The 2 unnamed English astrologers executed by Henry VI were executed for treason for making a prediction about the King's death. This is the point I made before - persecution only seems to have been attached to potentially heretical or treasonous acts, not to making a prediction clear and specific yet getting the details wrong. Rulers knew that could happen, most of them were themselves fairly well informed about astrological priniciples.
The Google link is - http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1p0pBHY6C

Jill, I will tell you that, as administrator, I don't want this forum space filled with examples or long discussion on what anyone dislikes about 'most' of astrology (traditional or modern), or what they see as 'silly'. That is not what this forum is about. It's designed for discussion between students who take the subject seriously and who have a committed and respect-filled interest in it. It's not for critics, or for people who don't like most of it. Querying the basis of certain principles is absolutely fine, in the light of understanding them better, or opening up discussion that leads to better understanding. If the purpose is to ridicule rather than gain better understanding then you need to take it elsewhere. There are plenty of sites and blogs that welcome criticisms of astrology, and like to refer to its principles as nonsense; this isn't one of them.

Im sorry, I feel bad for any offence caused.

I wasn't intending to make you feel bad Jill. But let's not make this about attacking any astrologer's system or astrology in general, or astrologers as a whole. Better to isolate criticsms to one particular point that can be discussed in its own thread, asking for input on where the sense is in it. Then others can contribute and that issue can get explored and evaluated. A year or so ago I described the certain use of a certain technique as 'daft'. I've since come to realise that it's not daft to the practitioners who have a different perspective, who have thought about it seriously and know when, and to what degree it applies. I'm more cautious now because all astrologers live in glass houses. Anyone with a sincere interest in any kind of astrology holds a perspective on life that is reported to have the official scientific term of 'claptrap'.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opi ... 07006.html

It was insensitive of me to criticise. I have a big, opinionated mouth with not much to back it up.

jill elinore wrote:It was insensitive of me to criticise. I have a big, opinionated mouth with not much to back it up.

It's good to be passionate though. This way you can focus on what you feel really works and just run with it.

I'm a little too critical myself as it happens. I think all astrologers are in some respects. We have what works for us and then quietly and privately scoff those who use those methods we don't use. We see it all the time. I think it's good to be aware that actually none of us are any better than one another. I certainly roll my eyes when someone feels the need to fill every blank space on a chart with an asteroid or TNO, but then I guess that's what works for them and that's what they're comfortable using.

It doesn't stop me questioning or at times critiquing it, but I try hard to be respectful at the same time. I don't think you were being disrespectful here but I guess we can all see how quickly things could unravel on an internet forum into outright bickering.

Yes, seriously Jill, don't feel bad. I agree with Paul's last comment and don't think you were being disrespectful either. I was a bit outspoken myself because I wanted to quickly halt the discussion from taking what might have been a negative turn.

Thank you Paul. Im glad you dont think I was disrespectful, thats what worried me.

I am passionate about understanding astrology (and life as we know it) and I dont really think anyone is even close but thats my problem!

Phew, thanks to you too Deb. Youre right to nip it in the bud, though, opinions are one thing but not useful if they just create negativity or divisions.

Maybe this would be a good place to pause and reflect, then share, some of our thoughts regarding how we choose the system we use.

I myself see a symbolic part of astrology and also a technical part. It seems that the symbolic part represents an accretion of thought over the past two or three millennia, and it feels like the various symbols have evolved, but done so in a steady direction. This slow honing process, to me, makes the symbolic component of astrology very powerful. And it seems that, at least relative to the technical aspects of the field, it is a lot less controversial. I haven?t seen too many posts with diametrically opposed views of, say, the symbolic meaning of Jupiter.

Astrology?s technical component seems more fraught. Witness the debates on tropical vs. sidereal, or whole sign houses vs. quadrant. It seems that in this realm, things have not slowly evolved in more or less one direction. Different threads of thought have diverged. One could make intricate use of a particular system, only to have newly unearthed documents from the past completely shift things. I?ve seen entire house systems argued based on the translation of one phrase of ancient Greek. To me, this has been a large underlying source of contention among astrologers, at least in this community. And I?m not saying that?s a bad thing. The scholarship done to resolve these issues is impressive, and has shed new light on the symbolic component.

Based on my humble viewpoint, I?ve leaned towards emphasizing the symbolic component of astrology, and am less concrete about the technical components. For example, I take a more vague view of the houses, with internal issues near the IC, external dealings near the MC. This is because very erudite people have told me my sun is in the 9th ? and also the 10th ? house. But that?s just me.

I?m curious to hear the thought processes of other people in the systems they choose. One thing is, astrology is a beautiful window into the human mind, and the collective unconscious of our culture. One can learn so much about humans reading the various arguments and points of agreement ? perhaps moreso the former. As a physician, I can feel some of the thought processes and modes of thought of my profession strongly present in astrology. This is perhaps from the time, long ago, before the two fields diverged. And it?s great. I?ve even applied some of the ways people have communicated in these forums to how I speak to my patients.

To Rich, who started this thread: welcome, you?re in for a treat!

Interesting points, Phil!

It is hopefully obvious that Astrology has, in many respects, become quite bloated with fairy tale measurements and creative imagination.

Still, I am of the opinion that many of the points that you raised DO have a unique and correct answer.

I find it impossible to believe that there isn't ONE house system which is actually the physical basis for reality. Some of the others are likely close enough that they are right (in terms of delineation) much of the time. It makes no sense to me that "Bob's" chart works with Placidus, yet "Dave's" chart works best by Koch. And here we have "Merry" and her chart works best with Porphyry. I must admit that, hearing these types of comments, the immediate reaction is... flaky birth data or flaky astrological perception is responsible.

To me, the thing that seems to be begging to be done is to take very accurately timed charts and then look at a ton of events and see where those house cusps SHOULD be. Oh wait, that's been done. That's how we got Topocentric.

Peace

James

hi and welcome rich!

i would like to emphasize a similar viewpoint to phils. i see astrology as much and more of an art then a science.. the art is in the interpretive process and how astrologers use different methods to arrive at the conclusions they do on a chart. there are many techniques, some more popular then others and much cross over going on in astrology where a person has to weigh these factors to come to a conclusion on the chart.. the weighing systems that one can consider in the article deb translated from johannes schoener's table of dgnity scores for example, are one clear example of an astrologer doing exactly this.. someone else might weigh the factors differently or have a different house system to arrive at a conclusion that would be different then another astrologer...

i often associate astrology with music. no 2 musicians will play a song exactly the same way, not would they if they allow a more personal and individual touch to enter into what it is they are doing..

thinking there is only one way to do something (right or wrong with no grey area) seems counterproductive when it comes to astrology or music. i personally don't think of astrology in this context, but more art and less science..