Seriously, I think if people want to believe in the consensus reality and the world view they were educated in they should leave off studying subjects like astrology which has challenging implications for them.

You might be surpried how many well educated people from the western rationalist philosophical tradition are interested in Astrology.The ones I know who might fit this description don't seem unduly challenged or threatened by any implications.

Trevor wrote:

My point about Sugar's chart is if I can't get astrology to work myself then I wouldn?t pursue it.

Saying that it looks like Alan Sugar is a double Aries, is not getting astrology to work.

With regards to your views on astrology use in warfare, it seems clear, when you talk about what ?strikes you?, that you have no deep knowledge and experience of the texts in question, the techniques used, or the philosophical principles that drive the techniques, so I?ll leave that aside.

With regards your comments on rectification at astrodatabank, I have no idea what you are talking about. Perhaps that is a matter you should take up there. (I don?t see why you feel a sense of personal integrity rectifying his chart ? I doubt Michael Jackson has asked you to do it, and you will still be left with an opinion when all is said and done.)

Trevor wrote:yes I?m quite direct with my challenges, must be the Aries?

Sorry this is blunt, but with all your experience discovering people's underlying motives you should take a reality check and accept that you were anything but direct. You were disingenuous and insincere. If you have philosophical principles to raise for discussion, do it in the philosophy and science section, which is subheaded ?does astrology work?, why??. Don?t misuse the generally trusting spirit and good will of the members of this forum, who answered your question as if it was a straight-up appeal for help information.


Kirk wrote:

But isn't that maybe a major weakness? If we don't question and contradict from within we will become more reliant on what comes from without

Kirk, read through the posts in the philosophy and science section of this forum and you will immediately set your mind to rest that such questions and contradictions are (and always have been) explored without fear or censure on this site. Healthy and constructive debate has always been welcomed here, and in my experience astrologers are more than willing to look critically at the hard issues involved. What this site provides is a platform for productive discussion amongst astrologers or those who are legitimately concerned about the issues. But any sceptic who trawls through the other sections of the forum, in the hope of tripping up astrologers in general discussion, in a space where we encourage students to share their views and gain confidence (with the promise that no one is here to trip them up) will be banned from the forum without explanation.
I hope that answers your question.

Phillip, I personally thought you post was very well thought out and argued, and I shared many of your views. Sorry to say that I am cutting off your right to reply to Trevor?s final remarks because I am locking this thread. My reason is that its content has gone completely off topic, and the kinds of philosophical issues that are now being discussed are too involved for the ?news and notices? section. Please feel free to start/continue the discussion or reproduce your posts there. That section gets the attention of the members who enjoy scientific and philosophical debate, so it is the best place to expose views and opinions of this kind.

Regards
Deb