement to dutifully drag it all in and be appropriately sorted and stacked.
That's all for now. ;D
-
Yes, I agree Kort. This is enough for now, it is getting off the astrological track and this is an astrology forum.
I think you need to look closer at this whole area if you want to discuss matters further. From my perception you are arguing supposition and theory rather than fact and have a personal dislike for my type of astrology.
In the matter of childbirth I think you are in an area where you are a little out of your depth. I don't think you understand the processes and urgency of childbirth and how it entirely takes over one's body, I don't think anyone can unless they have had a child. Outside circumstances don't interfere at all with this process unless something goes wrong and/or there is medical assistance for some reason. I don't know what it is like in the USA, but in Australia the doctor is legally obliged to tell the mother and her partner everything that they are doing and why, so the mother is fully aware of all procedures used.
I remember having an ongoing discussion about prenatal epoch techniques on the Astrology Research Forum, which at that time covered both Tropical and Vedic astrology. I was rather shocked at the level of ignorance about female cycles and the female reproductive system. I expected that from the Indian astrologers, many of whom secretly feel the female is inferior to the male, but I was very disappointed that the male tropical astrologers, some of whom were fathers, also showed the same ignorance. Without that understanding their theories were just so much nonsense.
Suffice to say that from my extensive experience in this field:
(a) A child is conceived when the energy cycles of both parents coincide. This can be quite easily mapped in astrology.
(b) A signature of possible conception is often shown by a lunar eclipse activating an angle or relevant planet or house cusp of either or both parents' charts.
(c) The conception chart is powerful in its own right.
(d) If the natural cycle is followed the conception chart shows birth triggers and the birth chart is strongly linked to the conception chart. The ancient techniques that described a link between the Moon and Ascendant-Descendant of these charts is usually correct.
(e) Because the child is part of the family dynamic, in a natural birth there is a strong correlation between planets, signs and houses of the child, its parents and other members of the family. As I said in my very first post on this matter, this is easily seen. For many years I have used this to show beginner astrologers how accurate astrology can be and this correlation has convinced some scientifically oriented people to continue their studies.
(d) There is also a strong correlation between the duads, their degrees and natal charts of the child and members of the family.
Alice McDermott
-
I think you need to look closer at this whole area if you want to discuss matters further. From my perception you are arguing supposition and theory rather than fact and have a personal dislike for my type of astrology.
Isn't it obvious just how closely I've been looking? :o The fact is, I disagree with you and find all sorts of weak spots in what you have to say. What you are in reality saying is that I should agree with you more before you will discuss it further. Right?
In the matter of childbirth I think you are in an area where you are a little out of your depth.
Yes, I am the one who wrote that I can't speak from experience. I also wrote “I can imagine the woman being intensely aware of her experience . . .” I thus clearly stated that imagination was my way of approaching the woman's experience of childbirth. I do know when I'm a lot out of my depth.
A child is conceived when the energy cycles of both parents coincide. This can be quite easily mapped in astrology.
When someone tells me that something can be “quite easily mapped in astrology” I run in the opposite direction. Really fast. It's all so slight, casual and simple as “quite easily”?
-
hi kort.. here is a quote from you that i would like to discuss..
"Scientific laws give us planetary orbits. They don't give us harmonic astrology charts."
i was reading about radio waves : "Radio waves were first predicted by mathematical work done in 1865 by James Clerk Maxwell. Maxwell noticed wavelike properties of light and similarities in electrical and magnetic observations. He then proposed equations, that described light waves and radio waves as waves of electromagnetism that travel in space. In 1887, Heinrich Hertz demonstrated the reality of Maxwell's electromagnetic waves by experimentally generating radio waves in his laboratory.[1] Many inventions followed, making practical the use of radio waves to transfer information through space." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_waves
i see harmonic charts as a way of finding the waves, or rhythms of a chart and i find the system of 12 which so much of astrology is built upon as being only one of a possible number of waves for consideration... 12 captures the 3, 4 and 6 wave and might partly explain it's popularity in astrology, but underneath all of this i think i see a common thread of trying to find a particular wave or rhythm to cycles...
science doesn't stop making discoveries.. neither do astrologers that are open to learning more about astrology thru experimenting with new ideas..
-
the chromatic scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_scale consists of 12 notes.. the relationship between the notes within this scale are unique.. put 2 or more notes together and it is usually referred to as a 'chord'.... i believe harmony or dissonance as perceived in music may also be perceived when considering planetary relationships... as i see it these are subjective ways of describing the interpretation of sounds labeling them harmonic or dissonant.. while musicians and astrologers may have a tendency towards using certain ideas/techniques more regularly then others, it doesn't exclude other approaches worthy of as much consideration.. i suggest incorporating new ideas or ways of thinking about astrology is absolutely vital to anyone who practices astrology..
kort, here is a statement you made earlier that implies you know very little about ebertin's work. ""The 90-degree dial focuses on conjunctions, oppositions, and squares. Nothing new there – the Hellenistic astrologers were way ahead of Mr. Ebertin. They considered those to be the strongest aspects."" this implies either you have never worked with a 90 degree dial or you would have mentioned the centrality of midpoints to much of the work that ebertin focused on, not to mention the 45/135 aspect which i am not so sure hellenistic astrologers were familiar with..
the reason i like so many of the parallels that i believe exist with music and astrology has to do with the fact that many of these parallels aren't considered by non musicians.. i think those unfamiliar with the laws of music which are based on mathematics may miss out on the possibility of considering other ways of understanding astrology more fully as well..
-
For James:
hi kort.. here is a quote from you that i would like to discuss..
"Scientific laws give us planetary orbits. They don't give us harmonic astrology charts."
Let's keep it in context. Here is the full quote from you and my reply (with a crossed-out word which I just noticed today):
i see the triplicities and elements as coming straight out of a philosophers head..
??? Sort of like delineating planetary interrelationships with charts based on such numbers as 2, 4, and 8? Someone somewhere thought that those up and gave meaning to them. Scientific laws give us planetary orbits. They don't give us harmonic astrology charts.
I was saying that the scientific laws allow us to predict exact planetary positions for a determined point in time. The phenomena of the material bodies, the planets, fit the important scientific necessity of being reproducible. There are no such scientific laws that allow us to consistently predict exactly what will happen to a person on a certain date or enable us to always pinpoint the chart native's exact characteristics, qualities and behavior. Mathematical concepts give us harmonic charts, but we use those charts as meaningful springboards of metaphor which lead us to come to judgment as to likely events or personal characteristics – and "likely" is the best we can do (very unscientific ;)). Finding interpretive importance in charts based on the numbers 2, 4 and 8 has nothing to with the scientific laws of the physical world. Interpretation and judgment are in the head. Astrologers need to break free from the grip of science – it's a different activity with different aims and purposes.
i see harmonic charts as a way of finding the waves, or rhythms of a chart . . .
But are those waves physical forces that touch and affect the person or are those waves somehow like the person and his or her life events, are they descriptive? Are you wanting an astrology of physical influences or an astrology of image and metaphor that leads to interpretive judgment? You appear to favor the idea that astrology is based on the planets having an actual physical effect on us. That's a hot topic which goes back a couple thousand years.
science doesn't stop making discoveries.. neither do astrologers that are open to learning more about astrology thru experimenting with new ideas..
What about old ideas that have been forgotten? That is the case with astrology: The old methods and ideas weren't replaced so much as forgotten when astrology itself was nearly forgotten during the 18th and most of the 19th centuries. During that period there were very few people studying western astrology and leaving behind written works showing their experience of what worked or didn't. The 20th century astrologers picked up the broken astrological tradition and started to run in all directions with it, assuming that the old ideas had been replaced or needed to be (if they even knew what those old ideas and techniques were). And that's pretty sad when you think of the huge body of writings in Latin and Greek that sat unread on institutional shelves because few of those 20th century astrologers could read them or even knew they existed. :'( Silent ignorance of the past doesn't mean that the most up-to-date astrologers are those who chase after scientists in a laboratory or mathematicians staring at a university blackboard. A truly up-to-date astrologer is one who has filled in the blank spots of knowledge and can tell you why the ancients assigned the domicile rulership of Aries and Scorpio to Mars.
this implies either you have never worked with a 90 degree dial or you would have mentioned the centrality of midpoints to much of the work that ebertin focused on, not to mention the 45/135 aspect which i am not so sure hellenistic astrologers were familiar with..
I had no intention of going in-depth into Ebertin's work and felt no need to bring in midpoints. Whether working only with the actual planetary positions or also with midpoints, the 90-degree dial will show the bodies and points that are in a relationship of conjunction, opposition or square in the chart. I also saw no need to say 'By the way, Ebertin also used the 45-degree dial'. ;D
As far as I know, the Hellenistic astrologers didn't use the aspects of 45 and 135 degrees. That was Kepler's addition. This is a good time to clarify that Hellenistic astrology is the astrology from around 200 BCE to 600 CE. Some posts back I was called a Hellenistic astrologer and that is not at all the case – not only because I wasn't born during that period :D, but because, like most astrologers (even the so-called 'modern' astrologers), I practice medieval astrology. Medieval astrology is the Hellenistic/Babylonian base with Persian and Arab additions. And another clarification: 'Persian' and 'Arab' can also include the Jewish astrologers. The major centers of astrological activity were of Persian and then Arabic language and culture.
-
kort, i like the similarities with music and astrology for another reason... both have a strong artistic or intuitive connection which puts them beyond the hard science i believe they're largely based on... the outer planets discovery by 'science' can be ignored but it doesn't stop others from incorporating them into a vocabulary of astrology for today..
now as for your response to my observations on your familiarity with ebertin, i continue to sense a lack of familiarity on your part with this advancement in astrology and all that it implies... one will see the 45/135 aspect as an opposition on the 90 degree wheel without the need to use a 45 degree wheel... in spite of implying a position of knowing about midpoints in your 2nd response, i doubt you have worked with them any or you'd have highlighted this part to ebertins work in your 1st post on this rather then blow it off so quickly as you did...
regarding your question "Are you wanting an astrology of physical influences or an astrology of image and metaphor that leads to interpretive judgment?" both... i feel astrology is an art as much as it is anything else..
regarding your comment "Finding interpretive importance in charts based on the numbers 2, 4 and 8 has nothing to with the scientific laws of the physical world." i have to challenge this.. what are aspects but a division of the circle by such numbers as these? how does one come upon an opposition or a square any other way then thru numbers? i find this comment of yours baffling!
thanks for clarifying just what hellenistic and medieval astrology means.. i appreciate it..
-
the chromatic scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_scale consists of 12 notes.. the relationship between the notes within this scale are unique.. put 2 or more notes together and it is usually referred to as a 'chord'.... i believe harmony or dissonance as perceived in music may also be perceived when considering planetary relationships... as i see it these are subjective ways of describing the interpretation of sounds labeling them harmonic or dissonant.. while musicians and astrologers may have a tendency towards using certain ideas/techniques more regularly then others, it doesn't exclude other approaches worthy of as much consideration.. i suggest incorporating new ideas or ways of thinking about astrology is absolutely vital to anyone who practices astrology..
kort, here is a statement you made earlier that implies you know very little about ebertin's work. ""The 90-degree dial focuses on conjunctions, oppositions, and squares. Nothing new there – the Hellenistic astrologers were way ahead of Mr. Ebertin. They considered those to be the strongest aspects."" this implies either you have never worked with a 90 degree dial or you would have mentioned the centrality of midpoints to much of the work that ebertin focused on, not to mention the 45/135 aspect which i am not so sure hellenistic astrologers were familiar with..
the reason i like so many of the parallels that i believe exist with music and astrology has to do with the fact that many of these parallels aren't considered by non musicians.. i think those unfamiliar with the laws of music which are based on mathematics may miss out on the possibility of considering other ways of understanding astrology more fully as well..
Hi James m
I love this post! One of the most memorable lectures I have attended was by Malvin Artley, who is a musician. He brought his guitar and played all the harmonics for us. I really wish he was a sitar player as it could have been even better.
I was interested to see I really disliked the 7th harmonic on a musical level, but like it on an astrological level.
One of my earliest experiences whilst a beginner astrologer and teaching myself was a mystical one where I 'heard' the sound of the planets orbiting the Sun. It was absolutely exquisite -all the sounds blending into the most beautiful energy.
Alice McDermott
-
Hello james m,
Re: "...put 2 or more notes together and it is usually referred to as a 'chord'..."
Technically, it takes 3 or more notes to make a chord.
An example or two....
Amin = A + C + E
Amaj = A + C# + E
Chords, of course can have more than three (but not less)...
E7#9 (the "Hendrix chord") = E + G# + B + D + G
You might hear the term "power chord", which consists of only two notes, but it is an incorrect term, much like a two-sided "triangle" would be...it goes against the "root definition" of the term.
I also find the music analogy a useful one. In a complex harmony, each and every note can add to the exact character of the sound. It's the same in Astrology, ...a wonderful, sunny Leo with Moon in Libra takes on a different "tone" when we pause to hear that Saturn sits on that Moon and that the Sun sits "unappreciated" by the world in the 4th House. Suddenly, the "Major" triumphant fanfare takes on a certain dissonance... as this "dissonance" works against the dominant harmony, it modifies what would otherwise be. We see and process this same idea EVERY time we look at a horoscope.
Peace
(http://www.jamesalexander.de/O3.png)
-
alice - thanks! that is a fascinating and beautiful thought - hearing the orbit of the planets round the sun!!!
there are many different scales in music. ordinarily the 7th is thought of as an extension off the ordinary triad or common chord like a minor or a major- see o'dd's description of a minor and major triad.. there are also augmented and diminished triads which run off different types of scales.. there are also major and minor 7th's, as well as dominant 7th chords all of which are a bit further on in music theory.. o'dd's example is of a dominant 7th chord with a #9 extension.. ordinary scales usually consist of 7 notes with the 'octave' being an interval or pitch twice or half it's frequency depending on whether one goes up the scale or down the scale! pretty wordy, but with a little imagination you can get a bit of the picture...
playing the first note with the 7th note up in the chromatic scale will give you what was nicknamed the devils interval ...it has an interesting history which you can read about here... this interval is called a 'tritone'... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritone
i play and teach music for a living.. i am going out on a tour which begins this monday for about 6 weeks.. i may not be around here much for at least the first part due to an intense rehearsal schedule in the first week... i love music - all kinds! i saw ravi shanker - a sitar player) when he was on tour with george harrison way back in the late 70's or early 80's.. i enjoy the sound of indian classical music a lot too!
o'dd - thanks for your note too with a description of common chords..
-
James and All,
In reading through the posts on this thread, it strikes me that some headway might be made if we could separate out the 'hard' and 'soft' attributes of Astrology. By 'hard', I mean the reality of astrological effects and structures; by 'soft' I mean the intuitive skills and interpretive judgements that are part of the process of astrological consultation. It is true that, for those steeped in the intuitive arts, it is not necessary that Astrology be in any sense 'hard', since almost any system of symbols can 'work' as a stimulus in a psychic reading. As an example, I recall a young female psychic of my acquaintance – she used playing cards during her readings. For her, each card had its own unique meaning, not associated with the 'proper' use of playing cards, and the number system/hierarchical systems they depict.
From another angle, I also knew a life-long medium who, as a sideline, wrote a sun-sign Astrology feature for a local (Edinburgh, I think) newspaper – apparently successfully! She had no training in Astrology – she wrote down what her 'guide' told her to write.
I'm not saying that certain astrological techniques only work because those who employ them, whether they know it or not, are using innate psychic skills. What I am saying is that intuition, imagination and momentary judgements overlap with full-blown psychic (non-conscious) awareness - and so we have a 'grey area'; a potential source of confusion.
My own view is based on my experience of Astrology as an aspect of reality – the experiencing of that 'moulding of the moment' (Barbara), of feeling the flow of Life's organising efforts. No amount of scientific argument to the contrary can shake my view of “Astrology as Reality”. I heartily concur with those who admit to feeling ignorant in the face of that reality. What I stand against is the attitude that “This works for me and my clients, so I don't have to seek explanation or further supporting evidence.” I think we, collectively, owe it to the greater community to 'get Astrology right'.
In that spirit, let me comment on the Placidus House System, and those systems related to it. I am told that Placidus was renowned for his mathematical skill, which is surprising - since his house systems fails ('is not defined') at high latitudes, due to his modelling assumptions and method of construction. Since the underlying mechanisms of Astrology are not known, the best we can do is to create astrological structures that encapsulate our experience. How this Placidus system, and all those related to it, has survived into the current era requires some thought and discussion. I am told that the majority of astrologers use this system; presumably “it works” for them. It doesn’t work for me. I have a chapter on house construction which I intend to make available on my website at some point in the near (hopefully) future, time permitting. For the moment, I challenge the idea that houses, and zodiacs for that matter, are systems of division. I have demonstrated that the twelvefold nature of astrological structures naturally arises from a product system.
So much of Astrology seems to be, fortuitously, 'almost right'.
Henry.
-
henry - i am really happy you have initiated some commentary on this thread again as i see the discussion on what works and what doesn't in astrology very far from over! i am looking forward to reading your comments when you are ready to share them on your website or here... meanwhile, i am reading a thoroughly enjoyable book called 'the black swan' which i am 1/3 of the way thru... it is a thought provoking book in many respects that indirectly challenges many of the automatic assumptions that get made by our minds... it is hard for me to know where to begin when thinking about sharing some of the ideas that i think astrologers in particular would benefit considering.. perhaps the biggest one in my own words would be the thought of remaining sceptical of many of the popular rules and ideas that abound in todays astrology circles.. i think it is necessary to question it all, even though we all seem to have this strong need to understand and create an 'astro' logical basis for our experience..
the fact placidus is so popular is a good reason to examine it more closely.. i don't use it.. i am particularly intrigued by your last few lines - "I challenge the idea that houses, and zodiacs for that matter, are systems of division. I have demonstrated that the twelvefold nature of astrological structures naturally arises from a product system." and i don't understand them! i look forward to more of your thoughts!~ thanks - james m
-
House Division Discussion could be a whole new thread.
For the equatorial regions, I use equal house.
For 20 to 45 degrees, I use Placidus.
For the higher latitudes, I use Koch.
Nevertheless, I still find vagaries in the succeedent and cadent house cusps when planets are involved nearby.
,Daniel
-
Hello
Interesting comments.
The various "answers" to this house question (yeah, THAT question) will depend on the perspective of those making the comments.
Three years ago, if asked, I would have said "go with Placidus". It's the most popular (there must be "something" to it) and it is the system that Noel endorses (on some level it must work).
That being said, having been exposed to different "evidence" has led me very much to believe that Topocentric is the best bet. I have been immersed in this, since I have to closely examine so many events for the rectifications that I do. (which now outnumber my normal readings)
If one looks at Primary Directions and tries Placidus, they will find a LACK of appropriate aspects to house cusps, because the orbs are too wide for this system. On the other hand, if one uses Topocentric, they will find very many appropriate aspects to relevant house cusps at events. (and again, within just scant minutes of arc)
As an example, from my latest rectification: (all primary directions)
3rd with Mercury (0° 5') - her Brother was born
9th with Uranus (0° 4') - left University
Neptune with 3rd (0° 11') - auto accident (common, malefic with 3rd for accidents)
8th with Pluto (0° 0') - death of long-time male friend
Sun with 8th (0° 2') - found out about the above-mentioned death
Neptune with 8th (0° 1') - death of close female friend
Use any other house system and these aspects are NOT there.
This leads me to my conclusion that Topocentric is the house system to use. I have no particular personal inclinations, it is a purely empirical decision. If Porphyry worked for these primary directions, then I'd be writing about Porphyry.
(http://www.jamesalexander.de/O3.png)
-
OD'd
I was first exposed to Topocentric houses by Margaret Millard, M.D. in her writings. (I met her at an astro conference in 1983.) What I like about Topocentric houses is that they are virtually identical to Placidus houses in temperate regions, even though the underlying mathematical formulae are completely different, which allows them to function in polar regions.
In one of Astrology's greatest ironies, the only difference between Placidus cusps and Topocentric cusps in Margaret Millard's own horoscope was that her 6th and 12th cusps were one minute greater under Topocentric. The other 10 cusps were the same.
Margaret Millard was born September 6, 1916 at 4:35 pm AST in Kingstown, St. Vincent and the Grenadines with 16:52 Aquarius rising. The coordinates for her birthplace are 13N09, 61W14. It is interesting that she would espouse a system that works best in the polar regions. But one must realize that the Vertex is undefined in tropical regions with house systems that fail in polar regions.
Esthetically, Porphyry is fulfilling. However, I live in the Pacific Northwest, and anyone who uses Porphyry in this part of the US gets assumed to be an acolyte of Jeff Green, with whom I have numerous issues.
Don Borkowski
-
Hello Don,
The first thing that impressed me about Topocentric Houses was the difference in how they were "discovered/invented". Taking the events, finding the house cusps...and THEN go back and derive the math to define those points.
Re: Millard
I still want to get that genealogical study book that she wrote!
Re: Jeff Green
Don't know much about him, other than that his books tend to be dark. (what do you expect in a Pluto book, eh?) He had so much Pluto within that he had to write two Pluto books to get it out! ;)
Wasn't he in partnership with Noel at one point?
Take care, Don
OD'd
-
the fact placidus is so popular is a good reason to examine it more closely.. i don't use it.. i am particularly intrigued by your last few lines - "I challenge the idea that houses, and zodiacs for that matter, are systems of division. I have demonstrated that the twelvefold nature of astrological structures naturally arises from a product system." and i don't understand them! i look forward to more of your thoughts!~ thanks - james m
James,
You won't understand that quoted comment unless you're familiar with 'The Logic of Life' chapters (in pdf format) available on my website: www.logicoflife.org.uk . (The level of abstraction employed is not what most astrologers are used to, or are comfortable with. The final draft will be, hopefully, much more accessible.) What you'll find there is a way of modelling astrological structures based on simple statements about organisation - all living organisms organise.
The purely geometric approach to house system construction ignores the possibility that the Human space may be connected, in ways that are not immediately visible. At some level of reality the purely physical information about solar system dynamics is overlain with meta-physical values related to Human organisation. There are astrological structures (The Ages, for example) associated with cycle times spanning many generations. The implication is that 'something' is experiencing, and perhaps creating, these organisational cycles. My personal experience is consistent with this line of argument - Astrology has (what might be called) a spiritual dimension. If so, this blurs the distinction between geometric concepts such as geocentric and topocentric.
Daniel,
I, for one, would be interested in hearing how you arrived at the multi-system scheme you use. Is it based on experience?
OD'd,
Sound argument, well presented. Unlike attempts at prediction, here the correlation of multi-possibility astrological significators with specific events (as presented in your evidence) poses no logical problem.
Henry.
-
between what we know and what we don't know, there is a big gap... i find myself being quite sceptical of what i think i know... the alternative is a form of arrogance as i see it.. i think people in general suffer from over confidence in their ideas and position and astrologers in general definitely fall into this category as i see it.. any person who gave many of the ideas in astrology the time of day would have to conclude that there are so many gaping holes in so many of the theories surrounding astrology, only those suffering from a form of insanity would seriously pursue it... that said, i continue to think there is something to astrology, but it isn't with all the baggage that astrology is presently known for..
i like the idea of techniques used in astrology coming under the control of statistical analysis.. i believe the french couples work and others work like john addey challenge many of the common assumptions surrounding astrology... that to me is a good thing, not that many will consider these authors works... i think it goes back to most folks being more comfortable with what they know then seriously considering what they don't know... most folks don't seem to have much of a taste for the abstract, or if they did they would question there positions a lot more!
the difference between someone coming here and saying they have found something to be true and someone coming here and sharing specific examples by sharing the data are very different... i am not inclined to accept a persons words as gospel and this is especially so if they haven't provided the details around the conclusion they have come to with them. others obviously can and do respond differently then me in this regard.
i go back to the idea of what does or doesn't work is either a completely subjective reality, or it is something more objective that can be articulated in a clear manner with examples which include the data.. without that, i withhold a conclusion and am not swayed by the confidence they usually get bundled with.. and.... if you throw in enough rules - anything can work...
show me an astrological 'rule' that works and i will change my mind...they all seem to come bundled with a host of other rules that are essentially allow for a host of exceptions... for every rule that seems to work, there are countless examples of them breaking down as i see it.. there is a crazy circular logic to so much of astrology that one has to be foolish not to acknowledge this at the start of ones inquiry into astrology... house systems are a good example... the idea of dividing everything up into 12 works, or it doesn't...this same concept of division can apply to the angles or it can't.... if it applies, who is to say a different division can't work equally well if all it is based on is a number? i tend to favour a house system that relies on the angles specifically.. that would be a '4' house system.. if others want to divide further, so be it... there are too many questions surrounding astrology for anyone to be in a position to think they know just how it works or that others who use different methods are wrong... either astrology is a subjective activity held up in the mind of the person involved, or it isn't.. i would like to think that it isn't but finding what holds up and what doesn't is difficult when one gets the impression they are wandering the halls of an insane asylum... sometimes i find myself thinking about astrologers and those interested in astrology in just this context...
-
between what we know and what we don't know, there is a big gap... i find myself being quite sceptical of what i think i know... the alternative is a form of arrogance as i see it.. i think people in general suffer from over confidence in their ideas and position and astrologers in general definitely fall into this category as i see it.. any person who gave many of the ideas in astrology the time of day would have to conclude that there are so many gaping holes in so many of the theories surrounding astrology, only those suffering from a form of insanity would seriously pursue it... that said, i continue to think there is something to astrology, but it isn't with all the baggage that astrology is presently known for..
i like the idea of techniques used in astrology coming under the control of statistical analysis.. i believe the french couples work and others work like john addey challenge many of the common assumptions surrounding astrology... that to me is a good thing, not that many will consider these authors works... i think it goes back to most folks being more comfortable with what they know then seriously considering what they don't know... most folks don't seem to have much of a taste for the abstract, or if they did they would question there positions a lot more!
[......]
I like your whole post
Because of the number of surveys I've done in relation to astrology, I
think I've got more reasons than anyone to doubt astrology as a whole,
but I don't because I know very well how most astrologers, including
complete novices, can do remarkable work at times, and even routine
work is still quite valuable.
Now all of that is being done with single factors that are usually
synthesized in one or more ways, but the single factors in themselves
don't usually hold water, or if they DO appear to, it is only ever at a
nominal level above chance - something in the order of 10, 20, 30% for
large amounts of data (much more for small amounts).
That might sound a lot, but it isn't when you try and do anything with it.
What DOES work at a much higher level, is what astrologers have been
claiming all along - that THEMES will manifest far more often than we
would expect by chance - not particular traits or events, but research into
this sort of thing has been virtually non-existent until a few years ago.
That's where the answers lie - doing surveys based on what astrologers
are actually saying - not what various people think they are saying.
-
James M,
Ray Murphy is giving you some sound advice. This is consistent with my experience of Astrology.
What DOES work at a much higher level, is what astrologers have been
claiming all along - that THEMES will manifest far more often than we
would expect by chance - not particular traits or events, but research into
this sort of thing has been virtually non-existent until a few years ago.
Ray advocates looking at Astrology from the perspective of 'the dispassionate observer' - measuring what's happening in the external world - absolutely necessary for the future of Astrology. But I advocate an additional approach (not an alternative): the inward journey. I put Astrology to the test in my daily life - using transits and the delineations of, primarily, Robert Hand. Robert describes not only the events that can be promoted by any given transit but also the changes in your inner world - how you're feeling; the topics that occupy your thoughts: there is a bias being applied to the flow of consciousness. This is my experience of Astrology - certain events become more likely because of current preoccupations.
This may not be the entirety of astrological effects, but it is something you can personally connect with. Keep a journal; paraphrase the delineations for the transits of the day; note what did or did not apply - internally (mental state; thoughtstreams) and externally (events). Develop astrological awareness - bring into consciousness what is more usually 'unseen'. Prove Astrology by personal acquaintance with its effects.
This is a practice that takes both dedication and time to produce changes in your "Self" awareness - but it worked for me! With all due respect James, you need to stop asking questions and do some work.
Henry.
-
James M,
Ray Murphy is giving you some sound advice. This is consistent with my experience of Astrology.
What DOES work at a much higher level, is what astrologers have been
claiming all along - that THEMES will manifest far more often than we
would expect by chance - not particular traits or events, but research into
this sort of thing has been virtually non-existent until a few years ago.
Ray advocates looking at Astrology from the perspective of 'the dispassionate observer' - measuring what's happening in the external world - absolutely necessary for the future of Astrology. But I advocate an additional approach (not an alternative): the inward journey. I put Astrology to the test in my daily life - using transits and the delineations of, primarily, Robert Hand. Robert describes not only the events that can be promoted by any given transit but also the changes in your inner world - how you're feeling; the topics that occupy your thoughts: there is a bias being applied to the flow of consciousness. This is my experience of Astrology - certain events become more likely because of current preoccupations.
This may not be the entirety of astrological effects, but it is something you can personally connect with. Keep a journal; paraphrase the delineations for the transits of the day; note what did or did not apply - internally (mental state; thoughtstreams) and externally (events). Develop astrological awareness - bring into consciousness what is more usually 'unseen'. Prove Astrology by personal acquaintance with its effects.
This is a practice that takes both dedication and time to produce changes in your "Self" awareness - but it worked for me! With all due respect James, you need to stop asking questions and do some work.
Henry.
Those things can still all be included in surveys, even if all of the evidence
is subjective, because if reports of feelings are tagged appropriately for
research purposes AND they come from many unrelated sources AND the
results point in particular directions, then the subjective nature of the
observations could reasonably be ignored, especially if the subjective
observations came from non-astrologers who had no idea what should be
happening "internally".
If surveys like this were conducted and astrologers' subjective observations
conformed with the text books more than non-astrologers, then we would
need to ask how much value we should be attaching to their contributions.
-
"the further one goes, the less one knows" - lao tze translation that i recall..
ray murphy - thanks for your comments.. are the surveys you've done publicly available for reading? i agree with your idea that themes might be more readily discernible astrologically, although that is not how all astrologers actually approach astrology... think of how a theme would work with those who try to time events to a particular house system cusp... the astro idea of trying to time events with something other then planet to planet or planet to angle and vice versa is not something i have involved myself with, but it would be open to analysis if someone wanted to gather info and put it under statistical analysis requirements..
lorenzo - thanks for sharing the article from ncgrs journal by kenneth irving.. good stuff and makes me think i would benefit from a subscription to ncgrs journal if many of the articles are like that one..
big mac - thanks for your comments... do you know how much or little work i have done in astrology? your comments seems to suggest that as a result of my asking questions, i haven't done some work in some respect.... asking questions is an essential part of the work as i see it...astrologers would benefit from asking more questions of the limits of their knowledge as opposed to jumping to premature conclusions - something i witness quite regularly and to which i referred to earlier as a form of arrogance or high regard for there astrological position...
my ongoing interest and curiosity in astrology - even more centrally - the human mind - are the basis for many of the questions i periodically pose here... they are not so much directed at anyone as the are a means for having a conversation on a topic that i find fascinating..
-
James,
big mac - thanks for your comments... do you know how much or little work i have done in astrology? your comments seems to suggest that as a result of my asking questions, i haven't done some work in some respect.... asking questions is an essential part of the work as i see it...astrologers would benefit from asking more questions of the limits of their knowledge as opposed to jumping to premature conclusions - something i witness quite regularly and to which i referred to earlier as a form of arrogance or high regard for there astrological position...
my ongoing interest and curiosity in astrology - even more centrally - the human mind - are the basis for many of the questions i periodically pose here... they are not so much directed at anyone as the are a means for having a conversation on a topic that i find fascinating..
When I advised you to do a certain kind of "work" I wasn't only thinking about Astrology. Using a journal in the way I suggested (something I advocate for all who are looking for answers) is a variation on a 'magical' technique that has been in use for a very long time. The idea is to develop an enhanced self-awareness, as well as 'astrological' awareness. Many truth-seekers are unaware, at least early in the journey, that they are looking for a particular brand of truth; I know I was. They desire to find evidence that supports the value of life, shows life to be meaningful and demonstrates the value of "The Rational Self". Are you actually willing to "Know thy Self"? The Human mind is a Self-supporting, Self-creating mechanism that tends to reject anything that questions the assumption of being a free-willed individual entity. "Shoot the messenger!" is one kind of reaction to uncomfortable information - and Human history (as well as my personal history) is full of examples of this kind of reaction.
Losing my own 'animal arrogance' is the price I've paid to gain certain insights – on the mechanics of Self-creation (an alternative name for the Logic of Life), for example. Mind you, “while in Rome ...”
The problem with understanding 'The Logic …' is that you have to battle with that creative and protective process that is 'The Logic …' itself. Chicken and egg! Most are not willing to go there.
Henry.
-
henry - 'know thyself' is a good aphorism to always keep in mind.. i like another quote too - "first cast out the beam out of thine own eye,"... some type of introspection is necessary as i see it...
what i mostly witness in astrology are a lot of unsubstantiated claims... 'this works for me' constitutes a subjective position which is where astrology primarily finds itself today.. this doesn't seem to differ much from present day 'religion' as i see it.. one has 'faith' or 'believes' the general ideology or not... is there some way that astrology might differ from religion, at least the 'fundamental kind' that to my mind seems so popular at present? it seems not... certain schools of astrology can differ widely from those who follow a different school of astrological thought - consider this like a parallel to the different religions or even more narrowly to the different types of christianity being practiced today... perhaps everyone can be right and it all works, but i tend to think there is a high amount of subjectivity going on that wouldn't hold up under deeper analysis... it is fine for others to maintain certain beliefs however disconnected from reality they are, so long as that is not what i'm doing in my ongoing astrology studies... watching others gives me pause to consider this regularly and for that i am grateful.. thanks for your comments - james
-
"the further one goes, the less one knows" - lao tze translation that i recall..
ray murphy - thanks for your comments.. are the surveys you've done publicly available for reading?
Yes and No.
Bits of them are scattered throughout the astrology groups, but I haven't put any
of them on a dedicated website because it's pretty much a waste of time, due to
a lack of interest.
i agree with your idea that themes might be more readily discernible astrologically, although that is not how all astrologers actually approach astrology...
It sounds like we'e focusing on two different things because astrology is ALL about
using themes and then zeroing-in on them - for example when we look transiting
MAR con nMER we always expect to see a MAR/MER theme manifesting, irrespective
of all else. If we don't see it or we are not experienced enough to see it manifesting
then we can always find excuses we're game enough.
think of how a theme would work with those who try to time events to a particular house system cusp...
Everything 'works' in astrology. The Law of Averages is very kind to us and guarantees
that in tle long term our predictive work will equal the chance levels. That is more than
enough for most people, so we can use any house system we like. They all work and
so will the ones that haven't even been invented yet BUT many astrologers - probably the
majority, develop ways of making thier preferred House system work at better than the
chance levels - apparently by using ESP and looking at the cusps more often when they
actually DO work (just by chance).
When it comes to examining (intermediate) Houses cusps, which I've done, it's like nearly
all things in astrology - there is very little deviation from the chance levels. A lt more work
could be done on that, but I think it would be one of the most futile things one could do
in research. It would be different if the Houses were being examined, where we kept right
away from very specific boundaries and used say the centre 50% of any given house for
surveys (or research if you want to call it that).
the astro idea of trying to time events with something other then planet to planet or planet to angle and vice versa is not something i have involved myself with, but it would be open to analysis if someone wanted to gather info and put it under statistical analysis requirements..[.....]
I agree. That's what I developed a transit program, beginning in 2003 - a program that
assumes virtually nothing and just reports "what's in the data" - all aspects - all orbs -
all harmonics. That's where the most credible results will be (and have been) found, so
until we get some very solid results that have be replicated convincingly, it would be a
waste of time dealing with House cusps which no one swears-by anyway. It's different
for aspects - we all agree that they work very well.
You mentioned above "planet to planet and planet to angle" but we really need to include
some midpoints, and about a year ago I found that transiting midpoints also work much
better than I realised AND they don't even have to be close to the transited body or point.
which was a big surprise to me. I only ever used them if they were almost straddling
another body or point.
-
Forum,
Given that this thread appears on a site dedicated to teaching 'best practice' to would-be (and actual) working astrologers, answers to the question “What works … and what doesn't ...” might naturally be expected to come from those who have the experience in using Astrology for the benefit of clients. But the question posed is also related to the larger topics “What is Astrology, and how are astrological effects produced?” - topics of importance to a potentially larger audience.
Today, I have in mind the relation that 'theory' has to 'experimental testing': the two interact. Whether it's assumed, or explicitly stated, there is always some theory behind attempts to test 'what works' in Astrology. In other words, you look for the expected consequences of some astrological configuration. What the theory should suggest is 'where to look, and the method to use'. If you don't find what you’re looking for, then a rethink about the theory or method, or both, is needed. My own efforts have been directed toward providing a philosophical base, or theory, for Astrology by getting down to some core ideas, condensed from the time-tested structures such as the twelve-fold nature of zodiac/house systems.
At the heart of my system is a four-fold set of complementary principles. To date, I have probably been a little too technical in my explanations of this system, in part due to one of my earliest intentions – to show that Astrology is 'respectable' in intellectual terms and thereby more attractive as a topic of serious study. Unfortunately, this approach seems to have alienated most astrologers. And so, a certain amount of re-writing is necessary. I'd like to show that this core four-fold complementary is demonstrable in everyday experience and language. One example (instantiation, technically) is the four-term set {irrational, rational, subjective, objective}. Water signs (4th principle) are often regarded as being emotional or even irrational, whereas the Air signs (3rd principle) are the opposite - the more rational, thinking signs. Opposite here means complementary: like the similar pairing, theory and experiment, they interact – you can't have one without the other. The simplest way to demonstrate this is in sentences of the kind “I want to know, so I ask questions.” In other words the rational process is always preceded by the irrational need, and success in discovery fulfils that initiating need – cycle complete. Note that irrationality is of a higher 'order' than the rational process itself! The most basic of these irrational needs is “I want to live!” Without that in place, nothing else proceeds.
As theoretician Michio Kaku expresses in his book 'Hyperspace': “Our curiosity is part of the natural order. Perhaps we as humans want to understand the universe in the same way that a bird wants to sing. … Some people seek meaning in life through personal gain, through personal relationships or through personal experience. However, it seems to me that being blessed with the intellect to divine the ultimate secrets of nature gives enough meaning to life.” The satisfactions of a scientist, and someone who implicitly understands, and gives voice to, the Logic of Life.
The pairing subjective-objective is even simpler: we react (assign value to) to events and objects we encounter in a way that is directly related to survival. Subsequently, reaction leads to appropriate action – cycle completes. This is part of the Earth-Fire, second-order first-order, pairing. I think I've said just about enough to demonstrate that the essence of 'Life' is in the combining of these four complementary processes: the irrational, rational, subjective and objective necessarily interact to fulfil Life's purpose – stuff we can all 'see' in daily life. It's only when Astrology is seen as an integral part of this totality that it begins to 'make sense'.
So much more to be said, but enough for now.
Henry.
-
As theoretician Michio Kaku expresses in his book 'Hyperspace': “Our curiosity is part of the natural order. Perhaps we as humans want to understand the universe in the same way that a bird wants to sing. … Some people seek meaning in life through personal gain, through personal relationships or through personal experience. However, it seems to me that being blessed with the intellect to divine the ultimate secrets of nature gives enough meaning to life.” The satisfactions of a scientist, and someone who implicitly understands, and gives voice to, the Logic of Life.
Let's think about this for a minute. Do we want to take direction from a theoretician when it comes to finding meaning in life? Basically, a theoretician thinks about thoughts, ideas. That's a far remove from a hands-on living of life (as, truth to tell, I find your incessantly mentioned Logic of Life to be).
Some people may seek meaning in life through personal gain – and in so doing create much from which others benefit. They are creators who play a large role in building the world. Sure, there are plenty of others who are just out to fill their own pockets and don't contribute much, but there are also selfish, greedy scientists and theoreticians.
People who seek meaning through personal relationships do things like create families. They don't have time to sit around and talk theory. They are busy feeding, clothing and providing a home for others. They provide a warm and welcoming environment for the exhausted theoretician to return to each night (thinking is very tiring).
Those who seek meaning through personal experience . . . This one's a little vague because personal experience includes the seeking of personal gain and experience with relationships – and everything else. But let's say the person has really concentrated on himself or herself. A strong focus on self. Maybe intense experiences with booze, drugs, sex, etc. Yes, it sounds pretty self-centered and not much of a contribution to the world – unless that person learns from such a narcissistic focus and goes out into the world to help others who are trapped in a similar negative experience. No theory, but intense life experience as teacher.
And then there are those who feel contented that “being blessed with the intellect to divine the ultimate secrets of nature gives enough meaning to life”. How we can we, or they, be so sure that their intellect is on the right track, that it isn't caught up in hubris and delusion? We may be dealing with a mind that is busy congratulating itself on finding supposedly correct answers. That doesn't do us a bit of good. And do we really even want to spend our lives trying to 'understand nature', or is our time better spent in actively creating, building, providing homes, and helping others in need? No special logic needed for those activities – just heart-felt contribution and remembering to step away from the private world of the mind.
-
ray murphy, big mac and kort: thanks for sharing your thoughts here..
ray murphy - transiting midpoints - astro.com has a free listing of the outer planets transiting midpoints, but i can't find it.. i agree that they are very useful to know about..
i would like to see what is on the net that you have so if you have something please share it.. thanks
i like thinking of astro symbols as giving us themes to work out of and not in a static way where something translates in a persons life in some hard and fast manner.. i like to make the analogy of planets being primary colours.. combine 2 and you get a secondary colour, 3 and you get yet another colour which combines themes associated with all 3 planets... this is just what happens with transiting midpoints to a planet that is being transited by these moving midpoints... it is an area that is generally overlooked by astrologers... it seems most folks want to get into archaic systems from the past as opposed to working with the concept of midpoints in the present... there is a lot of work to be done in this area as i see it and i do believe that work in this area will bring astrology into the 21st century in a more progressive context... dwelling on ancient techniques from the deep past seems tenuous at best and downright crazy at worst, however this is where astrology often finds itself at present....
as for the house conversation - i maintain the angles are the critical points to the chart.. i use house cusps the same way the vedic astrologers mostly do - the house cusp is the '''centre'' of the house...- 4/10 house - a square, 9/5 a trine, and etc... they are aspect or harmonic based off the 2 axis of the chart - ascendant and midheaven... well, vedic just work off the ascendant, but i think probably some of the astrologers in india are probably working with the midheaven at this point too.. i don't keep up on the topic of vedic astro, but i do know that equal house off the ascendant is really a harmonic based approach... unfortunately most astrologers get distracted with the house concept and forget to see that it is the harmonic relationship that is paramount in it all.... that is how i see it..
big mac - i like your comments here and it reminds me of some of the reading i have done of marie louise von franz, james hillman and others in this area... the 4 elements are an interesting philosophical beginning point for much of astrology as i got to know it way back when.. the idea of rational verses irrational - subjective/objective and etc are ongoing ways for me to understand the world i live in... i remember marie louise von franz giving a description of a 3 legged table where the 4th leg was not quite there - or something to this effect as it was a long time ago... i often come back to this idea as i tend to think we have a couple of the legs of the table, but not all of them... as a consequence we are always looking for equilibrium or balance thru that one area that we lack in and it is different for all of us... while fire and earth or air and water may be very different - i see them as having a real affinity for each other .. i believe there is always a weak link in the element balance of a chart that is a real motivation for the person to come to terms with, or not.... it can happen on a conscious level or the person can keep on hitting into things in a way that demands they look at an area they need to find harmony with..
kort - i think there is room for a number of different approaches to life... i think this idea is captured in the philosophy around elements...to continue with the symbolism, air has it's place, as do all the elements... as for hubris and delusion - that is something we all need to regularly watch for in ourselves... when i look back on different experiences i have gone thru, it is never obvious at the time, but only more apparent over the course of time....
happy trails everyone - james
-
I have found many techniques that work in astrology. Here are a few notable ones:
1. Noel Tyl's Vocation technique works. 2. Dymock Brose's Age Harmonic technique works for events.
3. Alice McDermott's techniques for Dwads and Duads works. 4. Isaac Starkman's rectification ideas and Polaris program do.
4. Solar Arc coincide with events 5. Primary Directions work. 5. I was fascinated with how accurate Vettius Valens predictions worked long before the advent of computer programs.
Now here is what doesn't work in todays astrology. Most of the astrology on this forum is "ASTROLOGY AFTER THE FACT".
In other words taking some event that happened and fitting the astrology so that it corresponds to the event. Very seldom do I read posts where a forumite will predict, using all the astrological knowledge one has, some important event in the future.
Noel does this with clients when he looks at their chart one year ahead and has the client aim to make good things happen by being prepared for this time ahead.
So does your astrology work if your techniques concentrate on "ASTROLOGY AFTER THE FACT?"---probably.
Do your techniques work for prewarning your client ahead of time of possible health issues, relationship issues, job possibilities,etc? or for guiding them in the right direction according to what the chart shows in the near future?
So what techniques actually worked for you and you were actually able to predict a future event? A few years ago I had success predicting which of 2 teams would win a sporting eveent by drawing up a chart for the starting time of the game and applying some astrological techniqujes.
-
ray murphy, big mac and kort: thanks for sharing your thoughts here..
ray murphy - transiting midpoints - astro.com has a free listing of the outer planets transiting midpoints, but i can't find it.. i agree that they are very useful to know about..
Transiting midpoints have always been a handy extra string to our bows, but for
most of us they weren't worth the effort that was required to use them, or we
already had more than enough other things to work with.
The astrologers who used transiting midpoints never had, as far as I know, a system
for locating all of them (for standard chart factors) probably because it would have
involved the printing-out of a ridiculous number of them for every event or future
transit date. They really need to be viewed in isolation so that a few days of them
(+/-) can be visually scanned at the same time.
They work very well if they are all used because it is only then that really striking
combinations are visible - you know - the ones you can win bets with nearly all the
time.
Some striking transiting midpoints when viewed in isolation can be very useful, such
as tran VE/JU = ASC or say tran MA/SA = ASC, and they are also very useful for the
normal rectification of birth charts, where meaning takes precedence over numbers.
I found that transiting midpoints can easily be used quite independently of all other
factors - if they are all used, because there are a bunch of days in each year when
each person has a cluster of them that points clearly in one direction for a particular
theme.
The orbs for transiting midpoints are larger than those that have been traditionally
used for midpoints. That's not a preference or an opinion - the data shows that is
the case, but as we would expect from our experience with transits and events,
the smaller the orb the better, but if there are say 3, 4 or 5 tranMpts pointing in
the same direction and a few of them have a wide-looking orb, then they shouldn't
be ignored because of that because they will be "dragged in to the picture" to make
it clearer - like Rob Hand described in Planets in Transit, where the average orb is
considered.
I have been observing astrologers' comments on a few groups and watching how
they will suddenly start talking about events that are sometimes amazing testaments
to tranMpts and therefore astrology generally.
To my surprise, I found that tranMpts work at any angular separation (gap) from the
transited body or point.
I also found that viewing just a few tranMpts at a time for any given date is pretty
much a waste of time unless they are striking ones. Sure, they often work, but it
would be hard to keep the "hit-rate" up when all the misses are counted. This wouldn't
apply to verbal gymnasts of course. I'm really addressing astrologers who like showing
off and hitting bulls eyes. :)
An exception to the above comment about being 'a waste of time' is where the astrologer
can already see what looks like a trend - say conflict/ love/ confusion etc when using
their normal methods, and the tranMpts appear to confirm it once or more.
I also found that identical MULTIPLE tranMpts appear at the dates of death of family
members. This is to be expected to a certain extent according to the rules of chance,
but I've been blown away by some of the cases I've seen and it appears to be more than
chance at play. This is saying a lot for someone who is always looking at chance, and has
seen how it can easily demolish some of our ideas, however a lot more data would need to
be processed before any statistical odds could be calculated.
-
Halina brings up the topic about predictive techniques.
In NOLA around 1971, I was one of three hippie astrologers who worked together with 90 degree wheels and Mars to try to predict horse races at the local track. We kept trying to figure out how and where we were off in our calculations. Then we realized the races were fixed.
I still don't know if the technique would have worked.
Isaac Asimov wrote "The Foundation Series". The books involve a series of future predictions from a mathematician called the "Hari Seldon Plan" designed to limit chaos in human affairs to 1000 years as humanity goes through a series of crisis. That is the kind of preditive ability I want to develop, and to that end I offer a start on the following page: http://www.xstarian.com/The-Future.html (http://www.xstarian.com/The-Future.html)
,Daniel
-
ray murphy wrote:
The astrologers who used transiting midpoints never had, as far as I know, a system
for locating all of them (for standard chart factors) probably because it would have
involved the printing-out of a ridiculous number of them for every event or future
transit date.
I do not understand several of the statements made here. Not because I am stupid, but because they do not make sense.
Midpoints:
calculation is simple by hand with pencil and paper. Most of the time one can do them in one's head. It's maths for 10 year-olds.
www.astro.com (http://www.astro.com) has the Swiss Emphemeris:
GO to left column of home page.
click Ephemeris
click 6000 Year Ephemeris
page opens.
after yearly planetary ephemerides
you find Midpoint Ephemeris for 200 years
also 22.30 sort midpoint ephemeris for 1800-2099
They however do not give Lunar midpoints.
The New American Midpoint Ephemeris 2006-2020,
Pottenger, 2007 does list Lunar midpoints.
On any given DAY there will be 55 planetary midpoints.
The number increases by 33 when one adds ASC, MC and VX.
This should not be beyond the mental capacity of most people.
I was referring to:
"the printing-out of a ridiculous number of them for every event or future
transit date. " Do you have any evidence that shows astrologers have
actually done that so they could view them?
-
This, at least, needs further explication. I find it non-sense.
-----
In my study of the British Royal Family I have found in the period 1600-2000 the successor to the reigning monarch ALWAYS has his/her JU/PL midpoint (C) as one branch of a pattern involving the previous two reigning monarchs' JU/PL midpoints, i.e.,
C
/ \
A B
This at times skips the eldest prole and sometimes an entire generation. So much for volition and individual choice.
Did it exceed the chance level?
Any idea of the Expected number and Observed number?
.
-
This topic is really fascinating. Please excuse my overly simple ideas but they're all I have at present. ;)
The accuracy of Astrology can be a tricky thing to prove. The key reason for this is the bias of individual perception to an experience. For example, try pointing out the negative traits of neptune in the first house to a client and chances are they won't see that about themselves. Even on a personal level, when I discuss my childhood with my sister, who is 14 months younger than I am, we end up arguing because our perceptions of that time are so different.
I am still very much an emerging astrologer and being Aries I learn about things according to how they affect me. The majority of my knowledge of astrology has come from analyzing my own chart. When it comes to personality definition I have found astrology to be extremely accurate but when I try to correlate events in my life with astrological transits I come up blank - well almost. Saturn seems to be a key point (My father died when I was 14, my grandfather when I was 21). But there are quite a few 'huge' events in my life I haven't been able to discern the astrological influence. This also figures for many current transits as well. I have just put it down to my lack of understanding. I trust astrology.
Maggie
-
This topic is really fascinating. Please excuse my overly simple ideas but they're all I have at present. ;)
The accuracy of Astrology can be a tricky thing to prove. The key reason for this is the bias of individual perception to an experience. For example, try pointing out the negative traits of neptune in the first house to a client and chances are they won't see that about themselves. Even on a personal level, when I discuss my childhood with my sister, who is 14 months younger than I am, we end up arguing because our perceptions of that time are so different.
I spend a lot of time doing all sorts of surveys in relation to astrology - mainly
tropical, sidereal and to a lesser extent, heliocentric, and I've found that it's
quite easy to locate batches of traits and events that are quite clear-cut and
provable - often with documents.
No researcher can actually test any widely accepted claim of tropical astrology
because we simply don't have any. If we did, someone would have quoted one
of them ad verbatim in the last 7 years when I've asked.
We can't test anything that is not specific.
-
I was referring to:
"the printing-out of a ridiculous number of them for every event or future
transit date. " Do you have any evidence that shows astrologers have
actually done that so they could view them?
HUH ?? This is a strange question!
I do. Others do. Yes. Well?
This, at least, needs further explication. I find it non-sense.
-----
In my study of the British Royal Family I have found in the period 1600-2000 the successor to the reigning monarch ALWAYS has his/her JU/PL midpoint (C) as one branch of a pattern involving the previous two reigning monarchs' JU/PL midpoints, i.e.,
C
/ \
A B
This at times skips the eldest prole and sometimes an entire generation. So much for volition and individual choice.
Did it exceed the chance level?
Any idea of the Expected number and Observed number?
It happens in every instance.
I suppose that is above chance?
[....]
feliciter.
It wouldn't be above the chance levels if it was expected to happen in every instance
or in the vast majority of instances.
It sounds like you have no idea what the Expected score should have been. If that is
the case, then why not compare the observation with random data and report on it?
-
There is a significant and important study of the patterning of midpoints in families, which builds on the evidence of the Cosmobiological school published by the Ebertins for the patterns of disease in family groups (this is thus a study of the cyclic interface with time and matter or genetic make-up in genetic groups('families'), to be found in Michael Harding Hymns to the Ancient Gods, 1992, pp 262-289: "Case Studies: Patterns in Family Charts". It is one of the most important studies in astrological literature.
IF it had exceeded the chance levels, someone would have written it up and
attempted to replicate it - so what good is it until that happens?
-
ray murphy wrote:
They are ALWAYS analysed in amplitudes of the 4th 8th 16th 32nd and 64th harmonics.
That is not the case at all. Astrologers select what harmonics they will use for midpoints.
I generally map all charts I deal with on a 90 degree chart, putting in the midpoints.
In this way I can take a midpoint ephemeris and see immediately where and what the T Midpoints will directly contact by 8th Harmonic amplitudes
(0, 45, 90, 135, 180 etc., as they used to be called 'aspects').
It never occured to me that this was a particularly difficult mental exercise;
It wouldn't to anyone else either. It wasn't even raised as an issue.
Nor that is was superseded by any astrology symbolistic (fictional models) construct.
That wasn't raised either.
Midpoints are the measure in TIME of the synodic cycles of the solar planetary system;
That's not true either. Midpoints are calculated with zodiacal longitude which has no direct relationship to time.
the cycles are the basis and sine qua non e non plusquam ultra of astrology;
transiting midpoints are used to measure the continuum of one transiting moment (radix) in the limited time such radix has to live.
What is the point of stating the very obvious?
The question of orbs we have dealt with before: 1.5-2 degrees in H4 for personal points; less for others in higher harmonics.
I've updated the information for transiting midpoints - based on research.
[Ray]:To my surprise, I found that tranMpts work at any angular separation (gap) from the
transited body or point.[/quote]
This, at least, needs further explication. I find it non-sense.
I indicated that I previously didn't believe that transiting midpoints worked well with large angular separations, but my research showed clearly that they do. I'm only referring to Direct midpoints.
.