Exegesis Volume 3 Issue #57 From: "Roger L. Satterlee" Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #54
Exegesis Digest Wed, 14 Oct 1998

Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 10:39:50 -0700
From: "Roger L. Satterlee"
To: Exegesis
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #54
 

Hi, Concerning the exchange so snippily quoted below, I have to submit my vote for astrology as a "subjective language", of sorts. Like the visual cues in a two dimensional graphic which we human beings *learn* to interpret as references to three dimensional objects (and subjectively *translate*), astrology is a matter of personal experience and a learned perspective. The only redeeming quality of astrology's basic assumptions is that many individual practitioners can somehow, at times, share a general impression of a symbolic figure they are attempting to interpret. The emotional jolt this mystifying, occasional consensus gives rise to the durable existence of the art itself. In that this consensus suffers from a low percentage of specificity, astrology remains vague, in general, yet often seems very precise to certain individuals at nearly random instances. Ironically it is this unpredictable schedule of positive reinforcement that is most compelling to the artist and not the consistency of *results* or *hits*. Yes, astrology is first and foremost a psychological response to an environmental stimulus. Thankfully, I find it very stimulating. In my mind, there's nothing wrong with "art for art's sake"...in fact, that's the only reason astrology persists, regardless of whatever more practical applications are eventually touted by any given practitioner...:)

Thanks,

Rog

 > Exegesis Digest Mon, 05 Oct 1998 Volume 3 Issue 54
 >
 >
 >
 > Contents
 >
 > -----e-----
 >
 >
 > From: "William D. Tallman"
 > Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #53
 >
 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 >
 > Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 20:53:49 -0700
 > From: "William D. Tallman"
 > To: Exegesis
 > Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V3 #53
 > Message-ID:
 >
 > Hello Mary,
 >
 > How nice to hear from your again, Mr. Tallman.
 >
 >
 > Thank you, ma'am, and it's very edifying to discover that you are still
 > watching this list!
 >
 > Why would the astrological response require life? Earthquakes, weather,
 > floods, tsunami and other disasters have astrological links. We were just
 > given an excercise in this by the last eclipse.
 >
 > Well, as I have been given to understand in some detail quite a number of
 > times, astrology is only a "subjective language" and is relevant solely to
 > the study of the human psyche. Your response would seem to fly in the face
 > of this apparently conventional astrological wisdom; are you implying that
 > astrology is actually a study of the relevance of the heavens, and not
 > simply a subset of Psychology?
 >

End of Exegesis Digest Volume 3 Issue 57

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