Indeed!
Printable View
Indeed!
The quote from Jung that stood out for me from that link was this:Quote:
Originally Posted by free
Astrology is one of the intuitive methods like the I Ching, geomantics, and other divinatory procedures. It is based upon the synchronicity principle, i.e. meaningful coincidence.
I realized I did not know what synchronicity was although I've heard the term before. This link helped: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ci...ronicity03.htm
The correlations that Gauquelin found might be best viewed as synchronicity, or meaningful coincidences. They cannot be explained by chance and yet there is no causal, deterministic explanation either.
Synchronicity is sometimes amusing, sometimes meaningless, for me. But I am not an explorer of it. Jung was. Talking about I Ching, they say that Jung used to spend hours 'under a tree' throwing the I Ching coins.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Found this old thread when I was looking for something else.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Meaningful coincidence seems to me a good synonym for synchronicity.
Astrology is a science and a very old one with itīs own parameters practiced already in old Egypt.
In India they used astrology (I donīt know if they still do) to predict if a certain marriage would be happy or not.
According to my experience it is more helful in exploring trends and charactheristics in a certain chart. It is not usual to make a very definite prediction as a certain aspect can mean several things. For example, a good astrologer wonīt tell anyone he is going to win in next weekīs lotery. He well tell the asker about his abilities to deal with money and if he can see a good astrological aspect in the chart that favours playing in the lotery next week.
That's how I see astrology as well, Danik. The trends aren't as clear, but the basic question is whether there is any reality that the astrologer is observing that the astronomer misses? I would say, yes. The astronomer misses the subjectivity of the observer.
Astrology is a holistic theory, much like Elliott Wave's "social mood" which I think is even more accurate than astrology. The opposite of a holistic theory is a mechanistic one that assumes some reductionist approach to reality is true rather than just a convenient model.
For what it's worth, I also think Tarot cards are valuable. If one sees them as prompts for one's intuition most people can find them useful. I have an app on my phone that gives me a card of the day to think about. I occasionally use it and find it helpful in focusing my attention.
Yes, I agree that the astrological approach is holistic. The astrological cards of people, places, countries and events follow very accurate patterns of calculation though. Today there are several internet programs to calculate an astrological chart.
An introduction to astrology I like very much, "Astrological signs/the pulse of life" by Dane Rudhyar though the book is from the 20 C- it is a dynamic at times poetic account of the zodiac, showing how each particular sign adds its contribuition to the whole process.
I'll see what the library has on astrology when I walk there this morning. There is a Vedic astrology which takes into account the precision of the equinoxes. I can't remember much about it at the moment although I did my horoscope using some online tools and the description it gave of me seemed rather accurate.
I haven't read anything about the Vedic horoscope. For the traditional horosope one has to know the exact date and hour of birth and the place of birth. There are several online sites that make your card for free, for example astrocenter.com. But the readings of the card are usually standard computer readings.
I found a printout of a vedic horoscope I did many years ago. I can't believe I still have it. Unfortunately, I didn't record the site address. It looks like there are many places now to get this done online for free.
I picked up a book by Caroline Casey at the library, "Making the Gods Work for You". She seems to be approaching it more from a psychological perspective. I don't remember much about it anymore.
I did a Vedic one yesterday, but I still prefer the traditional one, maybe because I am more used to it. I used to try interpreting charts but Iīm no astrologer. You have to have experience as a chart is like a poem. You can read it indifferent ways.
I donīt know this author but the psychological perspective can be interesting too.
The charts are a calculation. The reading of them is what counts. It is like reading a poem. It occurred to me just now that academics who write about literature and socionomists reading a market chart are like tarot and horoscope readers. They each take a text and with their subjectivity say something else about the text to make it more personal and understandable to their listeners. What they say is another formulation into words that could be viewed as a new objective text open to further interpretation if one saved it. The understanding is subjective. Anyone can do these things, but some people are better at it.
I agree with you about literature, but one needs a solid theoretical background because one must have acceptable parameters. Itīs like iin science, in fact it is a kind of science. One must be able to demonstrate ones conclusions.Itīs not wholly subjective, though subjective sensibility and subjective perspective play a large role in interpretation.
I donīt know how it works in socioeconomics, which is not at all my area of knowledge.
I found this link. Didnīt have the time to exame it yet but seems to be a treasure. Nothing very recent though, because of the authorīs rights:
http://www.skyscript.co.uk/texts.html
What I'm referring to would even work in science and mathematics. Some people are able to read these things better than others and come up new insights very rapidly. They use their subjectivity just like a psychic would who reads a Tarot spread. In the early 20th century there was an attempt to eliminate the subjective in mathematics leading to Whitehead and Russell's "Principia Mathematica". Strings of symbols and transformations were manipulated that deliberately had no meaning. The goal was to generate all of arithmetic. Godel, Turing and Church showed the project could not be completed as expected.
The underlying question is whether there is anything there to read or is it just intuitive guesswork. That is, is one actually reading something when one reads a Tarot spread or a horoscope or an Elliott Wave on a market chart? Or are these things random diagrams that suggests something to the reader that coincidentally is useful? That question goes even for those theories that claim to be reductionist and scientific: maybe all we have are models that coincidentally work?
I found the book on Vedic astrology I used some years ago. It came with software to draw the horoscope: Andrew Bloomfield, "How to Practice Vedic Astrology". I'll see if I can find something online.