Exegesis V3 Issue #11

Exegesis Volume 3 Issue #11

From: "Joanna M. Ashmun"
Subject: noise and echoes

From: Matthew Wilson
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #10

Exegesis Digest Tue, 03 Feb 1998

Date: Mon, 2 Feb 98 15:51:41 -0800
From: "Joanna M. Ashmun"
To: Exegesis
Subject: noise and echoes

> As to the erratic but occasionally synchronized noise in life, I think of the
> symbol Uranus. To me, you are addressing the opposition of Jupiter and
> Uranus...:)

Pedantus is not so preposterous! As a matter of fact, for the past week or more, I have been preoccupied with this line from David Bowie's "Teenage Wildlife:" "They can't do this to me -- I'm not some piece of teenage wildlife." Now, this song is as beautiful in its way as Artie Shaw's "Begin the Beguine," and I laugh out loud at Bowie's hooting, shrieking, and warbling -- just love it. Anyhow, my daughter shrewdly remarked that in the context of this song, "They can't do this t-o-o-o me -- I'm not some piece of teenage wildlife" is "nothing but Capricorn elitism." And she's exactly right. I'd just connected this morning that the line was zinging my JU-UR Cap/Gem opposition -- at least, I think UR in Gemini can be "some piece of teenage wildlife," though you may be stricter than I am. Now you can post David Bowie's chart and explain everything. (I already know he's a 1947 Cap with, I think, Gem rising. But I haven't looked further, because I wouldn't want to spoil your fun.)

Anyhow, I bought a book on stochastic resonance. Next I'm going to read it. And maybe I'll tell you all about it.

Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 02:43:30 -0000
From: Matthew Wilson
To: Exegesis
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #10

> Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 16:56:24 -0500 (EST)
> From: John Reder
> To: Exegesis
> Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #9
>

>
>
> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 19:08:20 -0000
> From: Matthew Wilson
>
> .............................................The fact is that as a
> supernatural
> phenomena astrology seems to require a spiritual home to align
> itself to.
>
>
> While in the middle of changing ISP's I missed #8. What was the
> basis for calling astrology "supernatural"? If the movement of the cosmos
> isn't natural, what is?
>

The study of the movement of the cosmos is not astrology but astronomy or cosmology.

The study of the relationship between the cycles of the planets (the 'above') with the mundane (the 'below') and the comparison with the native's life is called astrology and as there are no currently accepted or proven 'evidence' concerning the validity of either of these, they seem beyond natural explanation and hence Supernatural.