Exegesis Volume 09 Issues #001-010

 

exegesis Digest Thu, 11 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 001

In This Issue:
 #1: From: Patrice Guinard PhD
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V8 #59
 #2: From: Patrice Guinard PhD
  Subject: [e] The International Astrology Research Center (CURA)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:24:20 +0100
From: Patrice Guinard PhD
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V8 #59

True, Peter. The current issue is 8 #60.
Ask the webmaster.

Patrice
 
 

> From: "Paul Petersen" <safeasmilk@angelfire.com>
> Subject: [e] Status
>
> It appears that the Exegesis discussion "Back Issues" have been truncated at Volume 08 Issue #016 (Aug 2003). Is there a "Current Issue," and if so, where might it be located?
>
> Perhaps I'm mistaken, or have overlooked something.
>
> Best,
> Paul
>
 
 

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 09:24:24 +0100
From: Patrice Guinard PhD
Subject: [e] The International Astrology Research Center (CURA)

Hi a-list ,

Cura's next issue will be April, 2nd, 2004.

In the last one (28th), you could find, among other texts:

James Brockbank: The Sceptical Attack of Dean et al. on Astrology

Shelley Jordan: Astrology and Tibetan Culture (Part One)
  (Interview with Dr. Pema Dorjee, personal physician to the Dalai Lama)

Jesus Navarro: Astrology and Science: Two Worldviews searching for a Synthesis

Patrice Guinard: Des cycles et des hommes
 

Patrice

http://cura.free.fr

------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #1
 
 

exegesis Digest Thu, 11 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 002

In This Issue:
 #1: From: "Charles Hillman"
  Subject: [e] introduction.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Charles Hillman"
Subject: [e] introduction.
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 15:05:38 -0500
 

hello,i am charles hillman,and i have studied astrology for many years,
and am hoping to learn a lot more from the group.regards

------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #2
 

exegesis Digest Wed, 17 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 003

In This Issue:
 #1: From: "Dennis Frank"
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #2

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Dennis Frank"
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #2
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 20:09:40 +1300

> hello,i am charles hillman,and i have studied astrology for many years,and
am hoping to learn a lot more from the group.regards

Which group?  Those currently subscribed, I suppose.  Well, Charles, the
list is currently dormant, which renders the existence of the group somewhat
hypothetical.  When it does burst into life sporadically, the group
actualizes as (at most) up to half a dozen contributors.  The purpose of the
list is serious, but we are part of modern society which is mostly not, so I
guess it ain't surprising that few prove capable of addressing the issues in
a substantial manner!

You have studied astrology for many years, like me.  I also went online some
years ago in the hope of learning something more in a forum such as this.
Fair to say that it has happened, to a degree.  In the community of
astrologers such an attitude is untypical - they normally assume they know
it already.  It, however, seems to be somewhat differently understood by
each one!

Interesting that we all tacitly assume there is one astrology, yet reality
reveals the multitude.  We are brought to believe that learning brings us
knowledge.  Culture, via the education system, perpetuates the mass belief
that knowledge is based on reality, so that learning reveals aspects of our
collective reality.  Trying to grasp the collective reality of astrology
with one mind is rather like grasping a live fish with one hand, and
expecting to hold onto it, seems to me.

Dennis

------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #3
 
 

exegesis Digest Wed, 17 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 004

In This Issue:
 #1: From: Rachel
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #3
 #2: From: Exegesis Moderator
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V8 #59

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:06:09 -0500
From: Rachel
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #3

> Trying to grasp the collective reality of astrology
> with one mind is rather like grasping a live fish with one
> hand, and
> expecting to hold onto it, seems to me.
>
> Dennis
 
Beautifully put Dennis! But it is fun- Rachel

Tune in: Trust, you are perfection, a creative force in the Universal Mind.
                      Aum Tat Sat

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 23:24:54 -0800 (PST)
From: Exegesis Moderator
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V8 #59

Paul Petersen wrote:

>
> It appears that the Exegesis discussion "Back
> Issues" have been truncated at Volume 08 Issue
> #016 (Aug 2003). Is there a "Current Issue,"
> and if so, where might it be located?
>
> Perhaps I'm mistaken, or have overlooked something.
>

Paul, the fault is entirely mine. Please revisit the
web site and you'll see that nearly everything is up
there now.

Sorry about the delay, but I've been working
constantly for the last few years and have been
allowing the list to languish, hoping against hope
that the list would manage to survive without my daily
attention.

Unfortunately, I don't think that it has done as well
as I had hoped. I've been reading through the last 100
issues or so and have dismayed to find an ugly stream
of academic elitism creeping into the list, which is
certainly totally counter to my intentions in starting
the list. One of my goals was to get the non-experts
to deeply discuss the topic of the theory of astrology
as I believe that they are the only ones likely to
make any progress with it. In reading the back issues
I find a disturbing pattern of a "seeker" joining the
list and asking a question, only to have an academic
"expert" squash all real dialog with blowhard
pronouncements, the "seeker" leaves the list and never
returns. This is not what the list, nor academia,
should be. ARGHHH!

I'm a bit unhappy about this right now and shouldn't
be making long term decisions, so I'm not sure what
the best course of action would be. Suggestions are
welcome. At the minimum I need to monitor discussions
more and simply ban people who are dogmatic and who
avoid real discussion and attempts at common
understanding. The fault is mine for allowing things
to go on so long. Life is too short and my basic
impulse is to be nice, which is perhaps the wrong
thing for an online discussion group. I don't know.

I wish I could commit to fuller participation,
especially as I've been working through the concepts a
lot as a mental exercise over the last decade, but I'm
tied up in keeping a couple of small businesses afloat
right now and cannot yet devote enough time to do any
real writing and conversation. I'll try to keep on top
of the conversation and see if that helps.

I guess this is not a direct reply to Paul, but meant
for all list members. Everyone should feel free to
comment, in private if you need.

--fran (wispy transparent moderator)
------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #4
 

exegesis Digest Fri, 19 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 005

In This Issue:
 #1: From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #4

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #4
Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 11:39:34 -0500

   Well, you've some nerve being "nice", Wispy....:)

   But as to theories, I'm siding with the skeptics concerning astrology's
total lack of objectively derived content:  however, unlike a salivating
pseudo-skeptic, I am currently contented with the notion that astrology does
fill the billet as a means to exercise the all too human religious functions
of my psyche.  Thus I remain the aging hippie/freedom junkie, and I live for
the day that an astrological "hit" is in no way related to my petty will or
my prissy self-esteem--when "getting lucky" will do nothing to raise my
pulse and blood pressure, but merely enhance a generalizing feeling of
recognition...increase a comforting sense of universal connectedness.
Astrology remains for me a completely human perception--a miraculous,
powerless, inexplicable art of mankind with an *apparently* timeless
relevance.

  So how's transParenthood...:) (And, is that legal in PA?...)

Rog
------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #5
 

exegesis Digest Fri, 19 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 006

In This Issue:
 #1: From: "Paul Petersen"
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #4

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 20:19:20 -0600
From: "Paul Petersen"
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #4

 

My apologies, Fran, I didn't mean to be a thorn. I'm naive (specifically) to most of what's going on at Exegesis, and completely oblivious to "discussion lists" en masse, or even if said objects exist in like form or under a similar protocol. I noticed one more post this morning, V9 #5, so I'm not even sure this note is properly placed. I'll further heed any required liberties toward emendation or relocation. But from where I sit, more or less completely ignorant of the logistics, you are to be commended. So I thank you for your reply, and I'm appreciative of those archives that indeed have been (and are becoming) available.

And Dr. Guinard, I'm grateful for your response in kind. By the way, the name's actually Paul, and I thought that was kind of funny, since there may have been an insinuation that the thing had petered out. My close friends call me "Pete," but since I have several brothers, they sometimes say, "Hey Repeat!"

Once Patrice had posted (as have you) a prompt rejoinder, I did a bit more digging, only to find that the archives were to be made public periodically and not necessarily monthly or even semi-annually. That fault was mine. Fran, I know not what gratification or recompense you receive for your efforts, which may be considerable; I can offer only token, if sincere, remuneration. I hope that your consideration will soon bear sweeter fruits. And I also hope that ugly academic elitism, if that's what it amounts to, if it's not excised completely, would turn a fairer shade. I, for one, could stand a greater appreciation of the beneficent(?) academic elitists ... All kidding aside, I have every faith in each according to his measure. Each will get his: all in due time. That pertains to me, too. I pray God I wish no ill on anyone. My humble suggestion - slough it off like the dust off your shoes. My belief, religious or no, is that no man makes an adequate accounting of any other.

"Damn. braces: Bless relaxes. ... Improvement makes straight roads, but the crooked roads without Improvement, are roads of Genius"
   -Proverbs of Hell

Fran, I consider it a mark of wisdom to defer your decision. Most humbly, I do know. And I pray now "we" know. Your impulse to be nice shouldn't be ignored, even if the object of your affections must needs be. No matter how trite, a perfect stranger will never forget the smallest act of kindness. Even a random act. Likewise a slight. May the Good Lord bless and keep you and yours. Always.

I'm curious about something. Are these aims currently consistent (still valid to a significant extent):

~~~In some way what I'm proposing, assuming a bit of Jungian lingo for a moment, is that we deal with the shadow of astrology ... What is astrology? How does it work? What about the contradictions? What do we know about astrology from the past? What philosophical basis do we have in the modern world, when the modern world seems to reject the implications of astrology?
~~~Given that we know of no physical "force" to account for it, to what or where do we ascribe astrological "influences"?
~~~Given the time and place of an event, and by extension the celestial sphere and the celestial bodies, by what thoughts or organizing principles do we assign meaning to various components used by astrologers? That is, given the horizon, meridian, ecliptic, etc., how do we proceed in order to associate meaning with these components, and at what stages in this process are we sure or less sure of our understanding of why we make those associations? Example: house systems are often debated, but these are "later" in the process, what about the horizon? What about the meridian?
Was astrology psychological before psychology was recognized as "true"? That is, at some point in the past, the psychological attributes of a person were possibly not considered "real", or were unnamed, or not considered at all. We carry a tradition from "pre-psychological" times, is our modern understanding of astrology, and all of the psychological associations we bring to it, something that WE imposed on astrology? Or???~~~

And Fran, is this still the
~~~Subject: Theory, history, philosophy and culture of astrology.~~~

I think they are honest pursuits. That's my opinion.

I like seeing either "Patrice Guinard Director of CURA" or "http://cura.free.fr." on virtually anything that Patrice posts. Reason being, "MICROSOFT FRONTPAGE98 Software" supports hosting a free website at Yahoo.com (Yahoo geocities.com). F-R-E-E. No cost. Nil. I have a feeling there is a WINDOWS XP equivalent. No knowledge of HTML or any other computer code required. Anyone operating in a Windows environment can easily create a website. One (and only one!) very simple line of code (a published password as I recall) is all that's required. They teach schoolchildren to construct websites via this method. Any MSWord document can be posted directly to the website. And I think that applies to just about any file created on a Windows operating system. I know that from experience.

My point (question) is this: with all due respect, who are these people; "Who else? [Ed]? Dennis Frank? Juan Revilla? Bill Sheeran? Dale Huckeby? Andre Donnell? Candy Hillenbrand? Jane Axtell? [X Patrice Guinard?] Rab Wilke? Those are the recent habitues of the list, in the order in which they popped up in my mind. Then there are others who have contributed in the last year: Lynda Hill? Armando Rey? James Davis? Michael Jordan? Mark Shulgasser? Rob Tillett? Cynthia D'Errico Clostre? Martin Howe? And [...] Mary Downing?"

It took me an hour to locate this list of names, which was about 10 hours less than it might have been, had it not been stumbled upon. Fran, I noticed you recomended "Introductions ... But nonetheless, we do need to know who is here and I'd like to suggest we tell something of ourselves such that others might understand who we are, rather than post a short resume."

Great suggestion. But am I a "lurker" (whatever the sam heck that is) if I don't read ALL archival material, even from years back, in order to determine (very) roughly "who" someone is, or in order to formulate at least a tentative sketch of what books, magazines, movies, dramas
, musical works etcetera I need further investigate, so that I might understand, if need be, a little better where a person is "at"? ... My apologies, for that's a somewhat rhetorical question, not meant to offend ... Not so that I can "prove" something to them. Or even necessarily help them. But to get some idea if I'm even remotely on the same bandwidth on that particular day. I mean yes, absolutely, from EVERYONE I can learn SOMETHING, but hunt and peck is rough going.

This is what I'm saying (asking): Not everyone can precisely emulate Dr. Guinard's lead, because he's an exemplar. I don't have to agree with Patrice in every regard to respect his achievements. And imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

For example, I have certain ideas about Nietzsche's ZARATHUSTRA. Now Zoroaster was supposedly also an "astrologer," or at least I've heard said. And (here I'm speculating) Mythraism is an heir to Zoroastrianism. So I was stimulated yesterday to get out my copy of Gilles Deleuze's book NIETZSCHE (Trans. Tomlinson), partly just because, like Patrice (and this may exhaust the similarity for all I know) he's French, and although I've read numerous commentaries on Nietzsche in English, I wanted to get a take on how "the French" might gain further access to ZARATHUSTRA. Didn't happen. What did happen was that I now understand ZARATHUSTRA better and I understand how ONE Frenchman gained access to Nietzsche, and did well. Better than I expected. Maybe better than the Germans - hard for me to say without continued investigation/gestation - but certainly at least as well as Kaufmann, an American. But I now recall that Nietzsche said he'd wished he'd written in French. Maybe he didn't have to.

Anyway, perhaps one day it will dawn on me, this or that, knowing that Dr. Guinard is a professional philosopher, apparently of some rank, and obviously very knowledgable of astrology; I mean at least in terms of bulk - astrology/philosophy/astronomy - Dr. Guinard's grasp dwarfs my own, especially in every technical respect. But since I'm a physicist (BS, University of Kansas), and former VP of the Aquarian Organization of Astrologers (Kansas City), and having read his extremely provacative "Aphorisms" (CURA), I may have resonated one nano-Hz closer (or further) his (published) frequency on that particular day. Not that it matters. His ends and mine may be very different. Diametric, antipodal, even. Or perhaps our valences are complimentary. For now, who knows. But I do know one thing: if I go to his website, I've got a frame of reference. It's like coming in out of the cold - the desolate clime of cyberspace.

"Without Contraries is no progression."   -The Argument
"Opposistion is true Friendship."   -A Memorable Fancy

If it remains for me to read each and every Exegesis Digest in its entirety then I could hardly object: if that's what it takes to be elevated above the rank of "lurker" (whatever that may mean), then so be it. I mean to say this: I approve of the whole thing, based upon a glance at perhaps 20% of the archives, including all of last year's, roughly half or more of the first year's, and several threads of the intervening years.

This is what comes to mind: I recall, from last year's archives, a comment which ran something like, "after that response, silence is music to MY ears." It struck me as humorous. I don't recall the thrust of the discussion. But it WAS humorous, and I re-read the threads at least once and didn't see any flagrant maliciousness. I'm not defending it, approving of it, or condoning it. I'm not a moderator. I also seem to recall a measured response from Patrice (or one of his colleagues), not to that particular barb, but to the topic at hand. To my way of thinking, cooler heads prevailed. Again, I didn't follow the discussion verbatim - I'm not an astronomer. But meeting out measured responses to inflamitory remarks seems to be the technique - or ignoring them entirely. Or both. It appeared that Patrice, e.g., succeeded in that. Again, I'm going by memory. If I never learn anything of astrology/history/philosophy from Dr. Guinard (which is probably contingent only my own willingness), I've learned a little diplomacy.

Still, certain elements of Patrice's "Aphorisms" might themselves be taken as inflammatory, and because of my own particular interests, augmented and buttressed by certain historical facts, some fairly recently uncovered, and others not, some of the Aphorisms could be viewed as exceedingly inflammatory, especially in light of their
simple truth. I think someone somewhere must be contemplating
"Annotations to Guinard's Aphorisms" at this very moment. Lucid annotations, one could only hope. I wouldn't anticipate anyone flying into a narcissistic paranoic rage at the Exegesis forum anytime soon. But who knows? Stranger things HAVE happened. What then? To my way of thinking, censorship is an even higher form of flattery, uh, er, don't take me too literally, I'm not ready to be kissed off just yet!

I do have a website. Unfortunately, for the time being, it contains a privately published manuscipt that directly or indirectly treats of "the uses & disadvantages of astrology for life." The tutorial that I found (and I found 50 or so on www.) for publishing a web is in a stack of books or papers around here somewhere. Weird, but it was the ONLY one that gave the "passcode" for publishing. So it may be days or weeks 'till I can get an alternative site up. Especially since I've now graduated to XP. However, who knows, maybe it's time to go public. I'll have to ruminate on all this. What a shame that'd be - "growing up in public."

Respectfully,
Paul Petersen (And no, I'm not Catholic)

PS I'm here because I'm an admirer of both CURA, and perhaps to another extent, Exegesis. Both seem to merit further purview. You're right, Fran, the internet is anarchy, utter and total anarchy. Much like life. It's apparently not for the squeamish - it's a good thing to find permanent shelter. I've never tested these waters before. I could very conceivably be the next object of an even more pointed barb than the one I made light of. Then I may feel differently - very differently. Perhaps I'm in need of a humbling. Another one, I mean. Lord knows. In that case, I can only hope that Dr. Guinard (or the Good Lord) might come to my rescue - and my sympathies toward you, Fran, may well deepen. Anyhow, the voice of reason will prevail, if not here, then somewhere. But if people wish to triumph over one another, then please do so face-to-face, and in person, mano a mano (no disrespect to the fairer sex). I suspect the old code, a better code, the Theatre of Honor, the duello, may have kept some of the silly internet prattle under tow - and kept the lurkers under the bridges, or in the soldier's ranks, or behind bars, or in the cellar where they belong. I can't (presently) see that the aforementioned rudeness represented the drop of a handkerchief. I may be mistaken, and if so, I beg your pardon. Now if "an academic 'expert' squash all real dialog with blowhard pronouncements," then I'm not aquainted with any particular instance (in my brief perusal), and if said pronouncements eminate from a coward, then may he (or she) keep his hanky to his nose where it might cover the contempt that corners around his hollow horn. Glad tidings.

------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #6
 
 

exegesis Digest Sat, 20 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 007

In This Issue:
 #1: From: Aida Benetez-Rexach
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #6

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Aida Benetez-Rexach
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #6
Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 21:22:54 -0000

My name is Aida M. Benetez-Rexach, and I am doing research in Medieval
Astrology for an upcoming work about Astrology in Southern Europe.  I am a
Medievalist and Spanish Philology professor, currently living in the exotic
Morocco.  I have been constantly a quiet observer, avid reader of course, of
this list, yet somewhat timid (quiet pisces) and I would really see more
discussion, whomever wants to initiate it, whether amateurish or
professional.  Should I need to cooperate, I sure will.  It is great to know
people who really enjoy Astrology. Finally, I have a question: does anybody
here know the two astronomical poems attributed to King Sisebut?  I am
looking for those poems, I'd rather find them either in English or Spanish,
but French and Italian would do fine.

Regards,

Aida

Non dimitere credere pro credere, sed pro intelligere (Ramon Llull)
------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #7
 

exegesis Digest Mon, 22 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 009

In This Issue:
 #1: Subject: [e] astrology philosophy science
 From: Robert Tulip

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: [e] astrology philosophy science
From: Robert Tulip
Date:  Tue, 23 Mar 2004 12:13:46 +1100
 

Dear all

May I say how pleasing it is to see the exegesis discussion emerge again.
Like others I am too busy to devote the time I would wish to astrology,
despite a quite intense interest in its links with philosophy, science and
theology, but I am always interested to read emails which discuss astrology
with rigour and intelligence.

My long term goal is to contribute to the logical grounding of astrology in
scientific reason.  Underlying my short paper available on the web on
Calendersign (thanks Sepp!), I see the most promising line as fractal
genetics, seeing the geometrical harmonics of our solar system as providing
the long term ecological framework for the cumulative adaptation and
natural selection of the genes of earth, culminating in the way human
spiritual consciousness reflects the image of God in our galaxy.

If our Milky Way galaxy was the size of Australia or Europe, our solar
system would be a one inch disc, and the next star would be eighty metres
away.  Our solar system is the niche to which our genes have adapted over
four billion years of life.  Astrology is the study of the structure of
this adaptation.

I know this is rather difficult material to set out persuasively, so I am
happily patient, quietly developing my own thinking until I have time to
set it out more clearly (and until I can find anyone interested).  Having
just passed my Uranus opposition transit (d.o.b. 23.03.63, 3am Sydney
Australia), my main current interest is deepening my understanding of the
transits by studying Robert Hand's magnificent Planets in Transit, and some
of the other wonderful books on transits including Erin Sullivan's Saturn
In Transit and Haydn Paul's The Astrological Uranus.  These books help
explain the archetypal foundations of psychology and I strongly recommend
them. I have also recently found good papers on www.chaosastrology on the
fractal perspective, and another interesting site www.astronoetics.

Two articles of interest recently published on www.cura discuss science and
astrology.   Many thanks to Patrice Guinard for this great website.  The
first, by Navarro, I found very helpful especially for his excitement about
the possibilities of philosophical integration, although better English
translation is needed.  The second, replying to Dean et al,  I found quite
weak.  It did however inspire me to look for the first time at the
astrology and science website, which is a mine of information and comment,
generally trying to apply honest standards of rigour, but sadly finding
astrology rather wanting.  One extraordinary lapse on Dean's site was its
discussion of Gauquelin.  A paper there resorts to the bizarre and
desperate slur that the statistical planetary effects discovered by
Gauquelin could be ascribed to French parents changing the times on their
children's birth certificates to produce the results. Really - can you
imagine - 'I hope my child will be a champion athlete so I will tell the
registrar he was born under Mars rising??!  The CURA critique of Dean I
found interesting, but too magical and not sufficiently logical or
statistical.  I do hope some one can do better!

Our world can spend more than a trillion dollars each year on military
security but cannot find public resources to research the fundamental
astrological connections to our cosmos which are the true source of genuine
peace and spiritual integrity.  For example, medicine should research
correlations between major transits and health effects, building on the
recent interesting findings on insurance records of accidents at sun square
sun at http://safire.net/sara/method.html.

I felt Dennis Frank's recent comments here were too harsh about the state
of astrological discussion.  Dean, despite his faults and prejudice, has
shown why astrology remains in such disrepute, and has thrown the gauntlet
to astrologers to demonstrate why they should be taken seriously.  I am
confident this challenge will be met - as Navarro implies we are on the
cusp of a paradigm shift fully the equal of the Copernican replacement of
the flat earth theory.

One more comment.  My Master of Arts thesis was on The Place of Ethics in
Heidegger's Ontology.  Since writing it I have come to believe that
Heidegger's schema of the zuhanden (~practical) and vorhanden
(~theoretical) in Sein und Zeit presents the ground of a paradigm for
human-centred thinking which could integrate astrology with modern
understanding.  I would be interested to take this further.

with all best wishes, encouragement and respect

Robert Tulip

------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #9
 

exegesis Digest Tue, 23 Mar 2004 Volume: 09  Issue: 010

In This Issue:
 #1: From: Patrice Guinard
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #9
 #2: From: Patrice Guinard
  Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #9

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:50:14 +0100
From: Patrice Guinard <alcelia@club-internet.fr>
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #9

Hi Peter and list,

> the logical grounding of astrology in scientific reason.
(...)
> human spiritual consciousness reflects the image of God in our galaxy.

Well, seems to me a bit contradictory, unless the human spiritual consciousness
would be driven by scientific reason, of which I'm not sure. This "scientific
reason" is an invention of Occidental XVIIth century technology. So, before??
(our modern-technological world is not particularly lead by spirituality !)
 

> www.cura

cura.free.fr, "outside" world wide web!

:-)
 

> astrology and science website (...) honest standards of rigour

I wouln't say that! These works can be understood after the anti-astrological
and limited Popperian model.

.... and more : so "objective" that they have recently deleted all links to other
astrological websites.
(but see http://cura.free.fr/licom.html)
 
 

> The CURA critique of Dean I found interesting, but too magical
> and not sufficiently logical or statistical.

"magical" ??

Statistics is just a method. Very different of what logics is or could be.
Statistics is the "magic" of our modern reason. Not really exciting, and with
an announced ever-same "result", the disenchantment.
 

> I do hope some one can do better!

you?!  ... are welcome.
 

> A paper there resorts to the bizarre and desperate slur that the
> statistical planetary effects discovered by
> Gauquelin could be ascribed to French parents changing
> the times on their children's birth certificates to produce the results.

Surrealistic! A new good trick of Dean & al. team.
 

> One more comment.  My Master of Arts thesis was on The Place of Ethics in
> Heidegger's Ontology.  Since writing it I have come to believe that
> Heidegger's schema of the zuhanden (~practical) and vorhanden
> (~theoretical) in Sein und Zeit presents the ground of a paradigm for
> human-centred thinking which could integrate astrology with modern
> understanding.  I would be interested to take this further.
 

Well, I'm interested.
 

Patrice
CURA
 

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 11:03:23 +0100
From: Patrice Guinard
Subject: [e] Re: exegesis Digest V9 #9

Hi ROBERT!

(sorry for the lapsus!)

> Hi Peter and list,
 

------------------------------

End of exegesis Digest V9 #10
 

-----e-----

[Exegesis Top][Table of Contents][Prior Issues][Next Issues]

Unless otherwise indicated, articles and submissions above are copyright © 1996-2004 their respective authors.