Astrology and Standards

March 10, 2006

I sent this a while ago, but it seems to have disappeared into cyber

space, so I'm pasting it directly on the forum page.

At 11:55 PM 3/8/06 -0800, Steve wrote:

>I understand your concern with proper grammar. I think any

particular

>group looks 'bad' in some respect if people don't know how to write.

>On the other hand, one may have excellent grammar and speak nothing

but

>rubbish (although eloquently).

Steve,

I've see the two go pretty much together--missing some of the basics

of English generally goes along with illogical thoughts. It all goes

back to a lack of training in both. This isn't always true (your

posts are *not* illogical), but all we have to do is scan a few

astrology forums to see the often ridiculous stuff that passes for

astrology. This happens on ADB frequently.

>It seems there is an underlying concern, perhaps among the more

>scholarly astrologers, that we, as a group are made more presentable

>somehow. But to who exactly and for what purpose?

I'd say for *ourselves.* Anyone who's been through a lot of school

develops certain standards. Missing English basics hits us rather

like seeing someone on the street with orange and purple dyed hair.

O.K. so we all have the right to have any hair color we want. But if

we want to dye our hair orange and purple, what are we saying? We're

making a statement that we're in rebellion against society's

standards. Great for the young person, but after age 50??? What's the

point? I see it as a mark of respect to others to stay with certain

standards.

We do have something called 'civilization,' and those with the

highest standards will be the the ones who come out on top. With

education comes progress and those much desired twins--money and

comfort. (There are always exceptions.)

Most of the advancements in civilization have been by group effort

and cooperation. The all too common " Well, I'm a Uranian type, "

serves only the Uranian person. It's like there's no desire to build

and to develop astrology by cooperative effort for the good of all,

to make it into something truly useful. Yes, a certain conformity is

necessary, but science, computer technology, any advancement of

civilization are accomplished by cooperative effort and a foundation

in the education necessary for the field.

It's perhaps a fine line between keeping our individuality and

conforming enough to earn respect and not be seen as misfits. Then

down the road, we'd earn the grants to do really good astrological

research.

>Everyone has their particular agenda, exactly according to the

nature of

>their chart of course. As a Uranian type, I don't care too much for

>many forms of respectability and am quite content to be labeled a

bit

>'weird'.

And that will keep you happy and won't help astrology at all. Many

(perhaps most) astrologers share your attitude, and this is (in my

opinion) exactly why we have made so little progress in knowing what

astrological techniques work most of the time and which work only for

the individual astrologer.

I care very much for astrology as a science for ourselves. Society

has developed certain standards that it wouldn't hurt us to accept.

These standards just go along with the territory of civilization.

Would you believe, it actually causes me physical pain to see the

illogical stuff that passes for astrology on the internet? But if I

checked out entirely (which would be much more comfortable) I would

be contributing nothing at all to astrology. It seems that atrologers

like nothing less than when someone suggests, " You know, there's a

better way to say this, or to do that. "

Just look at the resistance to the sidereal zodiac, as just one

example.

Therese

>PS--it's snowing again here in So. Oregon--I suspect you'll be

shoveling

>some yourself tomorrow morning.

I've had it with shoveling snow after the last two feet. We all have

aching backs and owe a bunch of $$$ to the plow guys who come around

to un-do the damage the city plows do to our property.

March 11, 2006

therese92003 wrote:

> Steve, I've see the two go pretty much together--missing some of the

> basics of English generally goes along with illogical thoughts. It all

> goes back to a lack of training in both. This isn't always true (your

> posts are *not* illogical), but all we have to do is scan a few

> astrology forums to see the often ridiculous stuff that passes for

> astrology. This happens on ADB frequently.

Hi Therese,

BTW, in the above statement it's " seen " I believe that you intended to

say (not " see " ). :>))

I agree not everyone out there makes logical sense, but this is to be

expected as part of planetary reality. I think it goes without saying

that a mature understanding of astrology includes the idea that we are

not all created equally.

Therefore not everything can or should be subordinated to logic,

order, structure etc., unless of course one's personal ruling Deities

happen to be Buddha and Shani (Mercury and Saturn).

Persons of such persuasion can of course benefit greatly from their

ability to organize and analyze in their own personal lives, but it

would be a mistake to insist that the world and its occupants be held to

the same standard.

>

>I'd say for *ourselves.* Anyone who's been through a lot of school

>develops certain standards. Missing English basics hits us rather

>like seeing someone on the street with orange and purple dyed hair.

>O.K. so we all have the right to have any hair color we want. But if

>we want to dye our hair orange and purple, what are we saying? We're

>making a statement that we're in rebellion against society's

>standards. Great for the young person, but after age 50??? What's the

>point? I see it as a mark of respect to others to stay with certain

>standards.

>

You seem to be saying here that a person with poor grammar is

essentially in rebellion against society's standards.

So how would you advise a client with Sun/Uranus/Moon rising in

Aquarius, whose rainbow colored palate is as natural to him as a gray

flannel suit is to Wall Street?

These types naturally don't fit into society's neat little rule box,

unless of course they're looking to be extremely unhappy and develop

chronic illness.

Persons who differ from the 'norm' in mannerisms, dress, logic, grammar

etc are not always in a state of egotistic rebellion--many are quite

simply just being themselves.

Adhering to outer standards of conduct by way of dress code, proper use

of language, acceptable mannerisms etc may show respect to another's

idea of what is proper, right and good and it may also be the best way

of reaching deep into his wallet while he is least expecting it. Modern

CEO's, lawyers and political plunderers have got this down to a science.

We are all sleepwalking mechanical machines for the most part. Getting

our regular and customary 'lube job' from a dutiful and respectful

'mechanic' may also be the best way of guaranteeing an uninterrupted

dream/nightmare.

>

>We do have something called 'civilization,' and those with the

>highest standards will be the the ones who come out on top. With

>education comes progress and those much desired twins--money and

>comfort. (There are always exceptions.)

>

Nothing wrong with money, comfort and high standards. Civilization

doesn't necessarily imply civilized of course, just as high education

doesn't necessarily guarantee morality, ethics, goodness, intelligence

and tolerance.

>

>Most of the advancements in civilization have been by group effort

>and cooperation. The all too common " Well, I'm a Uranian type, "

>serves only the Uranian person. It's like there's no desire to build

>and to develop astrology by cooperative effort for the good of all,

>to make it into something truly useful. Yes, a certain conformity is

>necessary, but science, computer technology, any advancement of

>civilization are accomplished by cooperative effort and a foundation

>in the education necessary for the field.

>

There are of course the Tesla's, Einstein's, Dylan's and Da Vinci's of

the world. Obviously there must be a place for everyone in the Universe.

The persons best suited for codifying, organizing, and structuring of an

original idea(not usually their own) are often Saturn dominated. Why is

it that Saturn needs to have everyone play the game according to his

rules in a sand box he has designed?

>

>It's perhaps a fine line between keeping our individuality and

>conforming enough to earn respect and not be seen as misfits. Then

>down the road, we'd earn the grants to do really good astrological

>research.

>

Have you ever thought that we as astrologers are seen as 'misfits', by

the very persons who are in reality, the *real* misfits? This of

course depends on one's perspective.

Jupiter is normally the one here that seeks out respectability and the

respect of such persons.

>

>And that will keep you happy and won't help astrology at all. Many

>(perhaps most) astrologers share your attitude, and this is (in my

>opinion) exactly why we have made so little progress in knowing what

>astrological techniques work most of the time and which work only for

>the individual astrologer.

>

Keeping oneself happy and devoted to his/her work by following closely

one's own nature, is the best possible gift one can make to any subject

and from that comes the possibility of making a real contribution to the

group, if and when it is appropriate, necessary or desirable (by that

person).

The organizing, structuring and codifying of replicable techniques to a

standard acceptable to an educated and respectable societal 'norm' is

the combined dream of Mercury, Saturn and Jupiter (IMO)

Therefore, any astrologer attempting to organize such a massive

undertaking would seem to have a 'step up' in this objective by way of

his own astrological knowledge.

Persons fitting to be included in the ' standardizing club' should

necessarily be of a strong and robust Mercury/Saturn/Jupiter nature.

Often this very nature implies a good education, logical abilities,

grammatical and other language skills, discipline and the very essential

'respectability' factor.

Being of the same mindset, temperament, skills and level of erudition,

there would tend to be far less disruptions along the path to

standardizing astrological methodologies. Furthermore, no time would

have to be wasted in an attempt to bring various astrological rebels,

scoundrels and 'rednecks' up to speed--so no worries that such rabble

rousers would ever cause the organization undue embarrassment.

Applications submitted to the club by very strong Neptunians, Uranians

and Plutonians would naturally be subject to intense scrutiny and an

organizational by-law may in fact have to be included to exclude such

troubling persons altogether.

This would not be much of a problem though, since it's generally

understood that a Neptunian would only 'sense' he was being slighted

(thereby revealing his inherent weakness in any type of logical

standardization discipline and as such disqualifying him from any real

serious work anyway). Uranus and Pluto would probably not pose a threat

to the process, most likely neither would even show up for the interview.

Best wishes,

Steve

Best wishes,

Steve

>

March 11, 2006

Steve...

Nice...

Those of us who have studied and toiled with the dutiful reins of

Saturn appreciate your writing as a fine effort... Reading your e-

mail reminded me that keeping the windows open in 'our' neighborhood

provides fresh air to circulate. Fresh Air, the element we can't

see, touch or smell,(shouldn't anyways) through breathing, fills our

lungs and bodies with dynamic strengths. When added to the fires of

our passions it creates... We are all students and teachers during

this life of ours and engaging opportunities inspire purpose...

Speaking of opportunities....

The press was gathering around the president for an impromtu

Question and answer conference just after Hurricane Katrina.... One

of the reporters spoke up and ask the president his views on 'ROE

versus 'WADE'?

Dubya immediately replied that he didn't care how they were going to

get out of New Orleans....

drum roll please... Hope you hadn't heard it before... The other

day I walked into an auto parts store in a small rural town in

Texass. They had that joke taped to the cash register facing the

customers... When Dubya returns to Texass, it will be as its dark

little secret....

The art, science, vision and viability of Astrology is greater today

than it ever has been. Progress in terms of number of books written

on the subject of Sidereal Astrology may appear slow, however

progress in the use of Sidereal Astrological applications is

steadily advancing.

Each of us has learned something about the world we live in through

our study of astrology even though the variables of astrology cause

us inconsistent logical values....

We don't need sacred cows to tell us that every culture offers a

unique perspective... Was Jesus Christ God? Was he the result of

being born at an auspicious planetary configuration? Who are the

scholars that will answer the questions that we must ask and answer

ourselves?

All of our perspectives will be different when it comes to

Astrology... We may share some ideas but when it comes to equal

versus campanus we discover our differences... No one person knows

everything... No one person is the gatekeeper...

Jivio,

John Sarlya

, Steven Stuckey

<shastra wrote:

>

> therese92003 wrote:

>

> > Steve, I've see the two go pretty much together--missing some of

the

> > basics of English generally goes along with illogical thoughts.

It all

> > goes back to a lack of training in both. This isn't always true

(your

> > posts are *not* illogical), but all we have to do is scan a few

> > astrology forums to see the often ridiculous stuff that passes

for

> > astrology. This happens on ADB frequently.

>

> Hi Therese,

>

> BTW, in the above statement it's " seen " I believe that you

intended to

> say (not " see " ). :>))

>

> I agree not everyone out there makes logical sense, but this is to

be

> expected as part of planetary reality. I think it goes without

saying

> that a mature understanding of astrology includes the idea that we

are

> not all created equally.

> Therefore not everything can or should be subordinated to logic,

> order, structure etc., unless of course one's personal ruling

Deities

> happen to be Buddha and Shani (Mercury and Saturn).

>

> Persons of such persuasion can of course benefit greatly from

their

> ability to organize and analyze in their own personal lives, but

it

> would be a mistake to insist that the world and its occupants be

held to

> the same standard.

>

> >

> >I'd say for *ourselves.* Anyone who's been through a lot of

school

> >develops certain standards. Missing English basics hits us rather

> >like seeing someone on the street with orange and purple dyed

hair.

> >O.K. so we all have the right to have any hair color we want. But

if

> >we want to dye our hair orange and purple, what are we saying?

We're

> >making a statement that we're in rebellion against society's

> >standards. Great for the young person, but after age 50??? What's

the

> >point? I see it as a mark of respect to others to stay with

certain

> >standards.

> >

>

> You seem to be saying here that a person with poor grammar is

> essentially in rebellion against society's standards.

>

> So how would you advise a client with Sun/Uranus/Moon rising in

> Aquarius, whose rainbow colored palate is as natural to him as a

gray

> flannel suit is to Wall Street?

> These types naturally don't fit into society's neat little rule

box,

> unless of course they're looking to be extremely unhappy and

develop

> chronic illness.

>

> Persons who differ from the 'norm' in mannerisms, dress, logic,

grammar

> etc are not always in a state of egotistic rebellion--many are

quite

> simply just being themselves.

>

> Adhering to outer standards of conduct by way of dress code,

proper use

> of language, acceptable mannerisms etc may show respect to

another's

> idea of what is proper, right and good and it may also be the best

way

> of reaching deep into his wallet while he is least expecting it.

Modern

> CEO's, lawyers and political plunderers have got this down to a

science.

> We are all sleepwalking mechanical machines for the most part.

Getting

> our regular and customary 'lube job' from a dutiful and respectful

> 'mechanic' may also be the best way of guaranteeing an

uninterrupted

> dream/nightmare.

>

> >

> >We do have something called 'civilization,' and those with the

> >highest standards will be the the ones who come out on top. With

> >education comes progress and those much desired twins--money and

> >comfort. (There are always exceptions.)

> >

>

> Nothing wrong with money, comfort and high standards.

Civilization

> doesn't necessarily imply civilized of course, just as high

education

> doesn't necessarily guarantee morality, ethics, goodness,

intelligence

> and tolerance.

>

> >

> >Most of the advancements in civilization have been by group

effort

> >and cooperation. The all too common " Well, I'm a Uranian type, "

> >serves only the Uranian person. It's like there's no desire to

build

> >and to develop astrology by cooperative effort for the good of

all,

> >to make it into something truly useful. Yes, a certain conformity

is

> >necessary, but science, computer technology, any advancement of

> >civilization are accomplished by cooperative effort and a

foundation

> >in the education necessary for the field.

> >

>

> There are of course the Tesla's, Einstein's, Dylan's and Da

Vinci's of

> the world. Obviously there must be a place for everyone in the

Universe.

> The persons best suited for codifying, organizing, and structuring

of an

> original idea(not usually their own) are often Saturn dominated.

Why is

> it that Saturn needs to have everyone play the game according to

his

> rules in a sand box he has designed?

>

> >

> >It's perhaps a fine line between keeping our individuality and

> >conforming enough to earn respect and not be seen as misfits.

Then

> >down the road, we'd earn the grants to do really good

astrological

> >research.

> >

>

> Have you ever thought that we as astrologers are seen

as 'misfits', by

> the very persons who are in reality, the *real* misfits? This of

> course depends on one's perspective.

> Jupiter is normally the one here that seeks out respectability and

the

> respect of such persons.

>

> >

> >And that will keep you happy and won't help astrology at all.

Many

> >(perhaps most) astrologers share your attitude, and this is (in

my

> >opinion) exactly why we have made so little progress in knowing

what

> >astrological techniques work most of the time and which work only

for

> >the individual astrologer.

> >

>

> Keeping oneself happy and devoted to his/her work by following

closely

> one's own nature, is the best possible gift one can make to any

subject

> and from that comes the possibility of making a real contribution

to the

> group, if and when it is appropriate, necessary or desirable (by

that

> person).

> The organizing, structuring and codifying of replicable techniques

to a

> standard acceptable to an educated and respectable societal 'norm'

is

> the combined dream of Mercury, Saturn and Jupiter (IMO)

>

> Therefore, any astrologer attempting to organize such a massive

> undertaking would seem to have a 'step up' in this objective by

way of

> his own astrological knowledge.

> Persons fitting to be included in the ' standardizing club' should

> necessarily be of a strong and robust Mercury/Saturn/Jupiter

nature.

> Often this very nature implies a good education, logical

abilities,

> grammatical and other language skills, discipline and the very

essential

> 'respectability' factor.

>

> Being of the same mindset, temperament, skills and level of

erudition,

> there would tend to be far less disruptions along the path to

> standardizing astrological methodologies. Furthermore, no time

would

> have to be wasted in an attempt to bring various astrological

rebels,

> scoundrels and 'rednecks' up to speed--so no worries that such

rabble

> rousers would ever cause the organization undue embarrassment.

>

> Applications submitted to the club by very strong Neptunians,

Uranians

> and Plutonians would naturally be subject to intense scrutiny and

an

> organizational by-law may in fact have to be included to exclude

such

> troubling persons altogether.

> This would not be much of a problem though, since it's generally

> understood that a Neptunian would only 'sense' he was being

slighted

> (thereby revealing his inherent weakness in any type of logical

> standardization discipline and as such disqualifying him from any

real

> serious work anyway). Uranus and Pluto would probably not pose a

threat

> to the process, most likely neither would even show up for the

interview.

>

> Best wishes,

>

> Steve

>

Best wishes,

>

> Steve

>

> >

>

March 11, 2006

Hi Steve,

At 06:56 PM 3/10/06 -0800, Steve wrote:

>BTW, in the above statement it's " seen " I believe that you intended

to

>say (not " see " ). :>))

Nope, it's 'see.' Maybe you're kidding me?!

>...Therefore not everything can or should be subordinated to logic,

>order, structure etc.,

Of course not. But there seems to be the idea hanging around that if

one is 'spiritual,' then logic can be thrown out the window.

>...unless of course one's personal ruling Deities

>happen to be Buddha and Shani (Mercury and Saturn).

Well, I suppose they are for anyone interested in research! But I've

got Neptune as well, so then what do you have? A meditating

researcher!

>Persons of such persuasion can of course benefit greatly from their

>ability to organize and analyze in their own personal lives, but it

>would be a mistake to insist that the world and its occupants be

held to the same standard.

Only those who want to see a more disciplined astrology. The rest of

the world will go its own way.

>You seem to be saying here that a person with poor grammar is

>essentially in rebellion against society's standards.

No, that's not what I meant. I meant that youth has more leeway to be

rebellious than older people. Look at Steve Jobs. He was a young

rebel and now I believe he's CEO of Apple Computer? Interesting that

he's joined the corporate world, but still keeps his individuality in

his casual dress--which many have copied.

>...So how would you advise a client with Sun/Uranus/Moon rising in

>Aquarius, whose rainbow colored palate is as natural to him as a

gray flannel suit is to Wall Street?

The client can do what he wants. It's the astrologer who needs some

standards in his/her work. I'm talking about *astrology* as a

discipline, not people.

>Nothing wrong with money, comfort and high standards. Civilization

>doesn't necessarily imply civilized of course, just as high

education doesn't necessarily guarantee morality, ethics, goodness,

intelligence and tolerance.

Somehow you're expanding way beyond what I was trying to say. I'm

saying that to take pride in our work as astrologers, it doesn't hurt

to know our math, grammar, geography, whatever--to be well rounded in

our knowledge because astrology touches *everything.*

>There are of course the Tesla's, Einstein's, Dylan's and Da Vinci's

of the world.

Right, and can most of us equal them in ability and genius? (Oh, and

we don't need the apostrophes in that sentence. They're plurals, not

possessives.) Hey, I'm smiling! No offense.

>The persons best suited for codifying, organizing, and structuring

of an

>original idea(not usually their own) are often Saturn dominated. Why

is

>it that Saturn needs to have everyone play the game according to his

>rules in a sand box he has designed?

Hmmm....The planets are being mixed up here. Saturn is the democrat

who greatly dislikes one-upmanship and conformity. Jupiter is the

conformist who wants everyone to follow the rules. Regal Jupiter made

the rules for all the other gods. This planetary error came about

through the Tropical signs since astrologers believed that sidereal

Sagittarius was called Capricorn.

>Have you ever thought that we as astrologers are seen as 'misfits',

by

>the very persons who are in reality, the *real* misfits? This of

>course depends on one's perspective.

This sounds like spin to me.

>The organizing, structuring and codifying of replicable techniques

to a

>standard acceptable to an educated and respectable societal 'norm'

is

>the combined dream of Mercury, Saturn and Jupiter (IMO)

Not a societal norm. An astrological norm that astrologers can agree

upon in their work because it has been proved to work.

>Therefore, any astrologer attempting to organize such a massive

>undertaking would seem to have a 'step up' in this objective by way

of

>his own astrological knowledge.

>Persons fitting to be included in the ' standardizing club' should

>necessarily be of a strong and robust Mercury/Saturn/Jupiter

nature.

>Often this very nature implies a good education, logical abilities,

>grammatical and other language skills, discipline and the very

essential

>'respectability' factor.

I don't think that respectibility (Jupiter) enters into it. I just

want to see a good productive astrology that students can learn and

understand and apply in readings for clients.

>Applications submitted to the club by very strong Neptunians,

Uranians

>and Plutonians would naturally be subject to intense scrutiny and an

>organizational by-law may in fact have to be included to exclude

such

>troubling persons altogether.

I'm all for research, Steve, and Neptune is perhaps my strongest

planet. Guess I'd be kicked out of the club. Neptune gives the desire

to explore and discover. That's why I'm into research. I've got 'em

all--Uranus (opposite Mercury), Neptune (square the ascendant from

10th), and Pluto (one-degree square to my Moon). None of these

planets harms the logic of Mercury. But the Moon--yes, the Moon would

cloud Mercury. Moon makes a wonderful poet, however.

This post is almost sure to have spelling errors as it's very late at

night, and my mail program lacks a spell checker.

Sending Neptunian blessings,

Therese

March 11, 2006

therese92003 wrote:

>Hi Steve,

>

>I'm all for research, Steve, and Neptune is perhaps my strongest

>planet. Guess I'd be kicked out of the club. Neptune gives the desire

>to explore and discover. That's why I'm into research. I've got 'em

>all--Uranus (opposite Mercury), Neptune (square the ascendant from

>10th), and Pluto (one-degree square to my Moon). None of these

>planets harms the logic of Mercury. But the Moon--yes, the Moon would

>cloud Mercury. Moon makes a wonderful poet, however.

>

Hi Therese,

You did forget to mention your strong Jupiter/Saturn configuration.

Having that, I would place you in the group. But I would probably

disqualify you for other reasons (:>))), along with myself and many others.

When I speak of Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, I'm mainly thinking of these

planets angular and/or in hard aspect with the Sun or Moon..

Mercury/Uranus, yes of course, highly desirable, but sorry, no

Sun/Uranus. I'm also a near exact Mercury/Uranus opposition, near angles

(very good), but this comes along with a Sun/Uranus opposition (that

gets the boot for being too unorthodox and eccentric i.e a

non-cooperator). In addition I also have Neptune at the MC.

I'd also be hesitant to put in an angular Mars and certainly no one with

Moon/Mars. Venus on the other hand would be very necessary and

desirable--since it seems cooperation amongst astrologers is the main

obstacle to achieving this objective.

A hypothetical chart? How about a Mercury/Venus conjunction rising in

Libra, free from the Sun's combustion (Sun would be back a bit in the

12th house in Virgo).

This combination would throw a close trine to Saturn in Aquarius( at the

IC) and Uranus in Gemini in the 9th. Jupiter in Sagittarius in the 3rd

would be at the Mercury/Saturn midpoint and therefore throwing a close

sextile to the Mercury/Venus/Saturn. Mars in Leo perhaps, at the

Merc/Venus/Uranus midpoint, thereby sextiling these planets while

throwing a trine to Jupiter and an opposition to Saturn. The Moon, I'm

not sure, perhaps in Capricorn in close trine to the Sun.

this post was a bit tongue-in-cheek originally, but it strikes me that

it might not be a bad idea to look through my database and find a

current living astrologer who has some of the requisite requirements. I

ran a few of these astro combos through SF 6 on a database of

astrologers imported from the ADB.

My top candidate (only from a very quick and superficial search)

Deanette Warren: born Feb 21, 1954 @ 12:58 PM in Pomona, California.

Biography: American astrologer, a resident of a California mountain

community where she writes an astrology column for the local newspaper.

A resident of a California mountain community...hmmmm does this sound

familiar?

Judging from her current transits, something very interesting may be

coming her way soon. :>))

Other potentials:

Michael Wenrich: born Jan 25, 1943 @ 1:22 PM in Gross Point Farm, Michigan

Biography: American professional astrologer and teacher who holds TV

credits and an interest in humanistic astrology.

Vivian Martin: born March 29, 1956 @ 9:38 PM in New York City, NY

Biography: American astrologer and journalist who is the author of a

general book on astrology that was published in the fall of 1987.

>This post is almost sure to have spelling errors as it's very late at

>night, and my mail program lacks a spell checker.

>

>Sending Neptunian blessings

>

OK, but we'll be watching (very closely) from now on since you seem to

have elevated yourself to the role of Grammar Guru---you know, glass

houses and throwing stones etc etc. :>)

Steve

March 12, 2006

Steve wrote:

>>You did forget to mention your strong Jupiter/Saturn configuration.

Having that, I would place you in the group.

My Jupiter-Saturn is a good jumping off place to ask, " How do we know

which configurations are important for each person born during a

particular day? " It took me many years to notice that the ascendant

(rather than the M.C.) seems to be the key to a person's important

planets. So lately I've been placing a lot of emphasis on equal house

cusps. These cusps highlight Mercury, Venus, Neptune and Uranus in my

chart. Jupiter-Saturn are quite weak, not near cusps and making much

wider aspects to other planets.

Then we have to begin with good lists of planetary traits. Am I a

Jupiter person? Hardly since Jupiter is the planet of politicians and

the person who likes to play to the masses. For most of my life I've

had zero interest in politics, and I'm a hermit of sorts. Saturn?

Yes, probably because Saturn is with my ascendant lord. But the

ascendant lord itself doesn't describe me. My disposition is

definitely Saturnian. But Jupiter makes a fairly close aspect to the

Sun, 9th lord. I'd say I have `good spiritual karma,' and have

apparently earned a comfortable life.

Anyhow, this all points to one of my major complaints about astrology

and astrologers--we don't always know how to pull out the significant

planets in each chart, or to know in what life areas the planets

apply, so we tend to make a mumbo-jumble of the chart. This is

especially true from the Tropical perspective.

Every planet near a cusp is going to be aspecting one or more equal

angles. The M.C.? It's only the southernmost point in the sky, not

the highest point of the ecliptic. The M.C. and cusps do seem to be

important in timing with the Placidus system, but otherwise I haven't

been able to find the M.C. to be very important despite astrological

tradition.

>>Mercury/Uranus, yes of course, highly desirable, but sorry, no

Sun/Uranus. I'm also a near exact Mercury/Uranus opposition, near

angles (very good), but this comes along with a Sun/Uranus opposition

(that gets the boot for being too unorthodox and eccentric i.e a

non-cooperator).

Nice description of your chart, which I don't have by the way unless

it's in ADB.

>>I'd also be hesitant to put in an angular Mars and certainly no one

with

Moon/Mars. Venus on the other hand would be very necessary and

desirable--since it seems cooperation amongst astrologers is the main

obstacle to achieving this objective.

Does this mean that most astrologers lack harmonious Venus energy?

>>A hypothetical chart? How about a Mercury/Venus conjunction rising

in

Libra, free from the Sun's combustion (Sun would be back a bit in the

12th house in Virgo).

You've got Hillary Clinton here if the morning time of birth is

correct! Oh...but her Sun is in Libra... Sun in 12th seems to favor

presidents.

This combination would throw a close trine to Saturn in Aquarius( at

the

IC) and Uranus in Gemini in the 9th.

Uranus in the 9th has a good chance of being psychic. I've seen that

quite a bit.

>>this post was a bit tongue-in-cheek originally, but it strikes me

that

it might not be a bad idea to look through my database and find a

current living astrologer who has some of the requisite requirements.

I

ran a few of these astro combos through SF 6 on a database of

astrologers imported from the ADB.

>>My top candidate (only from a very quick and superficial search)

>>Deanette Warren: born Feb 21, 1954 @ 12:58 PM in Pomona, California.

A totally new name!

>>A resident of a California mountain community...hmmmm does this

sound familiar? Judging from her current transits, something very

interesting may be coming her way soon. :>))

Jupiter transiting Sun/Moon in 11th brought money but not cheer,

Saturn's been heavy (depressing, discouraged with what astrologers

have done to astrology, and feeling the burden of too much work), and

let's see what Pluto brings.

>>Michael Wenrich: born Jan 25, 1943 @ 1:22 PM in Gross Point Farm,

Michigan

Biography: American professional astrologer and teacher who holds TV

credits and an interest in humanistic astrology.

Another new name. Where are these astrologers?

>>Vivian Martin: born March 29, 1956 @ 9:38 PM in New York City, NY

Biography: American astrologer and journalist who is the author of a

general book on astrology that was published in the fall of 1987.

Never heard of her either. Talk about the lack of unity among

astrologers! There aren't that many of us, and too many of us seem to

live only within our own little lives.

>>OK, but we'll be watching (very closely) from now on since you seem

to

have elevated yourself to the role of Grammar Guru---you know, glass

houses and throwing stones etc etc. :>)

Matthew Quellas beat me to it. A former English instructor, he

complained a while ago about the way astrologers use `conjunct' when

it should be `conjoin' when talking about two planets together in a

sign. :>)

Therese

March 12, 2006

jivio wrote:

>Steve...

>

>Nice...

>

>Those of us who have studied and toiled with the dutiful reins of

>Saturn appreciate your writing as a fine effort... Reading your e-

>mail reminded me that keeping the windows open in 'our' neighborhood

>provides fresh air to circulate. Fresh Air, the element we can't

>see, touch or smell,(shouldn't anyways) through breathing, fills our

>lungs and bodies with dynamic strengths. When added to the fires of

>our passions it creates... We are all students and teachers during

>this life of ours and engaging opportunities inspire purpose...

>Speaking of opportunities....

>

Hi Jivio,

It's nice to hear from you and thank you--I've been lurking around for

months, mainly due to a stationing Uranus against nSaturn--the least fun

transit I can ever recall.

I've moved since we last spoke some months ago--I'll write soon.

" Students and teachers " no doubt, one day the wise man and the fool the

next..

>The press was gathering around the president for an impromtu

>Question and answer conference just after Hurricane Katrina.... One

>of the reporters spoke up and ask the president his views on 'ROE

>versus 'WADE'?

>

>Dubya immediately replied that he didn't care how they were going to

>get out of New Orleans....

>

>drum roll please... Hope you hadn't heard it before... The other

>day I walked into an auto parts store in a small rural town in

>Texass. They had that joke taped to the cash register facing the

>customers... When Dubya returns to Texass, it will be as its dark

>little secret....

>

I heard a different version not connected with " Dubya " , but the same

effect :>))

>

>The art, science, vision and viability of Astrology is greater today

>than it ever has been. Progress in terms of number of books written

>on the subject of Sidereal Astrology may appear slow, however

>progress in the use of Sidereal Astrological applications is

>steadily advancing.

>

>Each of us has learned something about the world we live in through

>our study of astrology even though the variables of astrology cause

>us inconsistent logical values....

>

>We don't need sacred cows to tell us that every culture offers a

>unique perspective... Was Jesus Christ God? Was he the result of

>being born at an auspicious planetary configuration? Who are the

>scholars that will answer the questions that we must ask and answer

>ourselves?

>

>All of our perspectives will be different when it comes to

>Astrology... We may share some ideas but when it comes to equal

>versus campanus we discover our differences... No one person knows

>everything... No one person is the gatekeeper...

>

Astrology has literally saved my life by guiding me through the darkest

hours many times. It is also responsible for me maintaining a theistic

view of the universe.

Can we put that in a bottle and duplicate it? I'm beginning to think

not....

Best wishes,

Steve

>

March 12, 2006

Hi Steve,

>All of our perspectives will be different when it comes to

>Astrology... We may share some ideas but when it comes to equal

>versus campanus we discover our differences... No one person knows

>everything... No one person is the gatekeeper...

>

Astrology has literally saved my life by guiding me through the darkest

hours many times. It is also responsible for me maintaining a theistic

view of the universe.

Can we put that in a bottle and duplicate it? I'm beginning to think

not....

I think astrology's ability to function as a spiritual balm in this way is

another reason for recalcitrance of many practitioners to submit to other ways

of doing things. It's not just a matter of the x's and y's of scientific

practice, it's a matter of deep-seated quasi-religious belief. (or maybe it is

a religion at least in the way that Buddhism is -- ie. a religious or moral

philosophy)

I'm sure we have all found comfort in astrological knowledge over the years to

help us through difficult circumstances. The consideration of other paradigms

and interpretations (eg. different zodiacs, different planets, etc) might be a

violation of those profound and even sacred experiences.

OTOH, while astrology may have helped us, I wonder if we can come clean about

how often our interest/obsession with the planets has hurt us? How often have

we been filled with anxiety at the approach of a malefic looking transit and

cleared our schedules or worse, only to have nothing in particular happen? I

think there is something to the notion that astrology is for people

(practitioners and consumers alike) who may be inherently timid, fearful, or

anxious and would rather avoid accepting life as it comes. The old adage that

" life isn't a dress rehearsal " strikes the astrological mindset in an odd way:

true, but if it's a real play, then all the actors have to make sure they know

their lines!

Chris

Best wishes,

Steve

>

March 12, 2006

Christopher Kevill wrote:

>Hi Steve,

>

> >All of our perspectives will be different when it comes to

> >Astrology... We may share some ideas but when it comes to equal

> >versus campanus we discover our differences... No one person knows

> >everything... No one person is the gatekeeper...

> >

>

> Astrology has literally saved my life by guiding me through the darkest

> hours many times. It is also responsible for me maintaining a theistic

> view of the universe.

> Can we put that in a bottle and duplicate it? I'm beginning to think

> not....

>

>I think astrology's ability to function as a spiritual balm in this way is

another reason for recalcitrance of many practitioners to submit to other ways

of doing things. It's not just a matter of the x's and y's of scientific

practice, it's a matter of deep-seated quasi-religious belief. (or maybe it is

a religion at least in the way that Buddhism is -- ie. a religious or moral

philosophy)

>

>I'm sure we have all found comfort in astrological knowledge over the years to

help us through difficult circumstances. The consideration of other paradigms

and interpretations (eg. different zodiacs, different planets, etc) might be a

violation of those profound and even sacred experiences.

>

Hi Chris,

I think you probably already know my opinion on some of these thoughts,

since we have discussed these ideas at length many times. Of course

astrology offers a comfort, guide and buffer along life's rocky road.

And not to knock the real benefits of serious study and a certain

logical and orderly approach--but may I ask, who or what is the thing

that keeps insisting that one *submit* to something?

If someone wants an astrological project, then I suggest that he find an

astrological signature for a group of astrologers that feel it is their

duty to organize the rest of us into a respectable, logical and coherent

body. To what end? For the betterment of humanity at large? For the

general improvement of the rag tag, rednecki, recalcitrant astrological

riff raff that the 'helpers' want to *lovingly* bring into line? Sorry,

I don't buy it--but that's just me speaking, in the only way I can speak.

And yours and others answers will be appropriately the only answer they

can come up with. Who's right ultimately? The answer is: No one, of

course.

Everyone's final judgment about astrology will be subordinate to the

characteristics (and limitations) of their own natal chart (IMO),

including the ability to enter other paradigms If they can ever go

beyond that opinion, then they will probably be living in another world,

beyond planetary influence. And no planetary influences means no need

for astrology.

>OTOH, while astrology may have helped us, I wonder if we can come clean about