Exegesis Volume 3 Issue #32

From: "William D. Tallman"
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #31

Exegesis Digest Thu, 23 Apr 1998

Date: Thu, 23 Apr 1998 00:54:55 +0000
From: "William D. Tallman"
To: exegesis
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #31

 > From: HeWhoGetsSlapped
 > Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #30

 > My question is, do you believe that psychological astrology should
 > be completely disregarded, or put in balance with the many other
 > fields of astrology?

My point is that we have no way of answering that question from the standpoint of astrological theory. We simply have no idea what is going on with psycho-astrology. Lots of ideas and some of them seem reasonable, but until one can tie together all the data one hasn't got anything worth investigating, and that means getting some handle on the astrological effect.

Personally, I believe we should continue to practice psychological astrology in a responsible manner because it produces positive results, in my experience. But we should be quite candid that we don't know how it works.

 > ......................I do completely agree with you, and in fact get
 > quite frustrated by the fact that most astrologers believe that
 > astrology is only a psychological matter, and often they believe
 > that it is synonymous with religion..ack

Most astrologers only have had experience with psychological astrology. Only the older practitioners have had any other form, unless they have actively pursued it. Leo, Carter, and Hone are long gone in many places, replaced by the disciples of Rudhyar, etc.

I think it would be valuable to discuss the connection between astrology and religion, but that is another thread, albeit one to which I would happily contribute.

 > Modern neuroscience is beginning to provide understanding of some
 > of the mechanisms of what psychology has so painstakingly documented.
 > A recent cover article in Life went into depth about the effects of
 > genetics on our psychological selves. It strangely echoed what I
 > hear most astrologers state, being that it, genetics (astrology)
 > predisposes one to certain sets of behaviorisms and often they will
 > not even show themselves in the individual unless they appear in
 > combinations of similar genetic codes. If it's still on the
 > newsstands, I highly reccomend going out and purchasing it. Just
 > substitute the word 'genetics' with 'astrology' and you'll have some
 > fun. bunbury

Please, please!!! Don't take an article in a popular publication as having anything other than entertainment value!!!!

There is no substantial value in comparing astrology with genetics in this context. Any value here would be strictly entertainment, and I don't see much that can produce laughs in this subject. In the context of this list, taking account of articles in Life magazine describes an energy draining dead-end.

Having said this, the connection between astrology and genetics may well be a fertile issue for further science, but let's work to let that develop rather than risk misguided preconceptions in the above manner.

Sorry to be a killjoy here, but this is too important an issue for the future of astrology, I think. But thanks for the thought, HWGS.



End of Exegesis Digest Volume 3 Issue 32

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

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