Skyscript Astrology Forum

Tom wrote:I suggest, in addition to adding a moderator, that the debaters stick to a single topic, just like a real debate. "Resolved, traditional astrology is overly fatalistic." for example. This would force both sides to narrow their focus and supporting their arguments with facts and logic would carry a lot more weight.

I regard fate as a sort of failsafe for when consciousness fails us (which is constantly I'm afraid). How many of you are aware of your heartbeat? Consciously control it now. See how laborious that is? Much simpler that it's on autopilot because if you forget, you're dead. Much of this world is like that and if we're here for a reason, then part of that reason involves a choice to take on limitation (as the myth of Er suggests). These limitations are like training wheels and the level of "Saturn consciousness" that Eric talks about, which I prefer to call the concrete particular, are necessary for the other levels to exist. If we are all just one fractured by the Dyad into several egos, then the Aristotelian cause and effect idea suggests that there must be a reason.

This debate reminds me of a remarkable observation I just read in Classical Astrology for Modern Living by J. Lee Lehman: If a traditional astrologer would call the natal chart "the way of least resistance" rather than one's "fate", it would in most cases make little difference - because people tend to keep functioning in always the same habitual patterns rather than making the effort to exercise the freedom of choice they basically have.

Paul wrote:

I agree Southern Cross, especially as he's not here to defend himself. I did find some of what he said a little disappointing with regards astrology, and shocking with regards a counselling setting though.
But I agree we should try to not make any personal commentary on him - and apologies for already having done so to an extent.

[/img]

Thank you.

It was a pity that Eric Meyers resorted to sloppy arguments about flat earth believers and I found it unsettling and indeed worrying that someone with a psychological background (as we're so often informed during the debate) would hold views amounting to rape victims needed a life lesson - I struggle to imagine any way in which such a view would be beneficial or healing to an individual within an astrological consultation with someone who holds these views.

When I heard him giving the example of rape victims I already thought that this would become an issue of controversy because it's such a sensitive topic.
What I find important here is to put his words in the context in which he sees the world. He is aware that there is a lot of suffering in the world and rapes are certainly part of it. In his view we all are part of an "higher" conciousness that want's to develop itself. Bad experiences are one way of reaching that aim.

Basically he has the view that there are no coincidences and bad experiences are part of a learning process of the person. He wants to empower people to get out of a state of helplessness.

What could be learned from a rape? There is not one answer to it. Meyers gives his own example of getting beaten up a lot when he was a child. He puts it down to a low self esteem that he had at that time. The emotional state of a living being is connected to the experiences in the outside world. They only appear to be separate because of our lack of perception.
For everyone the emotional (or maybe also intellectual) reasons for a certain experience will be different therefore we can't make general assumptions.

It's a difficult topic because words can easily be misunderstood and twisted. From my point of view Meyer does not have a lack of empathy for rape victims but on the contrary he wants to get something positive out of it by telling people that their bad experiences were not meaningless and senseless but are part of a bigger picture which will be understood at a later stage.

zoidsoft wrote:

I hope you didn't misunderstand my clever tongue in cheek statement. I was actually in agreement with Eric Meyers. I'm not a stoic and the statement I made was in favor of free choice. But I said it in a way that the ego will have a hard time understanding.

I wasn't criticizing you in particular. It just happened that your post was the last in the thread.

Eric said that everything in the world is an extension of our consciousness, therefore I don't really exist. That is a true statement. Of course, "Eric Meyers" doesn't really exist either (we are both a collection of ideas and molecules invented by our egos which is also true).

I think he goes a bit too far with his statement. There is a material world of which we are part of and on a certain level we are separate from each other.
He has some extreme ideas and is not an example that can be generalized for all modern astrologers.

Tom wrote:

I have noticed something over the years about trying to explain traditional astrology to a modern. It's a lot like trying to defend astrology to a skeptic. It's eerily similar in fact. Usually the skeptic/modern is loaded with misinformation if not outright ignorance, that he touts as definitive, so the traditionalist/astrologer has to waste time correcting him over and over and over. The skeptic/modern loves to engage in "hit and run" argumentation often consisting of piling one falsehood on top of another with no link between statements.

I agree that there is an eery similarity to talking about astrology to a sceptic but in my experience that also accounts for traditional astrologers reactions to modern astrologers. It's going both ways.
It's kind of pity because astrologers in general are a looked down upon minority who faces discrimination from the outside. To use the same way of interacting among us is more than counterproductive.
In the long run we should find an astrology that encompasses both: traditional and modern astrology because we need both. Traditional astrology connects us to our roots and values what has been discovered by our ancestors and modern astrology keeps us up to date with what has evolved in the recent past until the present. We now have more outer planets than in the past and their influence cannot be denied.

Fate in their view is, "You will have four children two husbands and serve a prison term." That's not traditional astrology.

Actually I think that there is fate. That's based on personal experiences and also books I read from people who had near death experiences etc. I don't know if everything is predetermined but certainly a lot. That applies to outside experiences but probably not to emotional and intellectual things.

Southern Cross wrote: Basically he has the view that there are no coincidences and bad experiences are part of a learning process of the person. He wants to empower people to get out of a state of helplessness.

What could be learned from a rape? There is not one answer to it. Meyers gives his own example of getting beaten up a lot when he was a child. He puts it down to a low self esteem that he had at that time.

Right but if you were beat up all the time when you were a child wouldn't you have a low self esteem too? Why are we assuming that he had a low self esteem and then attracted people to bully him? I find it a difficult pill to swallow that anyone would believe that if you get raped, it actually isn't a bad thing after all, it's just a lesson we needed to learn. Shrug. No big deal. I can't imagine how it could be helpful to adopt this attitude - did you get raped? oh you silly sausage now what have you learned after all no experiences are bad.

Sometimes things really are out of our control - sometimes bad things really do happen to us. I am totally all for the idea that we often become the instrument of our own undoing by lack of self consciousness and lack of discretion or wisdom - but it is another matter to then pronounce that all 'bad' things which happen to us are our own fault - it's basically just another nice way to blame the victim. I struggle to see how anyone could feel empowered being told "well you obviously needed to learn a lesson". Let's not sit an ivory tower and pontificate about the world - one of my best friends was raped, her drink was spiked and she was dragged to a room and raped. It still affects her years later and she sometimes suffers from anxiety attacks. I would hate to think of her brought to someone at her most vulnerable and explained in a very reasonable manner how there are no bad experiences and sure didn't she learn something from it.

The reality is that terrible things can befall us that are not of our own making. We have a degree of free will but we are not gods such that our mere consciousness shapes and dictates the flow of the universe around us. One stray thought could get us raped or beat up.

Certainly we are often instruments in our own destruction or undoing, but I would hate anyone to be in a counselling position where they essentially hold the view that A) It's your fault anyway in a way, if only you were more evolved and spiritual, and B) that no bad things occur anyway, we always learn from them.

I'm all for learning from difficult and trying times. But that's a far cry from assuming that the reason they befell us is that we failed in some fundamental part of life that we needed this to happen to us and that if only we were better, more spiritual, more conscious, or just somehow better, it wouldn't have.

In the UK we have heard time and time and time again of children sexually abused by celebrities, by teachers, by authority figures in general - terrified even decades later to own up about it as if it was their own guilt or their own shame or their own fault in some way. That is how damaging these things can be, very often the aggressor does try to make you feel that you deserved it in some way. I have to say it makes me a little nauseous thinking that someone vulnerable who comes to a counsellor with all the qualifications in counselling meets with a philosophy that yup, it was your fault all along. And what about toddlers or babies who get abused physically or otherwise? At what point do we draw the line from "you needed to learn a lesson" and "actually no you were just a completely innocent victim of a terrible crime against you".

All the "you are in charge" sentiments sound great if they're used a motivational "you can do it!!" you can get up and go get that job, you can get that relationship, change your attitude, change your life sentiments. But there is two sides to that spectrum if we take that belief as completely and as literally as we have seen them often expressed. Yes, by all means help someone turn that frown upside down and empower them - but let's not fill people with nonsense that they are the gods of their own world if only, bless them, they'd be more spiritual and wise and brilliant and then nothing bad would ever happen to them - be more conscious you won't get raped or beaten up or abused as a toddler/child/teenager/20-something/old person in a care home!

It's the most horrendous way of blaming the victim in my opinion.

And just so I am not misunderstood, I do not believe that people who hold these views wish to do anything of the sort of course. The problem is that by focusing on the simple shallow change your attitude and change your life - which of course I agree with - we can hold the view to such a simple and purer level that we fool ourselves and very real victims that if only they had done X or thought Y that their child would not have been killed, they wouldn't have been left paralysed, they wouldn't have been raped or any other awful thing that happens to people all the time.

@Tom: That's a nice way to put it concisely.

@Southern Cross: Hi,

I find these two assumptions of yours to be in contradiction with each other.

Southern Cross wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:51 am

Meyers gives his own example of getting beaten up a lot when he was a child. He puts it down to a low self esteem that he had at that time. The emotional state of a living being is connected to the experiences in the outside world. They only appear to be separate because of our lack of perception.

Southern Cross wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:23 am

Actually I think that there is fate. That's based on personal experiences and also books I read from people who had near death experiences etc. I don't know if everything is predetermined but certainly a lot. That applies to outside experiences but probably not to emotional and intellectual things.

Any illuminating thoughts?

Michael

Paul,

it would be better if Eric Meyer would explain his views himself as I only know some of it from the debate. I understand and agree with some of it but not with everything.

Just in general I get what you say. Terrible things happen to people and having someone to tell them that they caused it themselves is really the worst that someone could do and would do them great injustice when looked at it from a certain perspective.

Nevertheless there is more to it. From what insights I was able to obtain so far nothing happens by coincidence. As I said before I believe that there is fate.
Some of the bad stuff that happens to a person might be connected to something the collective has to learn and not be so much some personal lesson.

I had bad things happeing to me and after several decades I am able to understand now that there was a meaning behind it. I don't blame myself because at the time when it happened I had the choice between pest and cholera.
Still looking back at it from a distance I understand now that there was something in my way of thinking, emotional being and acting that needed to be corrected as I wasn't really true to myself and my values.

Right but if you were beat up all the time when you were a child wouldn't you have a low self esteem too? Why are we assuming that he had a low self esteem and then attracted people to bully him?

I see it from from a different perspective. I think that we have multiple incarnations and do bring some "old stuff" into this life that we want to work on. I think that we preplan the bad stuff that happens to us before we incarnate. Yes, we could just stay in paradise and never incarnate. That would be the easiest of all possibilities. For some reasons we choose to incarnate into duality and experience good and bad things.
Did you notice that some people always experience the same bad things multiple times while others never get near that same topic? Would I blame the victim? Of course not. Is it coincidence? Nope, not in my view.
Does that sound like a contradiction? Maybe in your view. I do have deep empathy for what victims go through. I can see that their souls have chosen very difficult experiences for reasons unknown to me.
When I look at what happened to some of the indian woman who got raped and murdered recently I think that their souls wanted to help to bring more awareness into indian society about how woman get treated there.

I find it a difficult pill to swallow that anyone would believe that if you get raped, it actually isn't a bad thing after all, it's just a lesson we needed to learn. Shrug. No big deal. I can't imagine how it could be helpful to adopt this attitude - did you get raped? oh you silly sausage now what have you learned after all no experiences are bad.

That's not how he feels about it from what I gathered. Just because he tries to put bad experiences into a broader perspective doesn't mean that he or I for that matter are some icecubics who are as cold as an arctic winter.

Sometimes things really are out of our control - sometimes bad things really do happen to us.

Yes, from our human perspective most things are out of our control. Nevertheless that doesn't mean that they happen randomly and without any meaning to them.

I have to say it makes me a little nauseous thinking that someone vulnerable who comes to a counsellor with all the qualifications in counselling meets with a philosophy that yup, it was your fault all along.

I hope and assume that when a traumatized client comes to Eric Meyer he will expain them the context of his views in a way that does not blame them but helps them to get a better understanding of it all.

The problem is that by focusing on the simple shallow change your attitude and change your life - which of course I agree with - we can hold the view to such a simple and purer level that we fool ourselves and very real victims that if only they had done X or thought Y that their child would not have been killed, they wouldn't have been left paralysed, they wouldn't have been raped or any other awful thing that happens to people all the time.

It's not a shallow view but quite the opposite. It is wider than the usual duality thinking of black and white. Because we all are traumatized to some extend and react very emotional to all sorts of topics it's easy to not see the other planes of existence and consciousness that also exist and could explain some of the bad stuff that happens to us and others.

Michael Sternbach wrote:@Tom: That's a nice way to put it concisely.

@Southern Cross: Hi,

I find these two assumptions of yours to be in contradiction with each other.

Southern Cross wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:51 am

Meyers gives his own example of getting beaten up a lot when he was a child. He puts it down to a low self esteem that he had at that time. The emotional state of a living being is connected to the experiences in the outside world. They only appear to be separate because of our lack of perception.

Southern Cross wrote: Thu Jun 19, 2014 9:23 am

Actually I think that there is fate. That's based on personal experiences and also books I read from people who had near death experiences etc. I don't know if everything is predetermined but certainly a lot. That applies to outside experiences but probably not to emotional and intellectual things.

Any illuminating thoughts?

Michael

Hi Michael,

from my point of view our emotions are connected to outside events in that sense that on a basic soul level we are foremost emotional beings. When we incarnate we plan our outside experiences around emotional topics we want to work on while incarnated. I think that we do have free will but almost only before we incarnate when we plan our existence on earth.
An unanswered question that I have is if we are able to change our fate when we managed to sort out certain emotions or intellectual things and don't need an event in the outside world anymore for us as "help" or as a"reminder".
I hope that makes it more clear.

Southern Cross wrote: Nevertheless there is more to it. From what insights I was able to obtain so far nothing happens by coincidence. As I said before I believe that there is fate.

If so, that's the exact opposite of the viewpoint that was expounded. The viewpoint that was expressed is that bad things happen because you have a lesson to be learned - as opposed to be bad things happening and great if we can learn something from them.

Still looking back at it from a distance I understand now that there was something in my way of thinking, emotional being and acting that needed to be corrected as I wasn't really true to myself and my values.

That may be true for you, as I say, often we are instruments in our own downfall - but there are other things which are not in our control. And therefore we are not to be blamed individually for when we are beaten up or raped etc. Enough of blaming the victim, the people who need to do the inner work are the aggressors.

I see it from from a different perspective. I think that we have multiple incarnations and do bring some "old stuff" into this life that we want to work on.

I'm agnostic about past lives, but I do agree we are not blank slates from birth, we have expectations and a blueprint much like an oak tree has an acorn, that we will likely grow into. I still don't think that the toddlers who are abused or abducted are because they were unenlightened in a previous life or were bringing some "old stuff".

Did you notice that some people always experience the same bad things multiple times while others never get near that same topic?

Yes, do you notice that toddlers are raped and abducted and killed after their abductor is done sexually abusing them?
I agree, we can be instruments in our own problems, a lot of problems are of our own making. That doesn't mean that therefore any problem is of our own making. Some animals have four legs and a tail and are dogs, that doesn't mean all animals with four legs and a tail are dogs - the logic does not work that way.

Would I blame the victim? Of course not. Is it coincidence? Nope, not in my view.

Let me ask simply then. A woman is raped. Is it due to her lack of consciousness / enlightenment / etc - whether because of some issue in this life or previous ones. Yes or no? What about the plethora of children who are abused and killed?

When I look at what happened to some of the indian woman who got raped and murdered recently I think that their souls wanted to help to bring more awareness into indian society about how woman get treated there.

I wonder why Indian woman don't just choose to not be raped before they incarnate - seems a lot simpler.

That's not how he feels about it from what I gathered.

Actually I think it is - he gave the analogy, when asked directly about the rape of individuals, of how he didn't love himself enough and was beat up, and how it's the same thing with raped individuals.

It's not a shallow view but quite the opposite. It is wider than the usual duality thinking of black and white. Because we all are traumatized to some extend and react very emotional to all sorts of topics it's easy to not see the other planes of existence and consciousness that also exist and could explain some of the bad stuff that happens to us and others.

Right we can do that without tut-tutting or pontificating from our pulpit wringing our hands about if only they were more enlightened they wouldn't have been raped slash beat up slash had their dog run over slash whatever it is.

Life is hard enough without piling more problems onto already suffering people. Sometimes bad things happen to us. It's all well and good to say "oh let's not label them bad" - who has ever been raped or stabbed and said "ah it wasn't that bad, I'd describe the feeling as neutral"? Nobody.

Good and bad are of course subjective words, we know this. But we can still use them. Yes we can sometimes learn something from our experiences, good or bad. Yes the problems often begin and end with us. But not every facet of life is like this - when Dane Rudhyar's brick falls on your head it isn't necessarily because you didn't learn Mars' lesson - sometimes it's just because bricks fall on your head. By all means learn not to walk under ladders when they're carrying bricks. But don't assume that the people it didn't fall on were because they dealt with those falling bricks back in the renaissance.