Critique of Astrology

[Guest guest]

At 05:14 AM 4/14/05 -0700, Mu'Min wrote:

>

>...I offer this article to highlight the fact that

>Astrology today - Western and more and more Vedic (as

>practiced here in the USA) as well - badly lacks Peer

>Review; just about anyone who has read a few Sun Sign

>books on the subject can put together a site, send

>some articles off to Dell Horoscope or TMA, and get

>whatever published, and there is no way in which to

>check their stuff by way of deep questioning and

>artful but incisive critique. Or, in the case of

>Forrest, a " name " astrologer can say and/or write

>anything, and because they have " tenure " so to speak,

>they aren't challenged...

>

>I posit that our Craft is seriously being degraded as

>a result of such occurances...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

This is all true, but I have no idea how to change this situation as many

young astrologers are following the old guard in this respect. Also,

there's no way I'm going to plow through Forrest's article. So astrology

today isn't a respected discipline. It's just....popular astrology, an

entertainment. A lot of psychology being applied by those who don't have

psych degrees. A lot of astrologers 'doing good' because they want to be

counselors. Sadly most don't have professional training.

 

Peer review won't help if everyone thinks like everyone else except for a

few analytical astrologers. Who will listen to the few no one agrees with?

 

Hope may come from Kepler College standards, but that's a way in the

future. There are very few students are present, and we'll have to wait to

see if they're critical thinkers.

 

Mu, as far as I know you may be breaking copyright by posting a TMA article

on a message list? I believe you could have made the same points without

Forrest's article. I hope you asked for his (or TMA's) permission first.

 

Therese

[Guest guest]

At 03:28 PM 4/16/05 -0000, Mu'Min wrote:

>

>Thanks for the input. Yea, it's a tought job, mainly because there is

>alot of feelings involved, and since we are loathe these days to hurt

>anyone's feelings, we allow for alot of out and out BS to occur.

 

Mu, the main problem is that astrologers don't recognize BS when they see

it, and they won't for a long time if they're not trained in critical

thinking.

 

>By the way, I trust you got my email on the old and young in

>astrology? That post has a good bit to do with what we're taking up

>here. The aping of the youngbucks of the sins of the old guard is

>disturbing to see indeed.

 

Yes, I received the email, but I didn't want to puruse that topic further,

since the young are doing exactly what the old were doing, but not

recognizing the pattern. Also, lack of time and energy on my part. I only

post a few notes on the public boards.

 

>Anyway, I think the way in which we change things is by talking

>about, no matter what anyone says or thinks. I think as long as we do

>that, we all win in the end.

 

I'm tired talking. That's for the younger people. So much energy is wasted

in arguing or disicssing with words. It's a stage of life I passed through,

and now I pass the privilege on to younger people with more energy.

 

>For me, it's important for us to get the argument right, the approach

>right. To be honest, I dont have any axe to grind with respect to

>Forrest; I've never met him, but from what I hear he's a really nice

>guy. But that said, I cannot allow him to put forth the things he

>does without challenge.

 

That's your mission, then. My mission is to try to complete the work I've

started--explaining the sidereal signs and researching the influence of

stars, mansions and sub-divisions of the signs of the zodiac.

 

I don't know what is going to happen to astrology--if it will ever gain any

respect on a level with other professional disciplines. Right now anyone

can be an astrologer. Astrologers themselves are fighting against any

standards of education and proficiency. They don't really care about

standards in astrology. They only care about being themselves because

'astrology works.' A few brave souls are attempting to establish standards.

Who will win?

 

>If I've violated any copyright laws, I deeply apologize.

 

The internet has opened up a whole new realm of copyright questions. It's

supposed to be necessary to get permission to use anyone's words, even

those from discusson lists. But who can track the millions of daily

messages on the internet?

 

Sincerely,

Therese