|
Exegesis Volume 11 Issues #041-050 |
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 41
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 12:08:49 -0500 (CDT)
On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 Roger L. Satterlee opined: >
> [..]
If "no plausible mechanism" is enough to make astrology
modern, we're
> If predictions are indeed based on a causal mechanistic foundation,
then
Prediction and plausible causality have indeed been unrelated,
which has
> I question what is the relationship between "empiricism" and our
There has been little or no relationship. That's
the other part of the
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . When has empiricism ever
been
I assume you're talking about Edison's famous riposte that
he now knew
> Fear of mumbo-jumbo is all I see...:)
I don't fear mumbo-jumbo. I just find it singularly
unhelpful.
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The cultivated "dead" universe
What do you mean by "mental disciplines"? What's
the unity hidden in
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tanas' adoption
Two things. Motivations underlying events, not events
per se, and
> Symbolism will never be abandoned simply because what
we call symbols
If you're saying symbolism will never be abandoned because
we can't
> The fact that people cannot seem to stay interested or pleasantly
I see no inherent evil in assuming SOME order and predictability
in
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I can cite
a
Then cite it rather than referring to it obliquely (which
protects you
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Those hell bent
on
Not mad, just incoherent. You disallow the notion
of predictability, as
> Horsehockey!...:)
Whatever.
Later,
--
"In the empty spaces--lacunae, vacuums, pauses, voids, black holes--new
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 41
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 42
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:36:26 -0400
>> Embracing the idea that there is no plausible mechanism is
the more
The *acceptance* of a very simple proposition--that
the term
A "modern" (contemporary?) astrology, by comparison, would
exhibit
Tarnas' Cosmos and Psyche variety of empiricism seems to
facilitate
As in when James Hillman cites Jung's later perception
of the
Here is an example of the Jung-Hillman-Tarnas archetypal "influence"
http://pedantus.free.fr/Phlogiston_Becher_01.gif
Here the Sun is nearly exactly conjunct and parallel Mars, these
What astrologers will eventually perceive is that there is no
This purely poetic understanding which Tarnas and others are
hoping
No causal mechanism, no matter how ingeniously quantified--however
Our task is to understand ourselves, to use astrology as
a guide to
Rog
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 42
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 43
Message: 1
Bill wrote:
I performed a little experiment in which I tested myself
for any
“The Crutchmans were so very, very happy and so temperate in all their
setup his chart minus any display of Chiron,
then "predict" where Chiron "should" be in the chart.
So I think that if one is seriously
I'm thinking that there probably is a way to reign in the
various
I have a bit of a Vision where Yeats is concerned, which
helps make
The first time I ever heard of Yeats was someone quoting "The
Second
http://pedantus.free.fr/Yeats_WB_02a.gif
I think I am here showing the basis of a future empirically validated
Secondly,
The color blindness symptom seems, at least to me, a function
of one's
Thirdly, that the more one uses a preferred set of symbols,
Yeah, but can't we at least critique the interpreter's
intended
My first suggested probe, though admittedly limited in
practical
Here, (Dale...:), as a "researcher" I'm virtually holding Saturn
in my
http://pedantus.free.fr/Hogwarts_01b.gif
Rowling's birth time in officially unknown, so you heard it here
>
I was thinking the phrase "to order our experience" still
smacks of
>
I know, or at least believe, you to mean parallels of sameness,
not
>
I *want* to agree wholeheartedly, I only question your
apparent
>
My guiding question is, *if* astrology has never shown any valid
track
>
Thanks for conjuring up a somewhat kindred spirit than most!...:)
"An astrological chart is based on the same principle [like a
I'm going to dissect him now, get back to your later on
that..:)
.
I dunno, but I think of something maniacally dictatorial...:)
Astrology isn't reflecting a universal system out
All I see is astrology tailored to markets, and little
or no sincere
>
Yeah, I have always relied on my own version Peter Parker's
"spider
>
I guess that's the integrative terminology...and what a
pretty piece
Thanx,
Rog
------------------------------
Message: 2
The International Astronomers Union's demotion of Pluto was a global
media splash. More amusing was the prior promotion of the story as
`astronomers expel Pluto from Solar System' - one envisages the collective
psychic force of this august body of establishment scientists wresting
Pluto from its orbit and ejecting it into outer space. The weight
of academic opinion remains forceful, even in this postmodern era!
So now we have 1st & 2nd class planets (allowed because they are
not people). Interestingly, the technical difference between these
classes was not reported, presumably because the details of the logic failed
to fit into the tiny brains of the journalists doing the reporting.
What was reported, however, was rare evidence of common sense: planets
are now defined as solar system bodies of sufficient gravity as to have
given them spherical form. So now Ceres is upgraded from asteroid
to planet, Pluto/Charon becomes a dual-planet thingy, & UB313 (otherwise
known as Xena) is now also a new planet.
Now the aging brains of humanistic astrologers are confronted with a
cognitive challenge of unprecedented complexity. Indeed, the cerebral
explosion of this curve ball casually lobbed into their midst by the enemy
may be terminal. Their habitually pedestrian mental process has probably
been knocked so far sideways that it will engage chaotic perambulation
mode & never get back on track.
Remember that you gotta (if you are a real humanistic astrologer) correlate
each planet with a psychological drive that varies from personal to collective
in continuous proportion to distance from the centre of the system.
Ceres lies beyond the energetic assertion of the individual (Mars), but
within the growth capacity of both individual and collective (Jupiter).
One can readily see that the vigor with which one is active in the social
context catalyses the assimilation of experience and expansion of confidence
via cultural (in the broadest sense ) processes. Yet somehow now
an intervening archetype must be inserted.
For the new-agers, no problem. Just identify the characteristics
of the relevant Greek god/goddess that seem eternally part of human nature.
Obviously those with a strong Ceres in their chart will be earth-mother
types (can't wait for the classic male examples), or, for the mundane materialists,
inclined to eat lots of cereal.
Charon must represent the hitherto hidden side of Pluto, so the depth-psychology
of human nature must have a component even more obscure than those thus
far described. If transformation is rooted in the collective deep-level
interconnections between people that are usually unconscious, what signifies
the ferryman who conveys the souls in transition? [Readers who have
yet to transcend the antique christian belief system are hereby advised
that equating hades with hell is a mistake made only by the ignorant &
simple-minded. Ethnocentrism can be a terribly handicap to learning.]
As for Xena, if the character is more than '90s hit tv show, it's news
to me. You could argue it's a hollywood reinvention of the amazon
archetype, I guess. So how do warrior women correlate with a collective
motivation in people that is even deeper than Pluto/Charon??
Dennis Frank
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 43
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 44
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 17:40:27 -0400
Bill wrote:
> I think one important thing is to recognise that even if astrological
How would one frame astrological observations if one were a Husserl
>
Well, then, I guess you have to write a book which equates
charts to
Here is a Tangle, well my (perverse) suggestion for skeletal
Object distribution parallels:
Looking for confirmation I found his birth time is cited as 9AM,
9PM,
http://thenewage.com/resources/lore/astro_search.asp?orig=
Miro, Juan
The Spanish site might be more authoritative, dunno.
http://www.bcn.fjmiro.es/
I refer to James Hillman a lot because he deals with the
notion of
For example an as to why I would care about such things, I think
if we
I think the absrtact self-portrait (above) is much more souful,
and
For an example of our observing the Ego portion of the self,
look here
We see the slightly unconventional but altogether a fairly
usual
For the Spirit, we look to a quotation to hear the aspirations
of Miro
"What I am looking for.. is an immobile movement, something which would
Illustrating a portion of chart contents as related to the above quotation:
I wish individual people were better described by chronologically
Rog
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 44
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 45
Message: 1
Dale
Many thanks for your interesting points in #37. Subsequent debate
on
I believe the lengths of the periods do matter, because they emerge
from
My point is that all healthy life is naturally attuned to the rhythms
of
This is confusing to me. Clearly what recurs is simply factual.
For
1.Arizona Astrology Conference early 2007
2. CPAK - Conference on Precession and Ancient Knowledge - this autumn
With best regards
------------------------------
Message: 2
Bill wrote:
And Roger replied:
I hope you all will permit a relatively uneducated and decidedly
BUT...I am curious to see what you make of the following Yeats poem.
The Lake Isle of Innisfree
I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
I will arise and go now, for always night and day
(go to http://encarta.msn.com/media_461543345/W_B_Yeats_Reading.html
When I look at his natal chart:
As I've been reading the discussions/debates, I have been thinking
Well, if nothing else, this will let you all know that some of us are
Best regards to all,
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 45
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 46
Message: 1
One well chosen word can be enough, if that word encapsulates
an idea
Archetypal drives become earmark issues of identity
>
Ah, come on, what can Yeats know about Yeats,...really.
So, Ok, I know I can be quoted using the word Self many
times, but
> The Lake Isle of Innisfree
In Salvador Dali the sound of a bee initiates a dream "because"
he
Yeats has Uranus/Sun opp Jupiter , thus a *very vital big
volume bee
>
Well, if I were to engage in the folly of analyzing the
man, as if I
But, now, I have to separate myself from the subject, the
actual
>
Gawd, that is pretty derned awful; what is wrong with that
reader? He
>
Didn't mean to be so completely dismissive, apparently
I exaggerate a
It is the limitations of computer programs which don't
allow "valid"
>
"To the reader, without whom all is vanity."--James Hillman,
Thanks, Lois.
Rog
------------------------------
Message: 2
[..]
I'm most impressed that Kepler understood the concept of
the natal
My Masters thesis on ethics in
Heidegger is another person inspired by natal chart complexes
as
However, if we look at the Heidegger null chart, as if its is the
Heidegger's natal Jupiter in House II is a handy demonstrative object,
a
[[Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914), the founder of the philosophical
And, this archetype was apparently not going to be ignored
by a
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~zuern/demo/heidegger/guide2.html
I think its pretty clear the planet/aspect complexes, as
inflected
So, anyway, Peirce has his observable object and its corresponding
This could
Just skip the explanations of Logic, per se...and get right
to the
Thanks,
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 46
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 47
Message: 1
Roger writes:
Your synthesis "rings true" to me, but so does my urge to analyze that
>> BUT...I am curious to see what you make of the following Yeats
A good question, but really beside the point...at least the point I
> So, Ok, I know I can be quoted using the word Self many
times, but
There have been enough symbols "hijacked", misunderstood, and misused
> The deal is, if we are to detect archetypes in the
form of
But obviously Yeats' work *has* (become en-souled). I'm not sure what
> as an individual inflection of the borrowed immortal universal
That seems like a good description of the Self, to me.
>> The Lake Isle of Innisfree
Now here's where I could use help in understanding. In my
> The striped image suggested by bean rows
I don't know how old that association is, nor do I understand the
> So
Do you see this as being an intuitive understanding for yourself only,
> If you want to read the poem as a natal chart output we must
No we mustn't. I'm profoundly embarrassed at mistaking Pluto for
(I have to read _Cosmos and Psyche_!)
>> And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
Now see, here again I could use some help understanding. I found your
> If natal astrology is "true" than the very soul of the man
For whatever reason--maybe that I am just more ignorant and gullible
>> (go to
:-)) Did you really not know that was Yeats himself? The first time
I
>> I'm really rather
Thank you so much for replying to me (at all!) with such care and
And to those reading: if this is too tedious and elementary to you,
Lois
------------------------------
Message: 2
On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 Bill Sheeran wrote: >
>> When has empiricism ever been
I appreciate the thought.
> I am curious to see how Dale gets on because while I am comfortable
It is striking, yes. And childhood transitions and
age transits are
Does "Uranus Returns, etc." also include Uranus opposite
Uranus and
> At the same time, getting a better handle on this facet of astrology
So analyzing the Saturn Return isn't part of "chart interpretation"?
Would like to comment on your interesting thoughts about
intersecting
> Others may simplify the definition of astrology in ways that exclude
Well, lies and illusions can have functional value, so
this approach
> An interesting implication of astrologer-centered astrology is that
it
Somehow, this reminds me of the critic(s) who objected
that Gauquelin's
> Contrary to Dale, André and Robert, I wouldn't see astrology
in terms
This is an awful lot like saying, "We make it up as we
go along."
>> Those hell bent on
That's an interesting perspective. So you're saying
astrology is NOT
Dale
--
"In the empty spaces--lacunae, vacuums, pauses, voids, black holes--new
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 47
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 48
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 17:47:55 -0400
> From: "Lois Cruz"
I don't want to inundate everyone by my constant diversions
but: in
As well, all traditional associations in astrology similarly
have to
>
I can only suggest that I am a very individual thinker
and not much
>
James Hillman headed the Jungian outpost in Zürich
for ten years, he
>
Well, if the soul is ineffable, then the Self, is the first
increment
So, I am concerned with existential and phenomenological views,
and
Art is not supernatural consciousness, it is all too human.
>
One sensory experience of what we call Uranus is a buzzing
sound, the
For the sake of astrology, and at the expense of some astrologers
Here then is an example of what I hope to impart. When
I saw this image:
I immediately tore it apart and reassembled it to make an astrological
What the archetypal astrologer in me did "see" is this:
This is what you want to see if you are serious about archetypal
Astrologers think I'm just playing with astrology's pretty
I haven't located all the birth data yet, but this is the
author of
I read that it his big break and first screen play,
it has his soul
>
Ok...I'm encouraged. The visual equivalence of oscillations,
and you
>
What I did here, is in fact a astrological exegesis, not
an
>
Yeah, you want to be an astrologer, or an English teacher
on a leash...:)
I'm profoundly embarrassed at mistaking Pluto for
This is cognition interfering with perception; the culturally
enabled
Would I intuit (or guess) this, having
I think you have been hiding from the experience, don't
want to get
I
Why can't we say, "Art"...and *mean* it. We critique
astrological
The father of archetypal psychology is also selectively unconscious
of
His chart, (and who knows who's art which was selected to represent
the
The congruency here is poetic and serendipitously synchronistic,
not
>
It's a chore. But perhaps each astrologer probably feels
something
>
I don't thinks it good to keep the two so separate in your
mind, if
>
Yeah, but the its the thinking part of your mind which
is accusing
>
I read his credit as reader there...but don't give his reading
any.
The first time I
Well, my dear, you finally heard Uranus et al...LOL...:)
Perhaps like
On listening to this excerpt of it again, I had a
Yeah...I had much the same experience, but it still sounds like
>
De nada, thanks for making me struggle at this position
statement
>
It's only tedious because I have so much trouble with language
>
When this poem is not actually engaged in contrived symbolism,
and
Rog
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 48
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 49
Message: 1
On Sat, 19 Aug 2006 Roger Satterlee complained: >
>>> Embracing the idea that there is no plausible mechanism is
the more
Okay, the long version: The phrase "Embracing the idea
that there is no
Dale
--
"In the empty spaces--lacunae, vacuums, pauses, voids, black holes--new
------------------------------
Message: 2
While reading critical commentaries of Nietzsche's,
_The Gay
http://pedantus.free.fr/May_13_1881_a.gif
This pattern certainly seems to have a more extreme potential
for
A Google search for, "[May 13, 1881]" yields a lot of unremarkable
http://www.sanjose.com/underbelly/unbelly/Sanjose/Tower/tower2.html
Though an archetypal "image" is not a cognitively sensible visual
one,
http://pedantus.free.fr/SanJoseLightTower_02.gif
We have here J.J. Owens envisioning an electric sun: "[..]by
This is all a quite wonderful example of an astrologically
mundane
"[..]J.J. hailed from the great state of New York.
The hope was that light-emitting towers, situated strategically, would
He dealt harshly with criticism, using a powerful cane in place of his
In 1881, he used the bully pulpit of his editorial page to propose that
Ah, so I am right back where I started before tried to
shift
And, finally I'm grateful for all those search return littering
When we set up a Noon chart for Owen,
we see both luminaries in natal opposition aspects. I've taken
the
So, in conclusion, what I actually observed by simply picking
out a
Here is a Noon natal chart with transits for May 13, 1881:
Go ahead, make my day...:) Ya feel lucky? Predict something..:)
I made an honest error in assuming a newspaper editor was opining
to
Thanks,
Rog
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 49
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 50
Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 13:23:33 -0400
Dale,
I am more than willing to accept that I am often incredibly
inept at
I find the task of wording my perception of astrology's
phenomena
Now, with that evolution finally in place, perhaps we may allow
our
Thanks,
------------------------------
End of Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 50
[Exegesis Top][Table
of Contents][Prior Issues][Next
Issues]
Unless otherwise indicated, articles and submissions above
are copyright © 1996-2006 their respective authors.
From: Dale Huckeby
Subject: [e] Re: Astrology & Biological Clocks (Dale Huckeby)
in response to what I wrote: >>
>> Astrology didn't/couldn't modernize during the 17th century
and was
>> abandoned by the educated elite. Astrology IS in a position
to modernize
>> now, and should. It would become more effective and, as a
side effect,
>> would regain much or all of its lost credibility. Modernization
involves
>> abandoning astrological symbolism in favor of empiricism, embracing
a
>> plausible causal mechanism, and limiting ourselves to astrological
effects
>> that are discovered/justified empirically and that make sense in
terms
>> of that mechanism (rather than continuing our self-indulgent belief
in an
>> astrology that can tell us anything and everything that we WANT
to know,
>> as opposed to what's actually knowable).
> [..]
>
> Embracing the idea that there is no plausible mechanism is
the more
> likely first step in the modernization of Astrology...accepting the
> inherent limitation (or complete irrelevance) of any "causal mechanism"
> model, as explanation, is probably the next evolutional step, and
not a
> suicidal leap into the dreaded Infernal lake of "mumbo-jumbo"...:)
already there!
> prediction itself has nothing to do with astrological understanding.
been part of the problem.
> experience astrological understanding.
problem.
> applied to something purely "astrological", as opposed to the routine
> pseudo-scientific aberrations of astrology as popularized by Edison-ian
> would be wizards and their 1000 trial filaments of tenuously
> illuminating causations.
of 500 ways that wouldn't work. This "tenuously illuminating"
approach
led to the discovery of the light bulb.
> atheism of a logical positivist apparently has a very fine pragmatic
> applications, it doesn't seem to serve our need for a broader grasp
of
> the unity hidden in the diversity of mental disciplines, these each
but
> the personal Kuhn-ian art of a given "scientist", etc..
their diversity? What do you mean by "personal Kuhn-ian art of
a given
'scientist'"? Etc.
> of Jung's unpredictable archetypal "motivations" and the suggested
need
> for "empirical" observations of synchronicity seem quite the most
> reasonable pursuit of astrology as means to our experience
of
> Understanding. If this should lead back to a fashionable cycle
of
> market driven practitioners and their individually conceived little
> worlds of predictable phenomena, so be it...we shall see...:)
certainly not events that we have no hand in creating, is what I relate
to astrological transits. And empirical observations of synchronicity,
SEEING that two things go together REGULARLY, and not just connecting
them by fiat, is what I'VE meant by empiricism but not apparently what
other astrologers mean by synchronicity, unless I've misunderstood
them. But it's not clear to me what "market driven practitioners
and
their individually conceived little worlds of predictable phenomena"
refers to.
> are the mind's conscious experience of the human psyche's communicable
> output, our responses to the soul of the world or universe. Astrology
> proper need only determine which alleged symbolism arise from a
> psychical foundation and which are just the hare-brained constructions
> of our manipulative ego's desire for an apparent wizardry.
get by without symbols, you're confusing one with the other.
How do you
differentiate, by the way, between symbolism arising "from a psychical
foundation" (which means what?) and that which is just "hare-brained
constructions", etc.? Your verbally ingenious case studies come
across
precisely as "apparent wizardry", for instance your discussion of
Charles Dickens in vol11/iss1, in which you use keywords "in a manner
that has, perhaps, never been done before," by which you discover that
he had Jupiter opposite Saturn: "We could guess that, if Dickens' date
was *not* known, we should find a date where Jupiter is opposite Saturn."
Despite your constant devaluation of prediction, that sounds an awful
lot like a predictive claim, that if we hadn't already known of it
we could have predicted that aspect in Dickens' chart on the basis
of
the keyword reasoning you illustrate. But I sincerely doubt it.
> entertained in a Life which has no tantalizing semi-anticipated plot
> surely has no bearing on whatever "reality" has in Mind.
human affairs, and if it involves motives and moods rather than events
per se it doesn't conflict with free will and common sense the way
the
traditional astro model does. In fact I assume less predictability
of outcomes, and certainly less magic, than implied in your occasional
look-what-I-did case studies.
> wonderfully compelling case for a Jungian synchronicity involving
the
> planet Neptune, and it glyph--it's projection in the visual world
as a
> graphic art-based "synbol", which occurs this morning involving an
old
> argument between Wittgenstein and Popper, and my wife's "spiritual"
> relationship with Richard Wagner...but such things are only about
my
> perceptions and our astrologically framed humanity.
from refutation by withholding the details).
> showing astrology as the measure of our predictability can only see
me
> as completely mad...totally lost, just foundering in mumbo-jumbo.
YOU define it, but your examples of astrology in action, a la Roger,
imply
prediction that is both useless and inane. Look, the planets
in Picasso's
chart make the shape of a camel-hair brush!!! Yeccchhh!
(You've never
made THAT particular claim, but some of your examples are an awful
lot
like it.)
Dale
things begin. We are born anew from the unexplored space, the
badlands,
the outlaw territory." - Sam Keen
Articles:
http://cura.free.fr/xxx/27dale.html
http://www.aplaceinspace.net/articles.html#Dale
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Re: Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 41
>> likely first step in the modernization of Astrology...accepting
the
>> inherent limitation (or complete irrelevance) of any "causal mechanism"
>> model, as explanation, is probably the next evolutional step, and
not a
>> suicidal leap into the dreaded Infernal lake of "mumbo-jumbo"...:)
>
> If "no plausible mechanism" is enough to make astrology
modern, we're
> already there!
>
That would be a straw man version of my position,
right...:)?
"mechanism" has absolutely no conceivable application whatsoever, is
what seems curiously missing here. The antiquated, never-has-performed,
egocentric human assumption that the motivating archetypal "soul" of
a
given astrological "influence" can be equated to some unseen physical
phenomenon...one of enormous complexity perhaps but nevertheless somehow
just out of our grasp.
more the acceptance of our actual current situation--we are much more
involved with the task of describing an observed synthesis which does
not merely bridge a the gap between what we call Science and Religion
but simply ignores any such arbitrarily established dividing boundaries
in the first place.
our need for time/event ordered observations, yet apparently accepts
the
totally cause-less quality of some unknowable archetypal motivation
which the art of astrology, in its ad hoc manner, tentatively label
as
some Uranus+Pluto aspect (whatever).
collective unconscious as actually being a ubiquitous substrate, more
like the atmosphere we breath than some cellar compartment of the
personal psyche, I am better able accept the evolving "reality" of
the
simultaneous non-local event observations of our postmodern physicists,
etc.. The term mechanism is, more likely than not, totally inapplicable.
we must eventually conceive of as the (unpredictable) organizing
"mechanics" of our art:
opposite Neptune. We observe that the natal archetypal complex finds
a
human voice, at least that's the way it seems from our self-serving
perspective as the consciousness center of the Universe.
essential difference between Phlogiston and Becher: they arise together
into the consciousness of human beings, and all, like Becher, are
mistaken in their assumptions--we moderns are equally mistaken and
merely egocentrically depicting the "reality" of something we
experience-- something we have chosen to call, the Universe.
will become self-evident to all mankind may just save us from extinction
by self-annihilation.
enslaved like a genii in a mathematical bottle, stands not the slightest
similar chance of broadening our consciousness at the level of our
soul.
In fact, the lesson of astrology is that our "mechanisms" are
but the
uncaused poetic extensions of one's Self. And my own?....:) You will
have to continue to guide me in that bit of awareness expansion.
our ideas about identity and existence, to demonstrate that a "real"
understanding of the person before you will allow the astrologer to
draw
a fair approximation of the unknown birth map, or at least the
phlogiston-like thematic aspect complex portion therein. "Modern"
astrological "research" starts in earnest at that point.
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 17:01:48 -0400
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Symbols only 'work' if they 'work'
>
> But on the other hand, symbols only 'work' if they 'work'. This may
> seem a trite statement, but I can't get Chiron to 'work' for example.
> It just doesn't speak to me.
ability to detect possible presence of Chiron; unfortunately I succeeded
though; I was hoping the confounding factor was just a bit of wishful
thinking on the part of its proponents. If you would like to perform
the
same test, read the opening sentence from "The Worm in the Apple",
by
John Cheever:
It opens with the following sentence:
habits and so pleased with everything that came their way that one
was
bound to suspect a worm in their rosy apple and that the extraordinary
rosiness of the fruit was only meant to conceal the gravity and the
depth of the infection.”
http://pedantus.free.fr/Cheever_01.gif
If you get it *right*, you are in for the same disappointment I had...:)
I was betting against the dern planetoid all the way. I'm certain
many
writers and their works will not be similarly useful because Cheever
is
perhaps more of a genuinely Chironic figure than most in literature.
> engaged rather than playing or flirting with astrology, one has to
> acknowledge first of all the engagement of the astrologer's cognition
> in the interpretative process, and also that this is unique.
'creative accounting' type of approaches employed by the astrologers.
The libertine spirit behind all that diverse interpreting behavior
probably only best succeeds at projecting a kind of abstract
self-portrait of the astrologer himself...when it "works"..:)
my point about the ironically more empirical nature of poetic archetypal
chart interpretation. First we ditch mechanism and prediction
as a
possibility, just to clear the mind, better make available all of one's
intellectual assets. As Tarnas ala Kuhn points out, without the ability
to shift paradigms we cannot data as it probably really is--as
supporting at least two different conclusions:
http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_aug2004/Frog2Horse.htm
Coming". Again we use the opening lines as an acid test of radical
or
non-radical symbolic self-expression:
procedure based on an archetypal astrological context, which is not
far
from Tarnas' own perceptions. I'm extending his exposition of the
mundane frame of reference to the personal role of the author's natal
inheritance and its interaction with the Western cultural inflection
of
the anima mundi. (At least that's my delusion..:)
> there may be the equivalent, analogically speaking, of colour
> blindness.
will. I am harsh on my fellows, perhaps as a function of my Cap Moon
archetypal bent, but I think nothing short of a good thrashing would
interrupt the constant flow of contextual biases blinding and deafening
would-be fortune tellers and all the eternity grabbing, bulimic,
"spiritual" power gluttons...:)
> the more insights will be generated. These preferences are beyond
> criticism, in the same way that one can't criticise an artist for
not
> using enough blue.
goal--determine whether or not the the astrologer is actually engaged
in
abstract expressionism when s/he claims to be producing the astrological
equivalent photographic realism. Why can't we set the standard
for
empirical research by limiting it to the process of identifying the
correct birth chart of a subject. And, research defined as the
development of how to get a targeted archetypal natal aspect complex
response.
I suggest that the if a Noon chart of the birth date is a given,
then
experimenter's need only come up with the birth *time* to show an
empirically validated result. The test is not whether astrology exists,
we assume something very like astrology does present itself to our
consciousness, but how do we get some astrological output from a fairly
average person. This is the only reasonable theme for experimenter
given
that it is *the* problem! I can only assume that astrologers talking
with clients only get a lot of what you call non-horoscopic material
to
work with. People do not put out! They are not "authentic" individuals
in that respect.
So, first, we must limit research to acheiving the means to produce
authentically radical archetypal responses. Known major natal aspects
with potentially observable outputs need to be stimulated as if we
put a
probe into the persons ineffable psychical organ which is reservoir
of
astrological inheritance, and getting a reflexive archetypal response.
application, is the map creating idea...it seems a good start. Subjects
should be screen for their astrological potentials..some extremes of
natal chart emphasis need be treated as the legitimate target of the
experiment. The astrological features of the given subject are his/her
ability to perform, not just an unavoidable obstacle to inquiry. If
individualism is at last respected as a property of persons, and natal
chart are to be considered the "map" of the individuality, then for
pete's sake what is wrong with an attempted mapping of the "map"?
hand:
first...:)
> An interesting implication of astrologer-centered astrology is that
it
> is in some way dissociated from the heavens. Which is probably why
it
> won't be well received as a concept. But I reckon that with astrology,
> the solar system is used as the source for the generation of
> conceptual metaphor schemes that are used unconsciously to order
our
> experience.
mechanistic determinism, I think of it as providing opportunities for
the psychically symbiotic experiences of individual identity and
collective belonging (soul).
> Contrary to Dale, André and Robert, I wouldn't see astrology
in terms
> of some sort of physical entrainment between humans and physical
> planetary cycles produced through the processes of evolution (although
> this may play a role at the physical end of the astrology spectrum).
invisible strings..:) Example, the "reason" we have genetic
developmental programs like our experienced cycle of personal/social
maturation stages coinciding with Saturn transits is due to our
ancestral genes developing under the "influence" of that planet's
inexplicable role as a factor in our extended environmental conditions.
> Instead, I would see astrology (or rather, the use of astrology for
> 'seeing more') as having emerged - come from within, as it were -
in
> co-evolution with human cognition. In other words, as a system that
> helps to order our experience, astrology (like mathematics, in my
> opinion) has been selected for in response to evolutionary pressures.
> The cultural forms of the various astrologies are highly decorated,
> but the essence of what's happening with astrology (or what separates
> astrology from astronomy) is an expression of human cognitive
> functioning, and particularly the way it uses conceptual metaphor
as a
> means of making sense of the world. It has become reified and
> identifed with its source, the solar system, as if the astrological
is
> governed from above. Hence the quest for a causal mechanism connecting
> planetary cycles to the dynamic order we experience or identify in
> life.
fondness for, or emphasis on, the innately exclusionary cognitive aspect
of the phenomena. I prefer to think one's individual being as the result
human consciousness, and cognition as the potentially communicable
portion, perhaps the tip of the iceberg metaphor is right, I dunno.
> A second implication is that if this is the case, then astrology
must
> be continually evolving, assuming that human cognition is continually
> evolving. Which means that some of the ideas and concepts emerging
at
> the growing tip of astrology will not survive. This may be partly
to
> do with cultural level 'rational culling' or extinctions, but it
may
> also be to do with the fact that they don't 'work' in a way that
is
> useful to human cognitive functioning (though the latter does seem
to
> be very forgiving or tolerant in that respect).
record for producing knowledge beyond what is already available through
other disciplines, (Ivan W. Kelly), then why would anyone resist
experimenting with the things only astrology can address, beginning
with
"predicting" unknown birth times. After all, it may only be a case
of
just being fair to the great minds who dismiss the possible existence
of
any kind of oracular astrology. Plus, if we merely validate astrology
as
an operationally defined phenomena merely relating identity to birth
time, we need not make any claim for any predictive ideological
religious sort of practices...and the "Truth"...:) But oh how they
would
fly from every crazy corner of the human imagination thus inadvertently
set ablaze...:)
> So for me, it doesn't really matter whether Pluto is a planet or
an
> planetoid, or whether one should be using Kuiper Belt objects or
some
> newly discovered planet in the horoscope, because this level of
> literalism doesn't impact on my way of perceiving astrology. If humans
> do start using them in the imaginal scheme, then they may or may
not
> make it into the relatively stable set of symbols used by most
> astrologers. It has nothing to do with logic or reason. That's why
I
> like Juan Revilla's take on the orbital behaviour of the Centaurs
as a
> means of identifying, or perhaps that should be creating their
> symbolic significance. It's an imaginally based project.
"When instead of imposing on people what the birth chart says
about
them, we listen to their life history, or when we study a biography,
or
when seeing a good movie or watching a play in the theater or reading
a
novel, "
calendar--time as visual space] : one whole life is drawn or
approximated by means of coordinates in a graphic."
>
> I don't expect other astrologers to see things this way though, and
> why should they?
> there, some sort of objective feature of the external world. At least,
> it isn't if one looks at its history, unlike science. What makes
sense
> to someone about the nature of astrology is on an individual basis,
> and with luck it may be shared by others who see the same way.
interest in an astrology which doesn't have an almost immediate social
payoff, but then I'm a misanthrope to say so I spoze..:)
>> >Those hell bent on
>> >showing astrology as the measure of our predictability can only
see me
>> >as completely mad...totally lost, just foundering in mumbo-jumbo.
>
> Science is the measure of our predictability - it overtook astrology
> on the outside 400 years ago. It's a much better fortune telling
> system than astrology, and I use and trust it all the time.
>
> The problem is the limitations of its application and scope. When
> science or scientific thinking is not useful for the task at hand,
> I'll use another tool. Sometimes the tool is astrology. Sometimes
I
> just look at what's happening around me and interpret it. Especially
> when it comes to invisible potential danger, I find the signs are
> anything but literal.
sense".
> Your not mad Rog - you're an interesting artist with an intriguing
> style!
political correctness it is...:)
Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:57:39 +1200
From: "Dennis Frank"
Subject: [e] Eek!
------------------------------
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Re: Empirical "measurements" need better Symbolic definitions
> 'effects' are causally determined (and I don't personally think that
> idea can hold a lot of astrology), the complexity involved in the
> causal process would be so great that it is effectively impossible
to
> identify it.
>
> The fact that a complex system may be 'deterministic' in nature does
> not mean that the future states of the system are predictable. Which
> is why the term 'deterministic chaos' is used to describe the dynamics
> of systems which are determined by a wide variety of interacting
> physical variables, such as the weather.
>
> So in my view postulating a plausible causal mechanism for astrology
> has a very limited value in engendering an understanding (and even
> less an explanation) of astrology's nature, because any model that
> attempts to tie down things to a level of specifics and
> micro-reductive details will in effect be as imaginally constructed
as
> the idea that everything runs according to clockwork. The thing is
> that for non-linear processes (such as those we experience in life)
it
> is impossible to separate causes from effects, due to the complexity
> of all the feedback loops, and so on.
phenomenologist? I guess Phenomenology is what I need study up on here...:|
> However, since the emergence of chaos theory and the development
of
> sophisticated thinking about non-linear linear systems (the only
ones
> that matter as far as a non-clockwork understanding of astrology
is
> concerned), there are other ways of looking at mechanism which are
not
> causal. Instead, they are considered geometric or mathematical
> mechanisms. For example, a seminal book on the mathematics of chaos
is
> entitled "Dynamics - The Geometry of Behaviour" (by Ralph Abraham).
tangles.
"Tangles: Diagrams that map the skeletal structure of a dynamical system."
structure of a dynamic system:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Miro_J_02.gif
Its an abstract self portrait by Joan Miro, and I used
it to
approximate his birth time. Starting with a Noon chart, I came up with
about 9PM this way:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Miro_J_01a.gif
and 11:30AM at the Astrotheme site.
"[..]
Miro, Joan
Birth Date: 4/20/1893 09:00:00 AM GMT
Time Zone: +00:00, Long: 002E09'00, Lat: 41N23'00
Birth Place: Barcelona, Spain
Source: AFA, celebrity, circall, penfield
Birth Date: 4/20/1893 09:00:00 PM LMT
Time Zone: +00:00, Long: 002E10'00, Lat: 41N25'00
Birth Place: BARCELONA/E
Source: lescaut [..]"
1893
20 April: Birth of Joan Miró i Ferrá at 9.00 p.m. at
number 4 Passatge
del Crèdit, Barcelona
archetypal motivation at the level of the soul, and he observes the
ego
and the spirit to be different from soul...each with its own
interpretation of "meaning", and each with its own habits for contextual
framing schemes.
make observations for astrological comparisons we ought to have a handle
on which part of the person are we observing.
thus much more connected to the whole of the natal chart.
at an early self-portrait:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Miro_J_01b.gif
image of the ego as one involved in communication with others, as an
individually recognizable social presence. The colors are like Jupiter
and Sun associations, the stripes and repeating rhombus shapes are
more
an expression of Uranus.
as guided by the natal planets:
be the equivalent of what is called the eloquence of silence, or what
St. John of the Cross, I think it was, described with the term 'mute
music'. "
Joan Miro
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/joanmiro270664.html
http://pedantus.free.fr/Miro_J_01c.gif
ordered physical "events" but I just do not see that they are in any
meaningful way...but, my sincere apologies to you, Dale, for my being
incapable of "getting it". The the individually *created* abstract
metaphorical meaning of the event seems to display the artistic
projection of a person in a condensed and holistic manner...the
*astrologically identifiable* person is like an archetypal "poem"
unfolding in time.
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 09:02:03 +1000
From: "Robert Tulip"
Subject: [e] Astrology and Biological Clocks [SEC=PERSONAL]
the list shows divergent views on the purpose of astrology. I
see the
reality of astrological observation as presenting a
philosophical/scientific problem, namely that no predictable phenomenon
can occur unless it is explainable by a causal mechanism. I respect
those who see astrology as primarily practical, a tool for such purposes
as psychological analysis, and for whom the fact that astrology works
requires no explanation, but the logical problem is my main interest
-
how to integrate astrological observation into a unified logical system
of understanding.
You ask: "Do you mean the modern paradigm of science, or of astrology?"
In referring to Tarnas' critique of the modern paradigm as mechanistic,
and his implication that a new paradigm will somehow not be mechanistic,
I was making the usual equation of 'modern' with the dominant culture
of
science rather than suggesting there is a mechanistic astrology.
Astrology can no more be fully mechanistic than can economics or
psychology, given the ambiguity inherent in interpretation. Even
by
comparison to those uncertain disciplines, the task of defining a
possible mechanism for astrology remains provisional and embryonic.
However, this difficulty does not mean nothing can be said about causal
mechanisms in astrology. My comments were intended to help lay
the
ground for possible understanding of the conditions of astrological
causality. I hope our conversation can assist in moving this project
forward.
I agree with your comments against obscurantism, as my personal interest
in astrology is mainly in its potential contribution to a coherent
and
elegant cosmology. I note Roger Satterlee's comments in defence
of
relativism, and assume these arise from quite a different use of
astrology, as a set of tools for an astrologer to assist a client.
This
latter use is more the usual approach of astrologers, for whom the
question of scientific underpinning is subordinate to intuitive tasks
like understanding a person's character using the natal chart as a
guide. For me, natal astrology is of interest mainly to illustrate
the
ontological nature of our causal bonds with the solar system as part
of
the project of developing a coherent and consistent cosmology.
Looking at astrology against paradigm shifts, Kepler's discovery of
elliptical orbits had such total explanatory power that astrology,
immersed in flat-earthism, could not possibly keep up, despite even
Kepler's intuitive sense that it should. My Masters thesis on
ethics in
Heidegger's ontology began to open up how the critique of Descartes
can
clear the ground for an astrological world view by recapturing the
centrality of human perspective to our theory of meaning. This
could
also help answer Roger's question about the value of Husserl. I will
come back to that later.
You say "Why can't we simply OBSERVE correspondences where they exist?
When they can't be observed (presumably because they don't exist),
as I
think is the case with signs, the corresponding belief should be
abandoned." I don't agree that signs are meaningless. As
I commented
in an earlier post, I believe a scientific basis for the signs can
emerge from observation that the structure of earth's seasons against
the equinoxes and solstices has been entrained by the lunar month into
a
natural twelve-fold cycle, with each sign combining a unique mix of
the
elemental dualities (yang/yin), triplicities (cardinal/fixed/mutable)
and quadriplicities (fire/earth/air/water). Hence the signs have
a
principle-based ontological reality grounded in cosmic rhythms.
Do you
really believe no difference can be observed between Leo (yang fixed
fire) and Virgo (yin mutable earth)? Are you reacting against
sun-sign
astrology in favour of a focus on planetary transits? I believe
both
planetary transits and sun signs are observable, and can in principle
be
explained scientifically.
You comment "the lengths of the periods that life evolves processes
to
match don't matter, so long as they're stable. If, by "intrinsic
formative part of the identity of our DNA," you mean simply that life
has evolved an internal clock(s) matching the Uranus period, I'd have
to
agree because that's what I've been saying, otherwise I have no idea
what you mean."
the empirical existence of the planets rather than any arbitrary
internal DNA clock. Look at it this way. Our solar system
is like a
tree, with Uranus one branch and earth another branch. We both
share
the character of the root stock from which we emerged in constant
synchrony. So I disagree with your comment "the origin in this
instance
is not the origin of the solar system, but the origin of the internal
clock(s) that match the Uranus period." Our internal clock has
always
had Uranus orbiting it every 84 years, ever since our atoms were both
part of the primeval nebula at the origin of the solar system.
I do see the analogies between the solar system and whirlpool, river
or
tree as having real explanatory meaning, describing the complex fractal
geometry of life. Your suggestion to replace "our genes have
the stamp
of their origin in attunement to the harmonic rhythms of the solar
system" with "life has used planetary periods as templates for internal
clocks" seems to miss the point that our internal clocks are not
arbitrary but have been physically entrained since their origin to
the
planets and the signs.
I accept your comment that the analogy of the music of the spheres
may
be "superfluous or premature" in purely logical terms, but the
comparison of the solar system to human scale I find helpful in
imagining the real orders of magnitude.
You state "if by attunement you mean "matches the periodicity of the
planet," it seems to me that IF there is an 84 year cycle in human
life
the attunement exists, in which case the fate of any ADDITIONAL genes
which used to but don't now contribute to it doesn't add anything to
our
knowledge of the ones that do."
the solar system, just as all the cells of a healthy tree are 'attuned'
to the reproductive purpose and timeframe of the tree, and die when
they
lose this link. All our genes have two year rhythms matching
Mars, 12
year rhythms matching Jupiter, and so on to 500 year rhythms matching
UB313 and 25,800 year rhythms matching the precession of the equinox.
These rhythms simply exist in us because that is where our genes evolved
over a very long time. I don't understand your comment about
additional
genes. Perhaps what I was getting at was that human freedom has
the
capacity to willfully deny astrological inclination, but that this
denial can be a source of psychological and other problems. I
actually
think of it in theological terms, in the sense that a good life is
fully
attuned to the path the planets incline for it, while a bad life is
forced along a direction at odds with the intrinsic character suggested
by its natal configuration. Hence the value of natal astrology
in
helping us to understand our soul.
You suggest replacing "Archetypal sources of meaning" with "temporal
templates, or more simply, available periodicities." I
find the
concept of archetypes helpful to describe purposive symbolic structures
inherent in the organization of the cosmos. So for example, limitation
is an archetypal dimension of Saturn, as a reality inhering in the
physical relation between life on earth and the actual planet Saturn.
We
do not know why Saturn is saturnine and Jupiter is jovial, but
observation suggests they simply are, and it is not just something
we
make up in fantasy. By comparison to this Jungian idea of archetypes,
the idea of templates has a psychological arbitrariness, while
periodicities has a lack of meaning and purpose.
You say "I don't see why we should concentrate on medical issues.
Gauquelin has shown one way to proceed statistically. As an alternative
for exploratory purposes, I prefer to look for rhythms per se, which
we
are genetically wired to see, and then clarify their nature and confirm
their existence by asking, for each rhythm, what "it" is that's
recurring regularly. If we can't answer that question we not
only have
no confirmation that the rhythm exists, we also have no knowledge of
recurrent effects to apply."
example, the fact that Saturn is at a certain angle to where it or
another planet was when an entity came into existence. The question
whether this fact is significant can either be left as a matter of
astrological intuition or can be tested against large statistical
arrays. I simply suggest medicine as a most promising source
of
relevant statistics. I am not aware of any previous statistical
study
of outer planetary transits.
And two exciting coming conferences in USA (sadly too far away for
me)
http://theblastastrologyconference.com
at the University of California at Irvine: http://www.cpakonline.com/
Robert Tulip
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 00:46:40 -0400
From: "Lois Cruz"
Subject: [e] Re: Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 43
>> So I think that if one is seriously
>> engaged rather than playing or flirting with astrology, one has
to
>> acknowledge first of all the engagement of the astrologer's
>> cognition
>> in the interpretative process, and also that this is unique.
> I'm thinking that there probably is a way to reign in
the various
> 'creative accounting' type of approaches employed by the
> astrologers.
> The libertine spirit behind all that diverse interpreting behavior
> probably only best succeeds at projecting a kind of abstract
> self-portrait of the astrologer himself...when it "works"..:)
>
> I have a bit of a Vision where Yeats is concerned, which
helps
> make
> my point about the ironically more empirical nature of poetic
> archetypal
> chart interpretation. First we ditch mechanism and prediction
as a
> possibility, just to clear the mind, better make available all of
> one's
> intellectual assets...<here edited by me; let me know if I have
> unfairly done so>
> The first time I ever heard of Yeats was someone quoting "The
> Second
> Coming". Again we use the opening lines as an acid test of
radical
> or
> non-radical symbolic self-expression:
>
> http://pedantus.free.fr/Yeats_WB_02a.gif
>
> I think I am here showing the basis of a future empirically
> validated
> procedure based on an archetypal astrological context...
non-specialized list reader and amateur astrologer to chime in with
a
thought or two. Roger, though I truly appreciate (and am learning
from) your "poetic, archetypal chart interpretation", I do see a
glaring problem just here in your illustrative example. Is that -one-
line of that -one- poem, of all Yeats' large body of work, THE one
that every astrologer would choose to examine? If not, then one is
forced to conclude that there is astrologer bias involved ("The first
time I ever heard of Yeats..."), which is hardly conducive to
empirical validation!
It is not one that I would choose from among my personal favorites,
but it is one that *he* chose as being contemporarily very well known,
and representative (presumably) of his style, his Self, and his work:
And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made:
Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
And live alone in the bee-loud glade.
Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings;
There midnight's all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
And evening full of the linnet's wings.
I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
I hear it in the deep heart's core.
for an author's sound clip)
http://www.khaldea.com/charts/williambutleryeats.shtml after reading
this poem, I can "see" there the influence of the 2nd house
Venus-Neptune conjunction in Taurus ("And live alone in a bee-loud
glade. And I shall have some peace there..."), and Mercury conjunct
the IC ("There midnight's all a glimmer..."), and even--stretching
it!--the Jupiter-ruled midheaven ("...and noon a purple glow"), but
honestly, this "vision" depends at least as much on me as it does on
the poem, the author, the chart, or the planets. I'm really rather
amazed that you don't admit to the unique "engagement of the
astrologer's cognition."
that "traditionally" there are *also* astrological indicators for the
(quality of the) astrologer, and there must have been a reason for
that, too. Though I (kind of) understand the empiricists' desire for
a
virtually "objective" astrology--let's face it, the first ones to
"prove" it would make a killing in interpretive software, lol--and
definitely their desire for validation and respect from the wider
scientific community, I greatly fear they're barking up the wrong
tree! But what the heck do I know--I'll defer to greater minds than
mine :)
reading and learning and thinking--so, please, keep discussing! Yeats
is a great favorite of mine, especially his "The Song of Wandering
Aengus".
Lois
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:48:25 -0400
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Re: Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 45
which projects the closest major aspects of an "authors" natal chart,
like the phlogiston example I cited earlier:
Phlogiston_Becher_01.gif
> BUT...I am curious to see what you make of the following Yeats poem.
> It is not one that I would choose from among my personal favorites,
> but it is one that *he* chose as being contemporarily very well known,
> and representative (presumably) of his style, his Self, and his work:
>
let's ditch that one too. Had Jung been able to ditch the notion of
Self, he would have been able to eventually drop his bias for a
Judeo-Christian "God". As Hillman points out we simply press this idea
of a Self and its "in the image of God" routine until both Ego and
God
seem the return of a solitary Titan to rule all of Earth. The family
of
Zeus, the source our astrological pantheon, has of course supposedly
long ago defeated and banned these colossal tyrants--the offspring
of
Ouranos and his mother Gaia.
The deal is, if we are to detect archetypes in the
form of planets
in aspect, then all boundless Titans like the Jungian Self and God
are
hopefully out to lunch here. The Self may or may not even exist, and
it
certainly has no influence over the archetypes..it must work with them
or no poetry happens..no work on the part of the author becomes
en-souled as an individual inflection of the borrowed immortal universal
material. We are to, as Gene Hackman's, Lex Luther, points out, we
are
to perhaps learn the secrets of the universe while reading the list
of
ingredients on a (*metaphorical*) gum wrapper. We are that pliable
stuff. The Self is for our purposes here is just a bit of extremely
limited unvulcanized rubber with artificial flavors and artificial
preservatives.
>
> I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
> And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made:
> Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
> And live alone in the bee-loud glade.
has Uranus opp Neptune.
http://pedantus.free.fr/SDal_Dream_Caused_by_the_Flight_of_a_Bee.gif
sound*. The buzzing sound is be appropriately absurd reduction
here--an
exclusive property of Uranus, (now that we moderns have that planet
in
our astrological inventory). The striped image suggested by bean
rows
are also Uranus. The Grid of wattles are the expression of Uranus.
So
supposedly the unconscious is calling on Uranus to be the dominant
ingredient. If you want to read the poem as a natal chart output we
must
assume the theme behind the curtain is the adaption of Uranus qualities
to the purposes of the other natal planets.
> And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
> Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings;
> There midnight's all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
> And evening full of the linnet's wings.
>
> I will arise and go now, for always night and day
> I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
> While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
> I hear it in the deep heart's core.
were an unreflective egocentric therapist trying to read the unwritten
and unspoken poem within the poem...the TV kind...
I would read the poem on the whole, as context for the
parts, I hear
that he says, in effect: Ok, I'm gettin' up now, I'm reluctantly going
out to the road, I'll walk into town, I'll do all the usual baloney
in
the mundane world of totally insignificant affairs. But, here in my
head, I remain in an imaginary cabin, day and night, on an island
surrounded by an insulating lake.
Rather than be absolutely bored to death by the
meaningless babble
of contentious people, I'll pretend their predictable repeated speech
is
really a pleasant lapping of waves on the imaginary lake shore. The
buzzing noises of people may be meaningless, but at least on my island
that hive noise means honey production is being stored. He digests
and
regurgitates everything people say, for his own understanding and so
derives a deep sense of meaning and belonging from that rich fantasy
life process.
Yeats, by recognizing that I truly am such a TV quack psychiatrist
in
spirit, by social convention, whatever. And, must overcome that
somehow. So I use the tactic of limiting my interpretation to merely
observing the motivating archetypes, and speculating as to which planets
aspect complexes can best possibly related to the specific metaphors
of
the author. If natal astrology is "true" than the very soul of the
man
(not the intellect or ego driven conscious mind) is patterned there
for
us to study in unconscious terms, both personal and collective.
> (go to http://encarta.msn.com/media_461543345/W_B_Yeats_Reading.html
> for an author's sound clip)
does typify everything about the manner of the times and the people
Yeats had to live with, but that is the only possible relevance of
the
bizarre choice of vocalizations, which are supposedly, somehow,
representative of the poem front of him...:) ("Culture" in can?)
> When I look at his natal chart:
> http://www.khaldea.com/charts/williambutleryeats.shtml after reading
> this poem, I can "see" there the influence of the 2nd house
> Venus-Neptune conjunction in Taurus ("And live alone in a bee-loud
> glade. And I shall have some peace there..."), and Mercury conjunct
> the IC ("There midnight's all a glimmer..."), and even--stretching
> it!--the Jupiter-ruled midheaven ("...and noon a purple glow"), but
> honestly, this "vision" depends at least as much on me as it does
on
> the poem, the author, the chart, or the planets. I'm really rather
> amazed that you don't admit to the unique "engagement of the
> astrologer's cognition."
lot...:) It's the word cognition that I object to because it seems
to
indicate that we can actually identify what we are "conscious" of just
by thinking about it, as if we can know our own agenda by citing our
beliefs and intentional reasoning, etc.....I dunno if that is true.
Can't say it well, at present, sorry.
>
> As I've been reading the discussions/debates, I have been thinking
> that "traditionally" there are *also* astrological indicators for
the
> (quality of the) astrologer, and there must have been a reason for
> that, too. Though I (kind of) understand the empiricists' desire
for a
> virtually "objective" astrology--let's face it, the first ones to
> "prove" it would make a killing in interpretive software, lol--and
> definitely their desire for validation and respect from the wider
> scientific community, I greatly fear they're barking up the wrong
> tree! But what the heck do I know--I'll defer to greater minds than
> mine :)
keywords to be useful very often. I can rotely recite, Jupiter is
Orange, Sun is Yellow, when I see a "Honey" color in Yeats text. If
I
were a genius I would add all the other properties of Honey as the
poet's context may allow and *may* see natal Sun opposite Jupiter as
a
possible natal aspect of his chart. I'm pretending we don't have his
exact date of course. The scope of its inflected re-occurences
across
the body of his works would have to be similarly ingested and processed
by a human mind to come to the compelling conclusion that the poet
is a
fella born on a date which shows Sun opposite Jupiter. (One reason
I say
this is because it is the natal opposition aspect which seems to most
vocal in this respect...well, to me, for a long time now...:)
> Well, if nothing else, this will let you all know that some of us
are
> reading and learning and thinking--so, please, keep discussing! Yeats
> is a great favorite of mine, especially his "The Song of Wandering
> Aengus".
dedication from _Re-visioning Psychology_
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 00:13:07 -0400
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Astrology and Biological Clocks [SEC=PERSONAL] (Robert
Tulip)
> Looking at astrology against paradigm shifts, Kepler's discovery
of
> elliptical orbits had such total explanatory power that astrology,
> immersed in flat-earthism, could not possibly keep up, despite even
> Kepler's intuitive sense that it should.
chart as having do with a "remembered image". This makes him seem a
lot
less mechanistic than I assumed the ol' boy to be.
> Heidegger's ontology began to open up how the critique of Descartes
can
> clear the ground for an astrological world view by recapturing the
> centrality of human perspective to our theory of meaning.
archetypal "image". His modeling example employing the Chalice is the
expression of natal Jupiter, House II, as mere object, as an ontic
*thing*--a cup:
Heidegger natal chart:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Heidegger_M_02.gif
personal inflection of the collective unconscious we see the powerful
spiritual nature of the Chalice, or an instance of Jupiter as Cup:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Heidegger_M_03.gif
cup; but as Jupiter 0Cap02 the cup is a Holy Chalice
http://pedantus.free.fr/SemioticTriadicRelationship_01.gif
doctrine known as pragmatism, preferred the term "semeiotic." He defined
semiosis as "...action, or influence, which is, or involves, a
cooperation of three subjects, such as a sign, its object, and its
interpretant, this tri-relative influence not being in any way
resolvable into actions between pairs." ("Pragmatism", Essential Peirce
2: 411;]]
probing mind seeking his own depths...:)
Heidegger's Chalice illustration from "The Question Concerning
Technology" as it appears in Martin Heidegger: _Basic Writings_:
"[..]Heidegger's recurring name for the chalice, "the sacrificial
vessel," is a reference both to Christ's sacrifice and to the way in
which the material, the form, the context, and the thought or
consideration of the silversmith all "give themselves up" to the
existence of the chalice. To give is an important verb for Heidegger.
In
German, es gibt [literally, "it gives"] means "there is." Giving, in
Heidegger's thought, is bound up with Being. If we think of hyle, eidos,
telos, and logos as giving to the existence of the chalice, then perhaps
the meaning of aition as "that to which something else is indebted"
(290) will be more clear. [..]"
archetypes, were a working part of Heidegger's Imaginal consciousness,
before the resonant cup becomes a mere stage prop of his analysing
intellect...an excellent example of horoscopic expressionism. Kinda
hard
to miss the whole bit about Communion when we see natal Jupiter trine
Neptune, which conjunct Pluto in Gemini at the cusp of House VII.
I think we can use Hillman's suggestion of "destiny",
meaning the
seed potentials which may not come to fruition, and forget about ever
predicting how these potentials find expression. *When* may be up for
grabs, but that cannot be ascertained very well if we do not know *what*
socially recognizable form, and intensity, maybe expressed. We could
be
simply missing the "event" because the event could actually be too
subtle--perhaps a lot more like my examples of synchronistic drawings
and metaphors than anything a traditional astrologer would be looking
for. I feel that learning how to stimulate horoscopic expressionism
is
the most pragmatic way to empirical observations...if something like
imaginary maps can be harnessed and made to stimulate the projection
of
natal chart patterns/birth time, then astrology at least has
a
correlative. Image, even with no explanatory power we would have
endlessly repeatable experiments being performed by generations of
befuddled skeptics.
sign (or symbol) in a tri-relative influence, and Heidegger has a set
of
four interacting redefined "causes" linked to human psychological
motivation. I see the tradition keywords as being subjected to these
fertile concepts...if one likes a mix of three's and four's for a
mystical geometry of meaning, so much the better...:)
> also help answer Roger's question about the value of Husserl. I will
> come back to that later.
good stuff, eh...:)?
Rog
Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 20:03:38 -0400
From: "Lois Cruz"
Subject: [e] Re: Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 46
> Archetypal drives become earmark issues of identity
statement. "Dismemberment" is also an archetypal theme, and surely
no
one here is in the habit of making value judgments about archetypes
;)
>> poem.
>> It is not one that I would choose from among my personal favorites,
>> but it is one that *he* chose as being contemporarily very well
>> known,
>> and representative (presumably) of his style, his Self, and his
>> work:
>
> Ah, come on, what can Yeats know about Yeats,...really.
was making! While Yeats was living, this poem was his most popular
work, according to him anyway; it is why he selected it to record.
So,
this work of his art, speaking deeply to many of his contemporaries,
should be a very good example of archetypal expression--whether any
of
the participants knew it or not .
> let's ditch that one too.
without adding this one to the list. "Self" is perfectly fine--let's
just ditch the misunderstandings and mis-applications, not the symbol
itself.
> planets
> in aspect, then all boundless Titans like the Jungian Self and God
> are
> hopefully out to lunch here. The Self may or may not even exist,
and
> it
> certainly has no influence over the archetypes..it must work with
> them
> or no poetry happens..no work on the part of the author becomes
> en-souled
you mean by the "Jungian Self" (see, under-education has its benefits
too ;), but "God"--especially as understood in the West, and/or by
monotheists--is just another archetype. Or do you see that
differently?
> material.
>>
>> I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
>> And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made:
>> Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
>> And live alone in the bee-loud glade.
>
> In Salvador Dali the sound of a bee initiates a dream
"because" he
> has Uranus opp Neptune.
> http://pedantus.free.fr/SDal_Dream_Caused_by_the_Flight_of_a_Bee.gif
>
> Yeats has Uranus/Sun opp Jupiter , thus a *very vital
big volume
> bee
> sound*.
understanding of "traditional" symbolism and associations, with Uranus
it might as well have been the sight of a neon sign, or the taste
of...I don't know, mint julep or something, or the smell of ozone from
a nearby lightning strike, that initiates the dream. That it was the
sound of a bee in Dali's case seems to me to be, well, accidental.
I
see no particular reason to associate bees with Uranus. However, there
*is* good reason to associate Venus with bees, honey- or bumble-.
> are also Uranus. The Grid of wattles are the expression of Uranus.
"why" of it, but I do "get" the association of Uranus and stripes--the
grid being stripes in two directions.
> supposedly the unconscious is calling on Uranus to be the dominant
> ingredient.
or for any astrologer--steeped in traditional symbolism and
associations, or otherwise?
> assume the theme behind the curtain is the adaption of Uranus
> qualities
> to the purposes of the other natal planets.
Neptune, but again, I see this first verse as emphasizing the second
house Venus-Pluto conjunction. Would I intuit (or guess) this, having
read the poem but not seen the chart? Probably not. I will readily
admit that you have much more experience, knowledge and practice in
this than I, but your approach is, in a sense, "familiar" to me. I
don't think the -results- of this approach will *ever* achieve what
Science aims for: consensus; but paradoxically the approach itself
may.
>> Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings;
>> There midnight's all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
>> And evening full of the linnet's wings.
>>
>> I will arise and go now, for always night and day
>> I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
>> While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
>> I hear it in the deep heart's core.
>
> Well, if I were to engage in the folly of analyzing the
man, as if
> I
> were an unreflective egocentric therapist trying to read the
> unwritten
> and unspoken poem within the poem...the TV kind...
"analysis" of the poem very insightful, but it was analysis of the
*poem*, not the man, imo. The man was just the messenger :) But of
course, being human, it was also true for him!
> (not the intellect or ego driven conscious mind) is patterned there
> for
> us to study in unconscious terms, both personal and collective.
than the excellent people on this list--I think this is a *most true*
statement!
>> http://encarta.msn.com/media_461543345/W_B_Yeats_Reading.html
>> for an author's sound clip)
>
> Gawd, that is pretty derned awful; what is wrong with
that reader?
> He
> does typify everything about the manner of the times and the people
> Yeats had to live with, but that is the only possible relevance of
> the
> bizarre choice of vocalizations, which are supposedly, somehow,
> representative of the poem front of him...:) ("Culture" in can?)
heard this reading (including introduction) on NPR a few months ago,
I
thought it sounded really creepy/spooky. Yeats was a member of the
occult Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, and to me, on first hearing
in a car, it had a "stern and mysterious" chant sound, almost a
malevolent sound. On listening to this excerpt of it again, I had a
different take. Now, to me, it sounds more like an -old man- trying
to
"sing" the poem in the manner of an ancient Irish Poet. Again, his
work and my reception of it are not independent of each other.
>> amazed that you don't admit to the unique "engagement of the
>> astrologer's cognition."
>
> Didn't mean to be so completely dismissive, apparently
I
> exaggerate a
> lot...:) It's the word cognition that I object to because it seems
> to
> indicate that we can actually identify what we are "conscious" of
> just
> by thinking about it, as if we can know our own agenda by citing
our
> beliefs and intentional reasoning, etc.....I dunno if that is true.
> Can't say it well, at present, sorry.
attention.
I'll "re-lurk".
"Though I am old with wandering
Through hollow lands and hilly lands,
I will find where she has gone,
And kiss her lips and take her hands;
And walk among long dappled grass,
And pluck till time and times are done,
The silver apples of the moon,
The golden apples of the sun."
--W.B. Yeats, "The Song of Wandering Aengus"
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 10:47:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: Dale Huckeby
Subject: [e] Re: Empirical "measurements" need better Symbolic definitions
in response to Roger: >>
>> applied to something purely "astrological",
>
> Well, that's what Dale's project is about! I think that if his
> approach generates results will give much food for thought.
> with the idea of the forms of astrology having their roots 'down
here'
> as opposed to 'up there', and being a fuzzy, ambiguous and culturally
> differentiated reflection of a feature of human non-rational cognitive
> functioning, I do stumble when it comes to the Saturn Return. I have
> to admit that the coincidence of 'crossroads' type events with this
> cycle is striking. And the same would be true for Uranus Returns,
etc.
even more striking and well-documented. By the way, the kind
of astrology
I advocate has its roots in both places, in that life 'down here' has
used the periods of the planets 'up there' as the bases for its natural
rhythms.
Neptune square Neptune?
> would not, in my opinion, be very illuminating for what happens in
the
> course of chart interpretation.
Or are you referring to analysis of the natal chart per se?
cones, physical, rational, objective vs. non-physical, imaginal/symbolic,
and subjective, etc., but am still thinking about it.
> various forms - lots of astrologers can't handle the concept of horary
> for example - but I find this a bit disingenuous. I prefer to accept
> that the forms which astrology takes are the forms it takes, and
that
> these must have some sort of functional value at least, otherwise
they
> would go extinct. Functional value doesn't imply objective scientific
> reality, but I can make a lot of room for functional value, even
if it
> is in some way contrary to scientifically proven fact. For example,
> the use of the geocentric perspective if one happens to live on Earth
> (a point not lost on the designers of planetariums across the world,
> not to mention fishermen), though maybe that's a weak example.
to determining validity (maybe that's not what you had in mind) seems
itself a bit disingenuous. And yes, your geocentric perspective
example
is a weak one. We use that as a convenience, not because we actually
believe in it. Likewise, the fact that in many instances we treat
our
locality on earth as flat doesn't mean we believe that it actually
is.
> is in some way dissociated from the heavens. Which is probably why
it
> won't be well received as a concept. But I reckon that with astrology,
> the solar system is used as the source for the generation of
> conceptual metaphor schemes that are used unconsciously to order
our
> experience.
findings apply only to Frenchmen (before he added athletes, etc. from
other nations, I guess).
> of some sort of physical entrainment between humans and physical
> planetary cycles produced through the processes of evolution (although
> this may play a role at the physical end of the astrology spectrum).
>
> Instead, I would see astrology (or rather, the use of astrology for
> 'seeing more') as having emerged - come from within, as it were -
in
> co-evolution with human cognition. In other words, as a system that
> helps to order our experience, astrology (like mathematics, in my
> opinion) has been selected for in response to evolutionary pressures.
> The cultural forms of the various astrologies are highly decorated,
> but the essence of what's happening with astrology (or what separates
> astrology from astronomy) is an expression of human cognitive
> functioning, and particularly the way it uses conceptual metaphor
as a
> means of making sense of the world. It has become reified and
> identifed with its source, the solar system, as if the astrological
is
> governed from above. Hence the quest for a causal mechanism connecting
> planetary cycles to the dynamic order we experience or identify in
> life.
>> showing astrology as the measure of our predictability can only
see me
>> as completely mad...totally lost, just foundering in mumbo-jumbo.
>
> Science is the measure of our predictability - it overtook astrology
> on the outside 400 years ago. It's a much better fortune telling
> system than astrology, and I use and trust it all the time.
devination for you, or do you define 'fortune telling' and 'devination'
differently?
things begin. We are born anew from the unexplored space, the
badlands,
the outlaw territory." - Sam Keen
Articles:
http://cura.free.fr/xxx/27dale.html
http://www.aplaceinspace.net/articles.html#Dale
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Archetypal drives become earmark issues of identity
>
> Roger writes:
>> Archetypal drives become earmark issues of identity
>
> Your synthesis "rings true" to me, but so does my urge to analyze
that
> statement. "Dismemberment" is also an archetypal theme, and surely
no
> one here is in the habit of making value judgments about archetypes
;)
short, you have to take "dismemberment" apart, if you want to see how
its pieces are collected, reassembled, and individually tailored to
encapsulate the meaning of dismemberment in terms of the individual
involved with some aspect (part) of that "image" (which is at depth
large archetypal category, not a particular phenomenon).
be disassembled and reassemble to have any working meaning for the
individual perceiver.
>>> BUT...I am curious to see what you make of the following Yeats
>>> poem.
>>> It is not one that I would choose from among my personal favorites,
>>> but it is one that *he* chose as being contemporarily very well
>>> known,
>>> and representative (presumably) of his style, his Self, and his
>>> work:
>> Ah, come on, what can Yeats know about Yeats,...really.
>
> A good question, but really beside the point...at least the point
I
> was making! While Yeats was living, this poem was his most popular
> work, according to him anyway; it is why he selected it to record.
So,
> this work of his art, speaking deeply to many of his contemporaries,
> should be a very good example of archetypal expression--whether any
of
> the participants knew it or not .
moved by a bandwagon of poetry consumers and or very well qualified
critics of the form(s) which Yeats has employed. I'm pretty sure All
of
that is or at least *should* be irrelevant to you as well, when such
making observations. I can't seem to effectively borrow the experiences
of others so as to fabricate my own; such that, nothing Yeats'
contemporaries had to say has any importance to me beyond how the
specifics of their commentaries relate to their own natal chart...that
is what I wish to study, that is my target, and it requires the tunnel
vision of a telescopic sight--something I may have been born with and
hope I have positively adapted to good purposes...:) But enough about
my
second favorite topic...(me)..:)
>> So, Ok, I know I can be quoted using the word Self many
times, but
>> let's ditch that one too.
>
> There have been enough symbols "hijacked", misunderstood, and misused
> without adding this one to the list. "Self" is perfectly fine--let's
> just ditch the misunderstandings and mis-applications, not the symbol
> itself.
says ditch it, I ditch it...not because he says so, but because I know
he's right...:) The cirle with the dot in it is the Ego, not the
Self...until I have some epiphany to share with Hillman, to correct
his
mistake, the concept of the Self has been mothballed for awhile...until
the ego gets used to the apparent demotion--it is now in charge of
an
invisible kingdom/wasteland, has been retired and found itself in
impoverishment like the Fisher King of the Grail Legend. It as if my
soul is mute by celestial design, but aware and waiting for
>> The deal is, if we are to detect archetypes in
the form of
>> planets
>> in aspect, then all boundless Titans like the Jungian Self and God
>> are
>> hopefully out to lunch here. The Self may or may not even exist,
and
>> it
>> certainly has no influence over the archetypes..it must work with
>> them
>> or no poetry happens..no work on the part of the author becomes
>> en-souled
>
> But obviously Yeats' work *has* (become en-souled). I'm not sure
what
> you mean by the "Jungian Self" (see, under-education has its benefits
> too ;), but "God"--especially as understood in the West, and/or by
> monotheists--is just another archetype. Or do you see that
> differently?
>
>> as an individual inflection of the borrowed immortal universal
>> material.
>
> That seems like a good description of the Self, to me.
of temporal semi-mortal being-ness, I guess. That's "It"'s category
for
me at this time. I know astrologers want to go off the deep end in
both
direction, mechanist versus transcendent spiritualists, but like Yeats
cone diagram, per Bill Sheeran's earlier Yeats input, I am staying
in
the middle where astrology is , as he says, "horoscopic" and, I say,
attached to matters of individual existence/Identity.
only those which don't get into manipulative wizardry and supernatural
claims of expanded consciousness, past life significances, PSI and
telepathic cures, etc., etc., etc., I am, surprizingly, actually a
centrist and a hands-off sort of legislator...just barely a Democrat
I
suppose...:) When I do make up my little rules for the archetypal
astrology, its only done to avoid total a catastrophic intellectual
bankruptcy...:)
>>> The Lake Isle of Innisfree
>>>
>>> I will arise and go now, and go to Innisfree,
>>> And a small cabin build there, of clay and wattles made:
>>> Nine bean-rows will I have there, a hive for the honey-bee,
>>> And live alone in the bee-loud glade.
>> In Salvador Dali the sound of a bee initiates a dream
"because" he
>> has Uranus opp Neptune.
>> http://pedantus.free.fr/SDal_Dream_Caused_by_the_Flight_of_a_Bee.gif
>>
>> Yeats has Uranus/Sun opp Jupiter , thus a *very vital
big volume
>> bee
>> sound*.
>
> Now here's where I could use help in understanding. In my
> understanding of "traditional" symbolism and associations, with Uranus
> it might as well have been the sight of a neon sign, or the taste
> of...I don't know, mint julep or something, or the smell of ozone
from
> a nearby lightning strike, that initiates the dream. That it was
the
> sound of a bee in Dali's case seems to me to be, well, accidental.
I
> see no particular reason to associate bees with Uranus. However,
there
> *is* good reason to associate Venus with bees, honey- or bumble-.
noise lets the mind associate Uranian topics to it. I guess for your
sake, I should say you ideas about archetypal things have been formed
by
huge coverall definitions of archetypes at the expense of most things
archetypal--like Newton's pivotal discoveries and his "pretty pebbles
on
a beach" analogy to describe his reshaping the consciousness of human
beings. He wasn't saying "aw shucks Mam, twern't nuttin'." He just
was
telling the unexpected truth about the puny size of such potent
ideas...:) Open up yourself to the experience of a an unpredictably
modulated buzzing sound and you will know just that much more about
Uranus and its role in symbolisms. I'm not selling eternity and or
fortune-telling prowess, I am expecting you to actually "hear" the
poet
whom you say you like...:) "Keep your eye on the sparrow." doesn't
mean
"live like bird, scratch like a bird"...:)
patience, I'll show you, how to "see" planets in aspects as parts of
what you have been told to call archetypes. (And experientialists
involved in such things as teaching psychodrama and dance therapy at
Esalen Institute or the California Institute of Integral Studies
is
pure commercial hokum by comparison.
http://pedantus.free.fr/Red_Knight_01.gif
http://www.smart.co.uk/dreams/fkprod1.htm
transliteration. This purposeful action is necessary because we are
in
essence dealing with two "languages" of the mind which don't share
idiomatic expressions. My own experience, which I'm trying to
share
here, allows that I cannot assume to know the context of that Red Knight
image, even though I "get" the writer's intended multivalent symbolism.
I cannot can literally translate an idiomatic phrase
used by a
Belgian cook who says to me, in French, "All men have four white feet."
Like I'm supposed to know what that means! Well, I say, at least
temporarily, forget what you have been taught about cookbook archetypes.
http://pedantus.free.fr/Red_Knight_02.gif
"images". First of all an "image" in the psyche has no visual, thus
it,
the psyche, grabs what ever is close enough, as Heidegger says, "handy,
at hand". Experience with natal planets in aspects, in the charts of
expressive and expressed persons, ("artists" all) then this
transliteration start to take place in the mind at the conscious level.
I supposed brilliant mystical psychiatrists like Stanislaov Grog prefers
to call it "mind expansion" or transpersonal consciousness, but I would
drink his Kool-Aid if I were you...:) Its just "real" astrology with
"real" archetypes at hand, like Newtons diversionary pebbles and shells
which formed the basis for the scientific revolution--"diverting myself
in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than
ordinary, while the great ocean of truth lay all un- discovered before
me."
shells...and so I am..:)
the Fisher King, (just guessing as to the likely time and not married
to it:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Richard_LaGravenese_00.gif
in it apparently. He could have Pluto on the Asc., or Saturn, or many
other things I can't pick up on. I expect interested people like you
to
be much better at this than I am. As a rule, I'm not an outstanding
student of any kind...:)
>> The striped image suggested by bean rows
>> are also Uranus. The Grid of wattles are the expression of Uranus.
>
> I don't know how old that association is, nor do I understand the
> "why" of it, but I do "get" the association of Uranus and stripes--the
> grid being stripes in two directions.
can see why Descartes was inspired to encage or Western conscious minds
with his Uranian grid coordinates:
http://pedantus.free.fr/descartes1.gif
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse_on_Method
>> So
>> supposedly the unconscious is calling on Uranus to be the dominant
>> ingredient.
>
> Do you see this as being an intuitive understanding for yourself
only,
> or for any astrologer--steeped in traditional symbolism and
> associations, or otherwise?
eisegesis. I'm sorry to say, "astrologers" by enlarge have a
paradigm
problem of their own...they keep think they are supposed to imitate
scientists. Astrology is wholly confined to the realm Phenomenology,
and
the primary activity is descriptive, not explanatory, Art not Science.
It takes a devoted agnostism to realize what we can an cannot know--we
must accept on faith that what we can't know is not really important.
When they stop tryin' ta 'splain things, and predict things based on
Cartesian wattles and dung enhanced mud, they may find the empirical
possibilities of poetry in from of them. I am surprised that I would
have to explain the role of Yeats natal Uranus here to the likes of
Liz
Greene, and even Jung himself, it just blows me away how little
hope
there is that my "intuitive understanding" will survive me.
>> If you want to read the poem as a natal chart output we must
>> assume the theme behind the curtain is the adaption of Uranus
>> qualities
>> to the purposes of the other natal planets.
>
> No we mustn't.
> Neptune, but again, I see this first verse as emphasizing the second
> house Venus-Pluto conjunction.
ego has the hororable job of being "the planetary building
superintendent" (-Hillman), a very reliable and dependable handyman,but
he's deaf as fencepost.
> read the poem but not seen the chart? Probably not. I will readily
> admit that you have much more experience, knowledge and practice
in
> this than I, but your approach is, in a sense, "familiar" to me.
caught with some telltale spaghetti sauce on you blouse..:) As to the
time honored ingredients--as the classic TV commercial used to say,
"..
Mama, don't worry...its in there!"
> don't think the -results- of this approach will *ever* achieve what
> Science aims for: consensus; but paradoxically the approach itself
> may.
propositions, not measure them. If navel oranges were blue, they would
never been expected to cure colds...but like blue M&M's they would
have
started showing up in response to our recent a need for token secularly
spiritual exploration. As George Carlin pointed out, "..there is no
blue
food!" We, as human, live in a phenomenal world, one of those phenomenas
is George Calrin expressing Neptune in *his* second house--he
sees
sosieties lack of consumable spirituality in his own delightful
consciously unconscious manner.
how astrology "works" and he has a very good article about the role
of
the color blue and its importance to mythological creatures and gods
in
his collection of articles, _Blue Fire_:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060921013/104-8491031-2013508?v=glance&n=283155
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0060921013/ref=sib_dp_pt/104-8491031-2013508#reader-linkHis
idea).
http://pedantus.free.fr/Hillman_J_01a.gif
scientifically anticipated or predicable in any way. This because we
are
humanly intelligent, and have soul--we are not just poor specimens
of
the future's grand bipedal flesh-terminals worshiping and fearing the
power of a "Big Blue" globe-monitoring artificial intelligence...:)
> (I have to read _Cosmos and Psyche_!)
like, "I'm darn glad somebody finally wrote one of my books for me."
>>> And I shall have some peace there, for peace comes dropping slow,
>>> Dropping from the veils of the morning to where the cricket sings;
>>> There midnight's all a glimmer, and noon a purple glow,
>>> And evening full of the linnet's wings.
>>>
>>> I will arise and go now, for always night and day
>>> I hear lake water lapping with low sounds by the shore;
>>> While I stand on the roadway, or on the pavements grey,
>>> I hear it in the deep heart's core.
>> Well, if I were to engage in the folly of analyzing
the man, as if
>> I
>> were an unreflective egocentric therapist trying to read the
>> unwritten
>> and unspoken poem within the poem...the TV kind...
>
> Now see, here again I could use some help understanding. I found
your
> "analysis" of the poem very insightful, but it was analysis of the
> *poem*, not the man, imo. The man was just the messenger :) But of
> course, being human, it was also true for him!
you want to think like an astrologer; though I know how much the
protective ego's of working artists does by necessity, for good or
evil,
insulate their Self by devotedly crediting a Muse. (Messengers have
much
better than a fifty chance of returning whole after their encounters
with the always questionable characters of the "Other" side, in life
as
heroic conquest.)
>> If natal astrology is "true" than the very soul of the man
>> (not the intellect or ego driven conscious mind) is patterned there
>> for
>> us to study in unconscious terms, both personal and collective.
>
> For whatever reason--maybe that I am just more ignorant and gullible
> than the excellent people on this list--I think this is a *most true*
> statement!
you of such social sins...what a whorl of fear the petty dictating
cognition lives in, eh..:)? Cogito ergo sum is just a spell to
ward of
the smelly invisible demons..:)
>>> (go to
>>> http://encarta.msn.com/media_461543345/W_B_Yeats_Reading.html
>>> for an author's sound clip)
>> Gawd, that is pretty derned awful; what is wrong with
that reader?
>> He
>> does typify everything about the manner of the times and the people
>> Yeats had to live with, but that is the only possible relevance
of
>> the
>> bizarre choice of vocalizations, which are supposedly, somehow,
>> representative of the poem front of him...:) ("Culture" in can?)
>
> :-)) Did you really not know that was Yeats himself?
Yeats his personality, is like (anachronism alert) Dane Rudhyar, caught
up in the Wizard persona:
http://www.khaldea.com/rudhyar/
> heard this reading (including introduction) on NPR a few months ago,
I
> thought it sounded really creepy/spooky. Yeats was a member of the
> occult Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, and to me, on first hearing
> in a car, it had a "stern and mysterious" chant sound, almost a
> malevolent sound.
the sound of a ego-clad bee invoking Zeus...:)
> different take. Now, to me, it sounds more like an -old man- trying
to
> "sing" the poem in the manner of an ancient Irish Poet. Again, his
> work and my reception of it are not independent of each other.
culture in a can.
>>> I'm really rather
>>> amazed that you don't admit to the unique "engagement of the
>>> astrologer's cognition."
>> Didn't mean to be so completely dismissive, apparently
I
>> exaggerate a
>> lot...:) It's the word cognition that I object to because it seems
>> to
>> indicate that we can actually identify what we are "conscious" of
>> just
>> by thinking about it, as if we can know our own agenda by citing
our
>> beliefs and intentional reasoning, etc.....I dunno if that is true.
>> Can't say it well, at present, sorry.
>
> Thank you so much for replying to me (at all!) with such care and
> attention.
stuff, but I'm certain to get on your nerves soon enough..:)
> And to those reading: if this is too tedious and elementary to you,
> I'll "re-lurk".
skills. This mail came in at Noon, it now 5:42. No one has interrupted
me today...so I got thought it.
> Lois
> "Though I am old with wandering
> Through hollow lands and hilly lands,
> I will find where she has gone,
> And kiss her lips and take her hands;
> And walk among long dappled grass,
> And pluck till time and times are done,
> The silver apples of the moon,
> The golden apples of the sun."
> --W.B. Yeats, "The Song of Wandering Aengus"
>
vampire drained metaphors, its almost Venus conjunct Pluto by
accident...:) (Poet get out of the way and let Art happen , you ol'
wizard wannabe!...:)
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:51:59 -0500 (CDT)
From: Dale Huckeby
Subject: [e] Re: Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 42
about my succinct response: >>
to his earlier comments: >>>
>>> likely first step in the modernization of Astrology...accepting
the
>>> inherent limitation (or complete irrelevance) of any "causal mechanism"
>>> model, as explanation, is probably the next evolutional step, and
not a
>>> suicidal leap into the dreaded Infernal lake of "mumbo-jumbo"...:)
>>
>> If "no plausible mechanism" is enough to make
astrology modern, we're
>> already there!
>>
> That would be a straw man version of my position,
right...:)?
plausible mechanism is the likely first step in the modernization of
Astrology" overlooks the fact that this appears already to be the position
of most astrologers, as embodied in the phrase, I use it because it
works
(in response to assertions that it's implausible). It's not something
NEW that will help make us modern, but an EXISTING attitude that's
holding
us back.
things begin. We are born anew from the unexplored space, the
badlands,
the outlaw territory." - Sam Keen
Articles:
http://cura.free.fr/xxx/27dale.html
http://www.aplaceinspace.net/articles.html#Dale
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 16:20:06 -0400
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] The unexpected overlap of mundane and natal observation
(Joyful) Science_, I let my mind shift paradigms, let go of my focus
on
natal chart expressions, and allow myself to be more immersed the
mundane astrology presented in Tarnas' _Cosmos and Psyche_. I began
to
look at the transits in the 1880's to perhaps get a feel for the
astrological setting of Nietzsche's "god is dead" proclamation. I
noticed a possibility of an extreme sort of alignment during the 1880's.
I set my chart program's the House function to "null", so as to place
0*
Aries on the Asc., because this seems to best allow me the best access
to what I think of as collective unconscious astrological symbolisms.
I
was just browsing the possible charts of that period, as if I were
in a
book store, and simply being attracted to the most eye-catching jacket
designs. I settled on this rare seeming, or at least emphatic looking
pattern: May 13, 1881:
some kind of dramatization, perhaps a documented public expression
of
some mundane archetypal activity being "born" in the collective
consciousness, an historical sort of Jungian synchronicity. Observing
here that Uranus in Virgo is involved by way of multiple trines, it
seemed likely to be highlighted thematically in a central way--a common
thread of meaning which constellates the various hypothetical attributes
of the seven planets apparently vying for attention in the Taurus
stellium.
trivia entries. It is not until viewing the third such page of personal
genealogical web pages and such that we find:
http://www.sanjose.com/underbelly/unbelly/Sanjose/plaza/plaza7.html
http://www.historysanjose.org/visiting_hsj/buildings/history_park/light_tower.html
art pretty much demands that try our best to make it seem so, thus
in at
least attempting to be a see-er, I have this image as my patently
contrived attempt at sufficient graphic symbolism:
providing one high and immense source of arc light, the night would
become as day for the downtown area." However, like an artificial Moon,
rather than a Sun, it did not produce a sufficiently practical light
source,thus more a victory for some equally important romantic civic
motivations than scientific wonders--
"[..]the tower proved to be more spectacular than practical,
since its
24,000 candlepower failed to sufficiently light the area. Although
the
tower did not fulfill the original purpose, it was a success in that
it
represented progress to the people of San Jose because electricity
was a
relatively new source of power.[..]"
Jungian synchronicity, on a local scale, but because we have at center
stage an individual who functions as three dimensional prime mover,
I am
of course curious about the natal chart import of J.J. Owens. We read
here a little characterization of his temperament from his 1885 obituary:
A man of vision, he was dedicated to the concept that electricity would
oust gas as the source of city lighting. In 1861 he moved to San Jose
and made a name for himself as editor and publisher of the San Jose
Daily Mercury.
do away with the need for gas street lamps.
fists. People tended to give J.J. a wide berth.
San Jose be electrified, offering up a design of his own - a tower
rising over the intersection of two streets. [..]"
paradigms. Apparently I am personally unable to be an observer of
something confined to mundane astrology...:) Well, I guess I knew that,
but I was surprised never the less that J.J. Owen, an opining
editor/journalist, actually designed the experimental lighting tower.
genealogical sites:
http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/NY-CENTRA/2001-12/1007533347
"[..]He was born on July 22 ,1827 in Onondaga Co.[..]"
http://pedantus.free.fr/Owen_JJ_01.gif
liberty of labeling the archetype imposing natal planet aspect complexes
in the context of his fairly well documented theme:
http://pedantus.free.fr/Owen_JJ_01a.gif
chart on the basis of its possibly representing an auspicious day,
actually just led me to the date of a transit pattern phenomenon which
apparently coincides with editor Owen's act of publicly announcing
his
"vision" for an improved public lighting system. Had I known about
Owen
as a person with a potential for announcing things, and if I were
actually *trying* to find a transit pattern and make a prediction as
to
the date and the topic that he would announce , whatever, I wouldn't
have a clue how to go about any of that.
http://pedantus.free.fr/Owen_JJ_01_T.gif
his audience about a personally remote public matter. But as it turns
out, he was in the "artistic" act of "creating" his suggested lighting
solution. I can't seem to get near any subject for study which doesn't
have someone's soul-prints all over it...:)
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
Subject: [e] Re: Exegesis Digest, Vol 11, Issue 49
communicating my intended meaning. Thanks for faithfully performing
the
much needed role of an adequate sounding board. Sorry to make the dance
such awkward Tango....:)
I never exclude the possibility of being deranged, but
at least at
present I think it is my intention to state that--the mental act we
call
a belief in "mechanism" seems the stumbling block to another category
of
human phenomenological perceptions. So, Just to help me more
clearly
understand your person position, I ask--do you believe a "mechanism",
as
they say on the X-Files, "is out there" ? Do you expect a super complex
method simply eludes conscious mind's activity we call cognition?
more challenging than I ever thought it would be, but I have had to
re-think what human consciousness and existence *is* in order to do
away
with the boundaries of pragmatically convenient and formal seeming
"logic"...I no longer see a meaningful separation of what we call
Science, Philosophy, Religion, etc.. I'm allowing that they are in
terms
of human phenomenological perceptions more like what astrology addresses
as House IX. It is as if we must actually enter astrology as astrology,
and not as pseudo-physics. I'll not ask you to agree to such a
proposition, I only ask that you see the difference in the paradigms?
I'm more interested in the logos. As in the case of Art, all
"mechanisms" are but the wholly incidental presence of the various
tools
and media employed by the "artist". The muse of the artist is a
coexistent being, there is no subject or object, nothing is separate
enough to fall into the category of "mechanism".
mind to expand its awareness by making more appropriate
observations...you know, the benefit of being unrestricted by the
previous, failed, paradigm. Our "scientific" observations of astrology,
whatever astrology is, will come when the superstition of mechanism
is
finally abandoned at the level of our (for lack of a better word) more
soul-center perceptions. Clear the decks of all dogma and any residual
biases which silently reflexive negate the human phenomenological
experience which we barley perceive at the present stage of our
development. We must hear the vocabulary of the human psyche which
has
currently no translation in the various paradigms of bounded sciences
and religions,and so forth. It is though such an attempted division
of
these thing serves only to promote a politically motivated pragmatic
ego
preserving distinction, which of course does not even exist in the
realm
of astrology. As, I said, I readily admit my lack of clarity, but I
will
keep trying...:)
Rog
