Skyscript Astrology Forum

I was reading through the "Temperament & Psychological Types" thread and noticed a few points I wanted to comment on:

Some folks said that the efforts of Jung to type people was not to be used in astrology---as if astrology never has psychology knit to its guts...

Astrology (even the archaic kind) is a form of psychology...

Also, there was a mapping of types to elements but they got two of them wrong. After many years study, here's what I feel is the correct attribution:

Intuition: Fire

Sensation: Air

Feeling: Water

Thinking: Earth

hi alex

what's your thinking on switching air and earth? and whose they?

trevor wrote:what's your thinking on switching air and earth? and whose they?

Well... Actually, I'm extremely glad you asked because I was remiss in my inadequate reference. I only looked at the posted attributions and failed to read further...

The poster, Papretis, actually made a correct attribution:

"...if we think attributes like ?rational?, ?logical?, ?consistent?, etc.? That leaves us Earth / melancholic as the thinking type. Maybe that fits best after all."

I tried and failed to find out how to reproduce the permalink for that post but it's the tenth post down on the "Temperament & Psychological Types" thread.

Shame on me...

amzolt wrote:

trevor wrote:what's your thinking on switching air and earth? and whose they?

Well... Actually, I'm extremely glad you asked because I was remiss in my inadequate reference. I only looked at the posted attributions and failed to read further...

The poster, Papretis, actually made a correct attribution:

"...if we think attributes like ?rational?, ?logical?, ?consistent?, etc.? That leaves us Earth / melancholic as the thinking type. Maybe that fits best after all."

I tried and failed to find out how to reproduce the permalink for that post but it's the tenth post down on the "Temperament & Psychological Types" thread.

Shame on me...

Hi again

Well you haven't produced much of a counter argument here to Greene and the other astrologers who are trained in Jungian theory.

Here's a quote from RELATING:
The airy signs are usually described in astrological literature as being detached, communicative, interested in the world of ideas and favouring rationality. They are in short civilised........Air is the element which is most typically human, the furthest removed from instinctual nature, and it is the human kingdom which has developed the function of thinking as it's greatest gift'.

If you can give a page reference for Jung that might be useful, but I and others familiar with ''Psychological Types'' regard Greene's take on it as quite straightforward!!?

Consistent is more earthy than airy, but what has consistency got to do with 'thinking'?

The air signs 'judge' as opposed to 'perceive' thus the need to think!

This old thread explored some of this
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... sc&start=0

trevor wrote:Well you haven't produced much of a counter argument here to Greene and the other astrologers who are trained in Jungian theory.

I wasn't trying to argue, counter or otherwise, just giving my ideas as an astrologer who spent over 30 years training in Jungian theory.

But, here's a little input from a Jungian analyst:

"Jung said that we need a function to tell us what is, and that is sensation. We need a function to give it a name, and that?s thinking. We need a function to tell us what it is worth, and that?s feeling, and we need a function to tell us what its possibilities are, where it is headed, and that?s intuition."

And, from an astrological perspective, Rudhyar in his article, A New Approach to the Zodiac, gives these attributions:

Fire: rhythm
Air: essentialization
Water: assimilation
Earth: consolidation

So...
Intuition-rhythm-possibilities-Fire
Sensation-essentialization-what is-Air
Feeling-assimilation-worth-Water
Thinking-consolidation-a name-Earth

These references and attributions are not meant as any type of counter-argument. I'm just laying out what I see (with a wee bit of citation) and what I've experienced in my 40 years of astrological/psychological journeying...

I think you are trying to provide a counter-argument.

I can (just about) see your thinking but i think if you read this extract from Rudhyar,perhaps more carefully, he seems to be agreeing with the astro-psychological view formulated in the 70's. This wouldn't be surprising as they were influenced by Rudhyar's quasi -psychology and he wasn't unfamiliar with Jung from memory.

I must admit Rudhyar's essentialisation isn't immediatly understandable but then he wasn't the clearest of writers/thinkers.

I've put in bold what i think gives the stronger link to the Thinking type being the air type in his view as well:
''The element air operates at the level of "life" at and after the fall equinox. What was rhythm, tone, driving energy at the spring equinox is now oriented toward the preservation of the typical character of the life organism in specific forms ? indeed, in "seed forms." The keynote here is essentialization. What is essential is preserved in a condensed form, as a seed ? or, in general, as whatever will insure one type or another of "immortality." At the level of "personality," the element air manifests as Aquarius. This refers to the effort in every individualized person to give a form to what is most essential in his or her experience. That becomes his or her great hope ? i.e., the image of his existence as an individual which seeks to affect the consciousness of other individuals.

At the level of "mentality," the element air manifests as Gemini, for it is through the codification and precise intellectual formulation of its collective values and its tradition that a culture can both spread and preserve for future ages the quintessence of its experiences as a people. ''

I couldn't find anything relevant in the other link you provided?

What we found more contentious in the discussion on the previous thread was to what extent Jung's four types fitted hand in glove with the 4 humors as Greene claimed in the 70's. Seems dependent on what source you are using for these humors, from memory.

In any event depth astrologers appear to be quite unanimous in regarding earth signs as relating to the world primarily through their 'senses' and air signs through their 'thoughts' so I think you will struggle with this notion of yours to get anyone to take it all that seriously unless you provide a compelling and well referenced narrative to back it up.

trevor wrote:...I think you will struggle with this notion of yours to get anyone to take it all that seriously unless you provide a compelling and well referenced narrative to back it up.

I won't and haven't struggled with this "notion" because it took me a few decades of research to come to my conclusions. No one else has to take it seriously...

Longevity counts for nothing i'm afraid.

In any event at least you now know that an audience of one may be your fate on this one

trevor wrote:Longevity counts for nothing i'm afraid.

It wasn't just time. It was serious research...

trevor wrote:In any event at least you now know that an audience of one may be your fate on this one

I have an "audience" of many more than one...

My third eye is telling me we may be on different pages here so until the 'research' appears i think we should call it a day.

trevor wrote:My third eye is telling me we may be on different pages here so until the 'research' appears i think we should call it a day.

One thing you might consider is that Jung attributed Intuition and Sensation as "irrational" types and Feeling and Thinking as "rational". He even characterized Intuition/Sensation as a compensatory polarity, as with Feeling/Thinking.

Stir those considerations into the mix and you may discover what I did...

Thank you so much amzolt!