Exegesis V4 Issue 56

Exegesis Volume 4 Issue #56

From: "William D. Tallman"
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V4 #52, #53 and #54

Exegesis Digest Wed, 30 Jun 1999

Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 11:26:51 -0700
From: "William D. Tallman"
To: Exegesis
Subject: Re: Exegesis Digest V4 #52, #53 and #54

Candy was very articulate in her objections to the current practice of astrology. I, for one, would be quite interested in having her present her views concerning astrology as it should be practiced!

I blundered in my representation of her views in an earlier post, for which I apologize. She *does* have philosophical and theoretic concerns. I think Candy represents a significant number of practicing astrologers who have not made their concerns public, and I earnestly invite her to expand on these subjects. (Hi Candy! Yeah, I know that you've got all these other projects going on, but please do present something here!)

Ummm... Cynthia, serial killers have a pathology that leaves them with the same sort of capability to express free will as a man without hands has to play the piano. It has only been recently that the mechanisms (oops, there's that word again < grin > ) have been discovered, but the evidence here is compelling.

I have the feeling from your elaborations on semiotics and language that semiotics is to language as quantum mechanics (damn, there's that word *again*!) is to Newtonian physics. If this has any value at all as an insight, perhaps you and your cyber-mate have something more to discuss.

Sorry, Dennis, for all that work I didn't get my answer. I do, of course, know at least somewhat of these matters and am (actually) comfortable with the use of these terms. My particular concern, if I didn't make that clear, was only the notion of synchronicity.

As I understand it, synchronicity is a term describing a subjective experience whereby coincident events are seen to have more than random significance. We all have experienced this sort of thing, and it is probably a phenomenon much the same as Hebbian neural connectivity initiation.

I do not understand how this phenomena has any useful connection to the community at large, except as some types are common experience. In the matter of this common experience, I can see that some potential connection might exist, but it has not been identified and defined in our discussions. So I remain at a loss to perceive the relevance of synchronicity to astrology in general, and our subject of discussion here in particular.

Ahhh, Dale! I was preparing a detailed response to your post, but then.... the Sleeper Awoke! Most of what you were concerned about is addressed in Andre's latest Monster! (I see Cynthia headed southwest again LOLOL!!!) I've been relieved of my arguments, which weren't anywhere near as good as Andre's.

Oh, and another blunder! This time I fell on my face, and Candy had to gently inform me of my mental denseness, thank you for your tact, Candy. < grin > Of *course* a Return chart for Saturn would be tremendously significant!

The problem is, however, given the lack of precision available in the relevant data, how do we determine the exact time of day. If Saturn is near a station, as is often the case, it makes determining the day itself problematic. So, in principle, Candy is very right and insightful here. In practice, however, it seems to me that a Return chart would often be problematic to construct.

As far as the question of astrology and organic/inorganic "influence", I'm much less prepared to address this than I was not too long ago. Life in the deep ocean at the volcanic vents?!? And now, life in deep bedrock very near a deep gold stream?!? What are we to make of this? I dunno, and so I'm going to put that question on the shelf pending further understanding, I think.

And astrologers as ambulance chasers are concerned, *yuk*! But that's part of the "astrology must explain everything" school of thought... and of course Andre addressed that as well.

Dale, you and Andre are doing very well by yourselves. < grin > So I'm gonna sit on the sidelines and ask the occasional question....

Andre explains so much so clearly! His information will surely have turned some parts of these discussions on their ear! I've nothing to add here. Nothing at all!

Clearly, there is much, much more to think about before we start building a theoretical base, but I agree that somehow build it we must if we are ever to progress in our attempt to more fully understand astrology.

Well, actually I do have a suggestion here: at the end of his post, Andre presents the problems of astrology as seen from his professional point of view. He assumes that the Planets, the Signs, the Houses, and Aspects (in principle) are archetypes, and that the combinations of these are thus types in themselves.

I see the archetypes as the Zodiac, the Circle of Houses, the Planets, etc. In this scheme, then, each Sign, House, Planet, etc is a type. People are then unique combinations of types and not separate types in themselves.

The result here would be that there is much more that we hold in common that astrology would otherwise suggest. Astrology would see us as different manifestations of the same (astrological) substance. Thus, uniqueness is a quality that astrology can reveal, but it does so on a basis of our commonality.

And then Cynthia speaks to Dale. This is how these matters should proceed: several different discussions at the same time, with the awareness that any one of these might have something to offer another at any time. I already said that, I know, but it's happening and I wanted to point that out!

In Cynthia's second post, she speaks of her background. Part of that was/is her experience from her religious foundation. She uses the word "faith", which is very evocative and resonant. She asks periodically if I have any questions, and I can say I've got a few now, but they don't concern semiotics.

I am quite comfortable in acknowledging that I have no religious background whatever, so there is much that I have no way of understanding in that regard. Faith is one thing, and there are others. My concerns are about religion in its connection to astrology, but I suspect that I have others as well; I will take those off list, of course.

Then there is that orphan child of astrology: horary. Cynthia specifies that the relationship between genethliacal and horary is a matter of significant concern for her. I can tell you, Cynthia, that your concern is almost universal amongst astrologers, and that many who might otherwise do so, do not practice horary because it does not fit with their view of astrology. So, we are pleased that you are willing to share this with us!

By the way, horary sits comfortably on the grill alongside fate, free will and broiled brain LOL!! From an astrological point of view, it remains one of the true heavies to be resolved.

Notice no quotes? I'm saving bandwidth, like a good fellow; lord knows I've already consumed more than my share!!