one thing astrology does is exploit the opportunity to say ‘our behaviors are caused by physical forces and events’. this is something established by neuroscience, but neuroscience deals with much smaller, localized observations that can be repeated in controlled environments. astrologers then come along and say ‘how do we know astral bodies and their activities don’t also have a direct affect on behaviors, dispositions, etc.?’ and because we have to answer ‘we don’t know’, they reverse the burden of proof and effectively conceal their argument from ignorance.
‘well because you don’t know, were gonna go ahead and assume they do.’
but then the problem of accurately mapping these assumed relationships between people and astral bodies arises. to address this problem, the mapping is made so complex that everything has an explanation… as a kind of fail-safe. if they claim that jupiter being here at time x should mean this and that, and instead something different happens, they’ll say ‘oh that’s because we didn’t account for this other factor; neptune being here at time y.’
another problem astrology exploits is the ambiguity of language. for example, there is no single way to define the behavior of ‘being aggressive’, or ‘opportunistic’, or ‘romantic’, or ‘timid’, or ‘risky’, etc. this way, if a taurus, who’s supposed to be sensual, doesn’t exhibit behavior that we’d expect is sensual, we can take advantage of the ambiguity of that definition and stretch it out to accommodate the taurus’s behavior, whatever it may be.
astrology is a kind of ‘make it up as you go’ system of explanations, none of which can be verified experimentally like neuroscience. those who practice it are either genuinely ignorant of its sophistry, or using it to try an dazzle people to gain their admiration.
It is no small thing to know ones own deep psyche.
For me it has been a proven and simple formula: a person who is afraid of the world is afraid of astrology. This is not only normal but inevitable. Self-valuing logic, will to power - which in most men is a will to not be confronted with a lack of power.
Whats the funny part is that grown up men manage to convince themselves that they’re able to judge the mechanics of something of which they categorically refuse to lift the hood to study it. It makes an insect look respectable.
It is indeed no small thing to know ones own psyche but I do not think that there is merely one way to achieve this
Studying that of which you have little or no knowledge is a path to understanding it but that does not mean it that has to be accepted as well
Ideologies and philosophies pertaining to self and to ones place in the grand scheme of things have always existed but they cannot all be true
Being open minded extends to acknowledging alternative interpretations but not to uncritical acceptance of them
But if something is true for someone on a fundamental level what others think of it should not really be a problem
Thats certainly true.
And with my own logic, I kind of enjoy the fact that it is hard for people to grasp and I find myself privileged being part of a small minority understanding it.
With astrology however it has long bothered me how it is judged by people who normally think like scientists but on this subject do not think they should research it thoroughly before judging it.
The explanation for this is simply: the massive fraud and soothsaying that is absolute trash that occurs under its name. On the other hand, do we dismiss chemistry because of the lies of big Pharma? Thats actually something fundamental Christians do.
I might as well ask you to find the mechanism of gravity before you postulate the existence of gravity. But I don’t enjoy repeating myself!
We are living in a much less understood universe than you seem to presume.
Here is a curious video fragment telling you a bit of the first moment of breath. youtu.be/gcmJ7uDQmDw?t=1344
II don’t expect this video to be taken seriously at all mind you - but his fragment is an answer to your earlier question.
Here is some literature for context. sevenray.org/uploads/2/9/0/ … estry2.pdf
I know it is all very weird. Don’t think I voluntarily got drawn to it. I fucking loathed all this shit, these queasy making people and the “soul definitions” - ridiculous.
But at there heart I found something really terrifying.
Mass, a lot of mass. Escape velocities, gravity slingshots, reverse thrust requirements, speed mass requirements to maintain an orbit. Newton’s law. Mathematically defined relationships of masses.
But I don’t think the two questions are equivalent. With gravity, Newton and Galileo could experiment to determine it’s results. No one invented it’s effect.
I’ll take a look at your links, thanks.
Them’s not mechanisms of gravity, only mechanisms that depend on it.
The only thing I have against you re astrology FC is that you perpetuate the idea that we somehow owe an explanation. My gf used to say that too: that’s not enough to convince me to look into it. Well lol. It was you who asked you stupid bitch.
The origins of my name are deep and misterious and not for your ears.
Mowk is a cool name though.
And that is one of the most badass origin stories ever. Movies tend not to offer so good ones. I am enthralled.
Probably your Libra expectation date manifests as this largely succesful search for style from an unmistakeably virgan soul. The disdain of a squirel. Majestic.
What Im asking after is not what gravity is and how it corresponds, because all that is known about astrological law as well.
You asked after cause, I ask after a cause. What is the cause of the mass attracting another mass?
Science is only concerned with the consistency of the fact of correspondence.
Granted, I mentioned something about electromagnetic isolation which the brain does not provide, so I speculated about causes, but the validity of astrology, to the astrologers mind, is derived strictly from the absolute consistency in correspondences of concepts and realities, the consistent accuracy of correspondences, as it is with anything worthy of being called a science.
Lol. When someone asks you to teach him to swim, most cases they’ll be willing to jump in the water to begin with. With astrology, not so. It is really strenuous and you’re right.
If someone wants to know she’ll not need me to find out.
Using the Newtonean order as a standard though we can still say something to make understood how even small bodies contribute in significant ways; note that Pluto as other outer bodies was first hypothesized because there was a measurable inconsistency in the movements of the other planets. Reifying the inconsistency mathematically someone disclosed the location of a hypothetical object, the physical version of which was then indeed discovered in the predicted place. In the same way its presence in the chart is sleek and insidious, very subtle and very, very deep behind the other paths -note also that Pluto’s orbit is slanted on one of the axes with respect to the paths of the others.
It requires a certain degree of will power to take the time to learn something you think is intellectually redundant and therefore superfluous
It is true regardless of subject matter and of how open minded anyone is because everyone has their blind spots for no one is immune to this
I do not think absolute open mindedness is possible for both moral and logical reasons but one can strive over time to become less closed minded
I have become more detached as I get older so see things more as an observer than a participant and I think it helps me to be more open minded
Astrology as a subject does not actually interest me that much although I do have a book about Chinese astrology
I read physics / philosophy / math / biology / history / politics but astrology for me is not in the same category as any of those
Although I am interested in religion even though I am an atheist and Greek mythology which I find more relevant than astrology
I have also read all of Everything You Need To Know But Have Never Been Told by David Icke which is very heavy with regard to symbolism and astrology [ particularly in relation to Saturn ] none of which I think is true [ such as the Moon being an ancient artificial satellite created by cosmic life forms ] but I still read it nonetheless because its an interesting insight into how his mind works - I try though as a general rule not to dismiss something entirely less I am absolutely certain that it is false
[ the Earth being flat for example which it clearly is not ]
It requires a certain degree of will power to take the time to learn something you think is intellectually redundant and therefore superfluous
It is true regardless of subject matter and of how open minded anyone is because everyone has their blind spots for no one is immune to this
I do not think absolute open mindedness is possible for both moral and logical reasons but one can strive over time to become less closed minded
I have become more detached as I get older so see things more as an observer than a participant and I think it helps me to be more open minded
Astrology as a subject does not actually interest me that much although I do have a book about Chinese astrology
I read physics / philosophy / math / biology / history / politics but astrology for me is not in the same category as any of those
Although I am interested in religion even though I am an atheist and Greek mythology which I find more relevant than astrology
I have also read all of Everything You Need To Know But Have Never Been Told by David Icke which is very heavy with regard to symbolism and astrology [ particularly in relation to Saturn ] none of which I think is true [ such as the Moon being an ancient artificial satellite created by cosmic life forms ] but I still read it nonetheless because its an interesting insight into how his mind works - I try though as a general rule not to dismiss something entirely less I am absolutely certain that it is false
[ the Earth being flat for example which it clearly is not ]