`` As if - the explanation of Emergence

Under Construction


Astrology


Everybody's a dreamer and everybody's a star
And everybody's in show biz, it doesn't matter who you are - The Kinks - Celluloid Heroes


Index


  1. Astrology - How?

  2. Astrology - life unfolds

  3. Adjectives - Signs, elements in combination as the Zodiac

  4. Verbs - Planets, changes as emergence of new elemental relationships

  5. Nouns - Houses, the world of our experience

  6. Nuance - Aspects, the subtle differences of meaning

  7. Astrology - Fate or Destiny?

Astrology - How?


It is one thing to use a language of myths, gods, elements, and chakras, to describe the workings of emergent life within an emergent universe, but it is quite another to make the cognitive leap required to embrace the idea that balls of rock or gas, floating in space, could have any relevence to the way our lives unfold, here on Earth. Hence, therefore, and because, we have to start with an explanation of 'how on Earth?' - exactly that; how on Earth does Astrology function?


The justification for Astrology fully arrives with the evidence that comes from real life examples, but before that we can have a theoretical explanation of the means by which it functions, and that is by the same principle of downward causation that operates between the personal history of one's spirit as memory, and the emergence of icons within the mind. Both kinds of downward causation alter the probabilities of change occurring to the parts of the system; in the one case the mind, and in the case of Astrology, within any of the four elemental parts of the individual.


In short, the centuries of planets orbiting the Sun, and therefore appearing to move around the Earth, means that those inanimate bodies have interracted with a variety of possible orientations between themselves, creating the Zodiac, and those positions have accompanied events here on Earth. The emergent outcome is 'as if' there were a causal link, simply from the habit of repetition. Over time the meaning of a planet and sign develops and grows, and just like the numbers are still growing, astrological meaning is still growing.


The nature of all change is that the facts of what has taken place previously will always be what determines the possibilities of what can take place subsequently - this is simply what we call causation, and all it is, is the consequences of perpetual change, anywhere in the entirety of Existence. Science recognises the consequences of physical change, but is largely reluctant to accept that the other three elements, apart from Earth, have any role to play. Astrology is simply the claim that each kind of element has an effect upon the others.


For this reason, and this reason alone, there are twelve, and only twelve, possible different categories of change - that is, change where things do not remain of the same elemental type. Each one of these equates to a planet, a chakra and a god. But also, they equate to stages of evolution in the Zodiac. However, the main point to grasp is that each planet etc. is what it is because of what it does. If it did something else, then it would be a different planet.


Astrology - a language of life unfolding


For those who are already believers in Astrology: Deep down, do you hold that the ancients had the last word in what is true about Astrology? Do you consider it a complete and unalterable gospel truth? To put it another way; if you needed to see a doctor about a medical problem, would you choose to see Galen, or a modern university educated doctor?


I aim to explain why I don't think that is the case. That the ancients, such as Ptolemy, did the best that they could, but that as with all knowledge, humankind moves on. I wanted to satisfy my own nagging doubts about the veracity of, not just Astrology, but all the other weird experiences that I have had. So I needed to make a coherent tale, for myself. Virtualism and Iconism form much of that tale, but the Mandala has been a useful tool for discovering inconsistencies and missing pieces, on that journey. The resulting view of Astrology departs somewhat from tradition, but not entirely so, and maybe that shouldn't be too surprising, because otherwise astrologers throughout history would not have found so much to sustain their belief.


Bear in mind her, that the naysayers - the sceptics - insist that astrologers believe despite there being no valid reason for them to do so. But in this they are both guilty of Dunning-Kruger, and of committing just about every other fallacy in the book, from strawman onwards.


If you want an exposition of traditional Astrology, you won't find it here. What you may get is my own position on the matter, which is very much not mainstream. I wanted to know how it could be, and that is how Virtualism was born, so clearly I think this approach has some merit.


The big thing with Astrology is, in the words of Lawrence Ferlinghetti, not to 'mistake any one thing for what it might not be.' As in life, when we need to recognize things as they are, not as we imagine or wish, in Astrology there are many factors, and it is important to be clear that there is a particular grammar to the code.


There are:


Adjectives - Signs, elements in combination as the Zodiac


The descriptions of all possible things can be seen encoded in the abstraction that is the Zodiac. Not only each sign, but each sector has a particular archetypal meaning that is no more than a layering of emergent elements, that taken together form a base-4 number where each digit is associated with one element. The full set of such numbers is represented by the Mandala Zodiac, where each sector is its own unique elemental code. The consequence of this is that the Mandala is the only way it can be, the only debate that could be had would be over the elemental order, and the final association of the Mandala with the solstices and equinoxes, that is the connection of each sign to its specific portion of the year.


The order of the elements is defined as Fire, Earth, Air and then Water; Aries is associated with both Fire and the beginning of the Zodiac, although really, being circular, there is no actual beginning. This means that the quadrant for the first quarter must be rooted in elemental Water. This constraint both comes from the emergent method of counting with elements, as if they were numbers, and it defines the method - for example, using letters to stand in for elements, if we start with Fire as 0 we would have: (F)F, (F)E, (F)A, (F)W, EF, EE, EA, EW, AF, AE, AW, WF, WE, WA, WW, EFF, etc. This could as easily be written 0,1,2,3,10,11,12,13,20,21,22,23,30,31,32,33,100, etc., if we were to substitute numerals for the letters representing the elements. What symbols we use makes little overall difference, it is still a form of counting, and ultimately the elements are not so very different from the entities that underlie numbers - all are variations on the theme of relationships.


This then gives us an elemental pattern for each sign that can only be as follows:


The whole point is that in this world there are only four possible relationship types, and so for the signs to be different from one another, they have to each have a unique elemental code, or they would not be different signs. If you find that the attribution of elemental mix to each sign does not fit your beliefs about Astrology, then possibly you have misunderstood what elements actually are, or even the signs.


Once we have seen the manner in which signs emerge from the quadrants of raw [Titanic] elements, then it is quite simple to see that the levels of sectors forming the Mandala naturally emerge, ad infinitum, in much the same way that a fractal image does, except that we draw the fractal going inwards, while the Mandala is drawn going outwards - there is not really so much difference when we are talking about abstract things.


(External Website) More explanation of the nature of Signs


Verbs - Planets, changes as emergence of new elemental relationships


The planets tell what is done, they are verbs, each one signaling a particular type of change, and each change is the emergence of some kind of new state from whatever preceded it. In this the planets echo the logic of the Mandala, so just as there are 12 signs, there are in fact 12 planets, each with a code that is the same as one sign. The difference between planets and signs [or sectors], is that the signs are done deals, whereas the planets are change happening. In this astrological sense, the planets are the change, not the astronomical bodies; hence the planets are the chakras, and the planets are the gods - all three of these; planets; chakras; gods; mean exactly the same thing.


Anyone who knows even just a little of traditional Astrology will see that there are some alignments with tradition, and some major breaks with tradition, if we contrast these listed similarities with the tradition of dignities in Astrology, that is of 'rulership' and 'exaltation'. To aid in seeing those variations I have flagged them up on the preceding list.


Perhaps I ought to write a little on the justification for the attributions given, as these are only allocating planets to elemental function as I see fit. Some may argue that I am mistaken, but overall it would be perverse to not recognise that the full scope of elemental possibility has to be seen across the range of the planets. The system itself demands to be complete.


Dignities - The traditional assignments of each of the original seven planets to certain places in the Zodiac is both fundamental to much of Astrology, but also poorly justified by theory. The argument given by Ptolemy runs along the line that the Sun is at its strongest at the height of Summer, so the Sun must be the lord and master of the house [sign] of Leo, in an archaic feudal sense [the remaining planets then being assigned rulership of other signs according to proximity to the Sun]. The planets are then said to be in 'detriment', an opposite meaning of ruling, when in signs opposite to their own sign(s) of rulership. There is a similar method of assigning each traditional planet the 'special guest' status of exaltation in one particular sign, together with their opposite status of 'fall' [as in fallen from grace, I suppose] in the opposite signs. This system then leaves planets 'peregrine' [homeless] in other locations. To this system, in more recent times, has been added the 'co-rulership' of newly discovered planets, although these are sometimes open to debate, as much as is the status of Pluto as a planet, or not [as now is the case], in the world of Astronomy.


Virtualism and the Mandala rewrite the rulebook for dignities, and they do this by claiming [with good reason] that because each planet/god/chakra has a specific function, embodied in the emergence of one of twelve possible kinds of virtual relationship, described as an alchemy from one element [relationship] to another, then each function, as a change, can only take place when it has the benefit of the appropriate soil in which the change can be rooted, i.e. the planet/god/chakra must find its own element, somehow, in order to function. In this each , and this has some important consequences:


  1. Each planet, in doing what it does, will produce elemental input suitable for three other planets.

  2. Each planet may be aided by any of three other planets that create its required element

  3. The remaining five planets, i.e. not the first three, nor the second three, nor itself, may interact with the first planet, but never as similarity, always as difference, thereby potentially causing the emergence of something new.

  4. Each planet has one particular complement, another planet that performs the reverse alchemy, such that together they create a self-contained and intense vicious or virtuous circle. These are: The Sun & Uranus; The Moon & Mercury; The Earth & Saturn; Venus & Neptune; Mars & Chiron; Jupiter & Pluto.

  5. Planets connect in helpful 'aspect' when they share a connection of similarity, at some level of the Mandala, for instance, a planet that requires water will be helped by any other planet acively producing water, as long as the level of the Mandala sectors associated with each planet actually combine usefully. So Venus in Scorpio potentially receives water at the sign level, and will gain it from an active Moon, Chiron, or Neptune; for which we might see the Moon in Libra, Aquarius, or even better in Gemini [it being rooted in water]; or Chiron in Taurus, say [or other earth]; or Neptune in Aries [or other fire].

  6. Planets that don't naturally connect elementally may still connect by being brought together in some other fashion; either by being associated with other adjoining factors [planets usually], or simply by the mundane fact of conjunction, which brings disparate factors together in the worldly manifestation of the astrological abstracts.

Venus and Mars - Traditionally Venus has been regarded as a soft, feminine influence, sometimes fond of bling, and Mars as wild and warlike, more like some Viking of old. But I say that Venus produces elemental Fire, which is both a consciousness of something, and a relationship of similarity. That is, Venus produces a love of someone or something, by making one conscious of that thing, i.e. by creating a likeness of that otherness, within the self. Mars, I'd say, is the desire to differentiate, to divide and separate things, and elemental Earth is a relationship of difference, winning, being top of the league, having one extra point, these are all Martian goals, as is dividing the land with the plough, farming, and ultimately slaughtering animals, are really much more Mars than Venus; more Taurus than Aries.


Venus wants belonging, in all senses, a uniting of entities, so Venus wants to have things, and be in a relationship, to be had and held, to have and hold, such are the qualities of Fire, i.e. of being the same as. But, key to the Venus purpose is that Venus comes from what is wanting in us, in our Self. That which we lack is a space which needs filling, and Venus fills it with consciousness of something - adding to oneself with the truth of that which was missing.


Mars wants to stand out in some way, to distance itself from the crowd, to separate and cut. To not be held or restricted, such are the qualities of Earth, i.e. of being different. As with Venus, Mars is driven by what is lacking, but Mars fills the void by changing the world, and so making a difference - adding to oneself by standing out from the crowd.


The swapping of association of Venus with Mars may be held by some to undermine the whole premise of Astrology - how can it be so wrong, if there is any truth to it at all? Well, to think that would be indulging in many fallacies, but the answer is that there are many places in all signs, where any given planet will find its fuel, at some level, so there will be occasions where traditional Astrology is correct for the right reasons, sometimes for the wrong reasons, and equally occasions when incorrect both ways. It would be a mistake to judge all of it by the fact that some smallish part of it may be mistaken.


It is also worth noting, in the context of Venus and Mars, that in ancient Mesopotamia and Babylon, where Astrology originated, Inanna/Ishtar, an earlier version of Aphrodite, aka Venus, was considered a goddess of war. Also, Mars is known to be associated with cutting, dividing, and so can sensibly be connected to the very Taurean agricultural function of ploughing the land.


The Earth - Traditionally Virgo is associated with Mercury, but the key Virgo attribute, as I see it, is rearrangement, organising one's environment. The Earth is the planet we inhabit, the world we rearrange everyday, and elementally that is Air producing Earth, and in Astrology the world is described by the Ascendant and all the Houses - this is where we manifest spirit - so planet Earth is primarily the Ascendant, as self - our perspective on our world, but also it is all the houses, hence all the signs, which together with the planets describe our perspective on everything.


Doing Air to Earth ia the function of the Earth as a planet, and it occurs each time we think of something and decide on some new purpose for it. In simplified terms, when the caveman sees a rock and thinks 'I can hit something with that', he is doing planet Earth, he is adding meaning to the rock in his mind and that differentiates the rock from all other rocks, manifesting its being as a stone axe, especially so when he decides tho shape it into something more suited to his purpose. It doesn't matter whether it is a stone-age axe, or the most hi-tech computer, or simply rearranging the furniture, all these things rearrange both purpose and relationship of objects of any kind, and so alter reality. It is important to note that this process doesn't necessarily require awareness, or intention, the emphasis is on the idea, which may be vague, leading to a new differentiation of reality. That reality could be the political hierarchy, or some other more abstract reality, just as easily as things in the physical environment. There may be awareness, intention, such as when the caveman throws the rock at lunch, but also there may be lack of attention, such as when we drop a glass through inattention, and it smashes. Awareness, be it attention or intention, is not the same thing as doing Earth.


Saturn - Traditionally Libra is associated with Venus, but for some occult reason Saturn is regarded as exalted in Libra. Being exhalted within a sign is to be an honoured guest of the lord and master of the sign - traditional Astrology is very feudal in flavour, that is just the way that the ancients saw the world. Of all the planets, Saturn has the worst repution, and I think that this is a big mistake, one brought on by the truth of the medieval world being [as Thomas Hobbes called it] 'Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.' Saturn, as I see it, is just the reflection of external objective reality, in the internal subjective reality of the mind, and that is precisely what Libra does; the seeking balance is seeking the correct balance of one's own mind - Libra is an Air sign. The way that the brain functions is to attempt to anticipate the icons that the mind needs to accurately model the thoughts that are required. Hence Saturn, giving us the sensory data of reality, goes a long way toward ensuring the accuracy of our mental perception.


Chiron - Often we see Pluto associated with the sign of Scorpio, while tradition has it that Mars is the ruler. I think the ancients had a pretty dim view of Scorpio, never seeing beyond the sting, on the whole. That aside, Scorpio is the sign of Water from Earth, which is the alchemy of Chiron, so we should at least look closely at Chiron as being potentially the ruler of Scorpio. What better subject, in contempory times, than Russia, a country of Scorpio consciousness, if ever there was one. Russia has a penchant for self-deception, a general sensitivity to percieved threat, and a bit of a nasty savage streak that really fits well with Scorpio. As for Chiron, the myth is that Chiron teaches all the heroes, in some sort of timeless kindergarten of the brave, and in the process is mortally wounded by the poison arrows of Hercules [poison, so Russian - just think Putin, think Ras-putin!] But, Chiron is one of the immortals, and so cannot die, so we see Chiron [Scorpio - Russia, Novichok] suffering from the poisoned wound. This is the truth of the whole individual [elemental Water] being systemically created from the reality [Earth and difference] of their situation. How Russian is that, but the emotions don't have to reflect poison, the other side of Scorpio, and of Chiron, is the healing that comes from exactly the same alchemical transmutation.


Pluto - Only discovered in February 1930, there is no tradition for Pluto, but we recognise that Pluto is, like Hades, invisible power, and as Leonard Cohen put it, the 'invincible defeat' of death. Appearing while the Sun was in Aquarius is fairly typical for Pluto, i.e. going unnoticed in the previous sign of Capricorn, as befits an invisible power, and Capricorn is the sign of power, the power of aristocracy, the power of money, political power, etc. Earth from Fire, which exactly matches what Pluto does. Many of these things have been mistaken for Saturn in the past, just as many Capricorn values have been foisted off on Scorpio. But now that we are coming to the end of the revolution in Capricorn values that has been going on since Black Monday in 2008, and has given us financial turmoil, Covid-19, Trump in the USA, Brexit in Europe and specifically the UK, and the consequences of war in Ukraine, together with the death of Queen Elizabeth II [note: the UK is a Sun in Capricorn country, since the 1801 Act of Union.] So, for all these associations, I believe Pluto to be a good fit for Capricorn.


All the Planets

To recap on all the planets, because they describe the central theme of Virtualism, that is the emergence of relationships between abstract wholes that exist, and thus the formation of some new thing.


Just as the personal planets operate from a basis of the self, and particularly what the self is not, and then require that the gap is filled [inspired by 'It's a Long Way to the Top', and the pauses therein.], the outer planets are all operating from a basis of truth, so Pluto is the truth of the laws of nature, what goes up must come down, what lives must die, etc. Uranus operates from the laws of logic, so maths, particularly, and the algorithm, this, then that, if.. else.. and there's the answer. Neptune is slightly harder to get, but the law is still there, what law? The laws of the self, so laws of psychology and art - if your best friend dies, then you cry, if you take drugs then you get high, and if it rhymes then it chimes. This is Neptune all over.


The personal planets are personal because they thrive on water, the element of the whole self [as opposed to the parts of self largely the mind]; Mercury is a conversationalist because Mercury is curiosity, and must provoke a reaction to get answers to fill the void in what Mercury already knows; with Venus the void is in her truth, Venus needs to be directly conscious of something, and that means making that something a true part of the self, so as to be the same as it; Mars, by contrast, needs to establish difference - is the establishment of difference, Mars divides and competes, to discover the way in which the self is really itself and not some other thing.


That has to be only half the story, there are planets of the mind, and planets of reality, only of course, mind and reality are misnomers. Reality being the consequences of difference, and mind being only one manifestation of the subjective parts of the self.


Jupiter, Saturn and Chiron are planets of actual difference, Jupiter brings consciousness of difference, the difference between men and gods, the difference between our nation [we don't fatherland or motherland, we island] and the foreign, the difference that is humorous when it is juxtaposed with sameness, making laughter. Saturn is the sensing of difference, making it knowing in the mind, often of things that we'd prefer were otherwise, but Saturn tells it like it is. Chiron makes us from the actualities, making us feel, making us feel sick when what is real is a bug or a virus.


The Sun, the Moon, and the Earth, are the creations of mind, of the parts of self [actually more than just the mind]. The Sun produces consciousness, in the manner of the sign that it occupies, so generally from the icons of mind, but also directly from the mind equivalents that give us sensations of the environment that we cannot place as anything more than the primitive awareness of pain, or comfort, and gut feelings that we cannot put into words, and the awareness of feelings in general that being abstract, also don't have the clearer meanings of icons. The Moon creates the whole self, thereby prompting the emotions that are the expression of the various wholes that may be found within the self. The Earth is the action of the subjective parts of self on the objective parts, on what is real, which initially is the body, and in mind affecting body, the Earth is downward causation in action, the necessary preliminary of the self affecting the environment. NB. The Earth is not just the Ascendant, but all the houses.


(External Website) More explanation of the nature of Planets


Nouns - Houses, the world of our experience


What it is that changes is described by the houses. This includes the self, the other, or somewhere in between both, and that in between thing may be public or private. From that basic rule we get the angles of houses 1, 4, 7 and 10; that traditionally relate to self, family, others, and place in the world.


The houses are a bringing into the World, of the abstract meanings of planets and Zodiac, a physical manifestation of the immaterial, and as such they are sometimes called mundane. There are many competing methods for dividing up the chart into houses, all of which are nailed in place by the lines of the ascendant/descendant, and of the midheaven/imum coeli ('bottom of the sky'), the Zenith and Nadir. The difficulty arises because the sky means the path of the Sun, and that can be at a range of angles to any given location on the Earth's surface, or even miss it entirely, if we go too far North or South. I think I would argue for dividing up the local space for the place into 12 equal divisions, and then align the signs of the Zodiac according to the Ascendant degree. This effectively says that the whole signs are the houses, and my reasoning is that the Zodiac is an abstract thing, as are the meanings of the planets, and there is no sound reason why the translation from 'sky' to Earth should, or should not, follow lines drawn from the sky. The only thing that matters is how we pin the Zodiac to the World, and generally, the point that astrologers agree on as important is the Ascendant [one could say the Angles, and mean the same thing], and the rule is that Aries aligns with the Ascendant at sunrise on the Vernal [Spring] Equinox. That rule is exactly equivalent to saying that Leo aligns with the Ascendant at sunrise on the Summer Solstice, which may be a more appropriate way to consider the basis of Astrology and the Zodiac.


All the Houses

(External Website) More explanation of the nature of Houses


Nuance - Aspects, the subtle differences of meaning


Aspects arise because of a similarity between the abstractions, being the same and being abstract means that by Leibniz' Law they are one and the same, what in the old days was meant by a conjunction. That happens at a zodiacal level, but because there are also real things involved, by the houses, then the abstract aspect becomes also a manifest aspect between real and different objects. This, I'd suggest, is the proper reasoning behind so-called 'mundane' aspects, those where the angle of the aspect is within orb, but the house or sign placement is more akin to a different aspect. Whichever way around you interpret that tradition, the lesson from the Mandala is that the elemental abstract gives the connection, the conjunction, while the mundane part, the worldly orientation, is what tells you who or what is affecting who or what. From that, it is clear thar 'orb' should not be a consideration, in the way astrologers usually parctice their art. Rather, the orb shold be the sector of the Mandala that fits the planet's requirements [ambrosia], and it should be treated as a quantum object, i.e. it either is, or is not, there is no halfway house.


Thus it is that disparate real objects may be affected by the same moment, but by no visible means. All it really is, is that the moment has its own style; character, and anything that responds to the moment also responds to the moment's style.


The way in which aspects function is linked to the Angles - these specifically relate to the self [Ascendant], the other [Descendant], where the other meets the self [the Midheaven], and where the self meets the other [the Imum Coeli]. Note, these have an order that originates from the rotation of the planet, and the fact that what comes first is causal of the consequences that follow. This then leads to approaching aspects being causal, so the Midheaven is causal on the self, so where otherness most sharply affects you, and is an approaching square, and we see it connected to status, authority, power, career, reputation and so on. It is also maternal, when we are young, because mother is out biggest influence then. The Imum Coeli must then be seen as primarily causal on others, so is where we have most personal agency, traditionally it has been seen as home and family, and even paternal, which all fits at different times of life, but the personal agency to affect others is the key thing.


Aspects that flow from the same element by sign will be trines, and these function more easily because they are on the same elemental page. Aspects rooted in other elements are still aspects, but it is not always apparent what can emerge from one element that is different from another, so squares and oppositions can seem difficult, but usually the difficulty lies in our ability to deal with complexity of such situations that occur when elements get mixed together.


The key to understanding change is that a chain of moments will affect the links in the chain. It may seem that only what precedes may affect what follows - chronologically, and that hence those aspects from later on in the chart are what is caused by us, while those that are at earlier degrees - in earlier houses and signs - must be causative, but in practice, while that earlier position can make an event cause another event, it is because time orders the events, rather than position orders events. Hence, we can be affected by the whole chart, but generally in the direction it turns throughout the year. That is; the planets move counter-clockwise around the Zodiac throughout the year, but each day they rotate around us with the clock, rising in the East and setting in the West. You could see it as what happens in the morning affects what happens in the afternoon, but that what happens in the afternoon can affect tomorrow morning, or next week even. So a trine from Aries to Leo is usually the Aries event affecting the Leo entity, but it can be the other way around.


Ultimately aspects and houses become seen as being very similar. The houses merely being an interpretation of the way in which life manifests things that affect us, or others, in particular ways.


(External Website) More explanation of the nature of Aspects


Midpoints occur between any two distinct objects, and that includes abstracts as much as real things.


Astrology - Fate or Destiny?


The question asked about Astrology is this: If Astrology is a true thing, then what sort of a thing is it? Does it compel our lives entirely, does it just influence them peripherially? In short, does it operate as unavoidable fate, or alternatively as a destiny that asks to be fulfilled, but which is by no means certain? This question is an adjunct to the old philosophical chestnut that asks Do we have Free Will?


The answer seems to lie in the direction of destiny, rather than of fate, as the philosophical basis for Astrology, that comes from Virtualism, is that it is but one more of many influences on our lives and the choices that we make. Of course, we may be as mindful as we like, but still not prevent others from blindly following whatever influences they may be subject to, and we may stand in the shadows of giants, as much as upon their shoulders - and nobody is going to get a suntan that way!


The analogy that I like to draw for describing both Free Will and Astrology is that of the Football Season. Just as we know which teams are scheduled to play which other teams when, we can foretell with accuracy the future positions of the planets. But what we cannot do is foretell the scores with any great accuracy. Yes, it may be likely that last year's champions will do well this year also, and that the newly promoted teams will be relegated, but it is by no means certain.


I think that the only way to resolve that question is to examine a lot of Examples, and also bear in mind that for every one person who seems to respond to the planets, there will be many others who do not, or at least not in any perceptible way. That doesn't mean that Astrology is not working for them, just that their circumstances are not necessarily conducive to the same kind of noticeable consequences that are sometimes seen in others. In this sense, Astrology cannot be proved, but it can be understood. I know from experience that research will never show plain Astrology to behave as anything better then chance probability, but also that every good story has a good astrological tale behind it, or so I have found.




Leave a Comment

Comments

2025-07-07 18:18:44 - jomaeslk
Someone else - the site is working nicely, particularly astrological examples which I feel do seem to bear out in most cases I have seen so far within your examples.
2025-06-15 17:15:24 - Meagain
Still great
2025-06-15 16:53:57 -
Very perceptive
2025-06-15 14:57:34 -
This is great
2025-06-14 20:56:32 -
This is excellent
2025-06-14 18:05:40 - Me
Gert dead brill.



Page visited 288 times