Posted: Thu May 14, 2009 6:28 am
Hello,
Tom said:
So, you say that hidden is better, and that hidden is another thing, different from powerless. Here I have a problem at the simple level of logic, without getting involved in a discussion about testimonies or experience.
How can, say for example Mercury, become hidden in its action, if its power to manifest it?s not obliterated? Isn?t in fact this idea with hidden just the same with saying it is without capacity to manifest, or a dysfunctionality?
Tom said:
Sorry for entering in Morin?s sanctuary with my speculations, but I saw that the discussion is, in this moment, more about personal conviction (a conviction that after all Morin?s idea is quite plausible and different). So, considering this I thought that it won?t be such a big deal if I will present my own conviction. If this is not the case please announce me and I shall retreat.True. We of the hidden persuasion are not arguing that there is no effect by conjunction. I think that is the point, that the conjunction has an effect, but the burning up of the planet is not valid. That conjunction cannot have influence if one planet is powerless.
So, you say that hidden is better, and that hidden is another thing, different from powerless. Here I have a problem at the simple level of logic, without getting involved in a discussion about testimonies or experience.
How can, say for example Mercury, become hidden in its action, if its power to manifest it?s not obliterated? Isn?t in fact this idea with hidden just the same with saying it is without capacity to manifest, or a dysfunctionality?
