Exegesis Volume 3 Issue #27

From: "Joanna M. Ashmun"
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #25

Exegesis Digest Wed, 11 Mar 1998

Date: Tue, 10 Mar 98 11:19:56 -0800
From: "Joanna M. Ashmun"
To: Exegesis
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #25

On Mon, 09 Mar 1998 01:11:35 -0500, Jens-Ole Paulin Hare wrote:

 > In my (danish) book on astrology I have claimed that astrology can be
 > seen as a science that places no fundamental discrimination between
 > subjectivity and objectivity. The important thing here, I think, is not
 > whether to call it art or science, but to make it possible to define
 > 'science' (or 'art') on astrology's premises - not the other way round.
 > Wasn't it modern science that precluded itself from art by claiming
 > objectivity as a reachable goal and as the only valid rule of conduct
 > for our understanding of nature?

The problem with this position is that if astrology is nothing but subjective, and if astrologers insist on defining both art and science on their own terms, then there's utterly no justification for talking about astrology in public or in print or using it on other people. As long as there is so little agreement among astrologers even on what chart factors mean, it only feels like communication when we talk about charts. In fact, everybody's speaking their own private code and it's not subjectivity so much as it's collective solipsism. Astrology is plagued by authoritarianism: we have only somebody's word for what's true. We need objective knowledge.

Science on the other hand is both anti-authoritarian and collaborative in the finest Aquarian sense. It's about knowledge we can share, stuff that's true for everybody. Scientists work together, critique and analyze each other's work, publish results in detail, share data -- so that you can find out for yourself and, if you want, duplicate the experiments to see if the others did it right. Everybody benefits, not just people who are lucky enough to consult the wisest oracle among astrologers.

Additionally, there's a lot of subjective stuff that's also objective: true of all of us. Normal color vision is an example. Emotional experience is another.



Joanna M. Ashmun ICQ#4802655 http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/


End of Exegesis Digest Volume 3 Issue 27

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

Unless otherwise indicated, articles and submissions above are copyright © 1996-1999 their respective authors.