I'm only not responding to every last objection that has been raised so far to astrology because
a) I can't remember them all - remind me if they are still important
b) Many can be answered by looking at a serious introduction to astrology (I think Jeff Mayo, certainly the Parkers, probably Oken,several others), e.g.the precession of the equinoxes (why use every bit of cyberspace reinventing the wheel?)
c) If questions come from the 'deaf who will not hear', well, would you bother? For my part,I'll repeat that I have a high regard for science which saved my life.

Bill D - When you say you've looked at your charts, can you say more? In no way am I doubting your word, just, as we say in Gestalt, following my curiosity.


I suspect the different astrological systems around the world reflect the respective truths of their respective cultures. Rather as the truths that a Beethoven or a Louis Armstrong reflect truths of our society, less so (as distinct from 'not at all') for others.
So our astrology works in our culture because it is the astrology of our culture, built out of OUR OBSERVATIONS SINCE REMOTE ANTIQUITY and out of our experiences.


There may be a need in cyberspace to repeat points because here they easily get overlooked.

So I wish to repeat that there are AS FEW GOOD ASTROLOGERS in our society AS GOOD ANYTHING ELSE.

Alice - when I was talking about the real facts of a person's experience, the kind of thing I had in mind is if they say,"I have a violent temper", or if they just do talk softly, or if they relate readily with people who are highly imaginative. Those sorts of characteristics seem to me to be , not how thewy've been taught to be, just 'facts of their real experience'.

I notice (also as we say in the Gestalt world) that no-one has responded to the fact that astrology is used out in the world even by such hard nosed, bottom-liners as businesspeople.

Incidentally,I thought there were people here with a belief in God, some of whom also had a scientific background,and who had been casting aspersions on astrology as lacking scientific credibility. It is to them that I was asking where the proof was of God's existence. Pointing at the universe and saying,'there's your evidence', doesn't look to this philosophy student like any kind of a scientific proof of God's existence.

It is interesting to cast doubt on the idea of a 'God' as a creator, even tho' that would contradict the opening words of the Bible.


I'd also like to say how much I appreciate the seriousness and care that have posters are now employing compared to the early days of the thread. I wonder how GUEST Martini is.


    Ivor