astrology - what works and what doesn't

[BigMac]

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.

[Kort]

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.

[james m]

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

[Halina]

     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]

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.

[DGordon]

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

,Daniel

[Ray Murphy]

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 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?

[Ray Murphy]

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?
.

[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 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

[Ray Murphy]

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.

[Ray Murphy]

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?

[Ray Murphy]

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]

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.
.