Thank you so much. At least we're seeing how a discussion of light motored by heat can work compared to to one of heat motored by ?????????????

I,too,am enjoying discussing all this with Tia,*daylia*,Bill and Captain.

Bill - it may look like that but it's not what I meant, and isn't a necessary deduction. I'm querying the possibility or appropriateness of the scientific method here. i no way mean that therefore astrology is true.

I was strongly influenced by the whole questioning of orthodoxy (authority?) in the 60s and 70s,which,as everywhere,was a mishmash of the ludicrous on the one hand and the pursuits of
understanding,knowledge and so on,on the other. I was also affected when I read someone's horoscope with them,and afterwards they told me that I'd said things which they didn't think anybody knew. Naturally,there are many ways to interpret that remark. I didn't know her or her family particularly well,hadn't tried to find out about her beforehand,and asked her very little during the reading.

I agree with the point about authority. And about the flaws of great men. (I'm going to have to be more careful than my Mercury in Leo likes.) We're all flawed,scientists,astrologers,'catters,even those we love and celebrities. I'll have to come back in 10 years when I've studied Plato,Goethe,Newton,Jung (perhaps not Reagan) and the others to explain how they thought about astrology and why. It might be something to with being open to others ways of conceiving of the nature of the universe than those we do. My point was more about great minds than authority per se,tho' i can see th't that doesn't sound immensely convincing.


Captain - the beginnings of the revival of interest in astrology starts psychologically with the works of people who were dubious of the unflawed merits of rationalism like Schopenhauer,Fechner and Nietzsche,and later the psychologists. More materially,astrological works of Renaissance times were being issued in fresh editions in the 1850s,for example Lilly(1602-1681)'s Introduction to Astrology in s1852 (Bohn Library).

A next step was the Theosophical movement (the answer to anyone's jumping-to-conclusions thought is 'no') of Madame Blavatsky. One of her followers was 'Alan Leo',who subsequently wrote a small library of astrological introductions at the turn into the 20th century. Practical Astrology appeared in a New edition in 1911.

Another was the growing interest in the sources of beliefs in the late 19th century in books on religion,magic,(yes yes,I know what I writ),other societies(anthropology).

Leo was one of a new breed of astrologers producing manuals,journals and almanacs from the end of the 19th c.                                                                                                                                           Tia, it's very nice to do business (as it were) with you,too. Your remark has made my day;at least. if not year.

In astrology we're dealing with individuals who among an infinity of elements are lacking self-knowledge,unfulfilling of their potential,over-socialised,in the grip of goodness-knows-whose ideas and beliefs etcetc. Not material that the scientific method would deal with well!!!!!!

*daylia* hi and thanks. My Sun's actually late Cancer,and I have my Moon's in Libra. Also,having a predominance in cardinal signs and in Air signs gives me a predominance of Libranness.

on Mudcat,I need all the delicateness me mercury in Leo can find (ha!). We never know where the next post is coming from, so this place doesn't half keep give us opportunities a-plenty (great tune,that)for openness,doughtyness,learning (not least about ourselves if we're up for that),and making decisions about whether to be firm or adaptable,etc.etc. It's positively an educational establishment.

your comment about the 'blow-em-all-away' Arian tendency reminds me of my hope to make THE point that settles the matter,(which I sometimes imagine being like dealing a fatal blow with a single sword lunge !!!!!!!!). It's curiously satisfying for me to see th't that's impossible,pure (hope you'll all forgive me) pure Hollywood. Pure Libra.

What I actually seem to go in for is the Cancery watery drip-drip effect. 'Cos there's always Taurean superior strategic approach and persistance;Geminian cleverness and sophistry;Leonine Royal pronouncements about the Big Picture;Virgoan hammering away at the slightest fleck of objection;Libran paralysis (I once played a game of Monopoly which I paralysed by refusing to sell anything after I couldn't win !!);Scorpioic threats etcetc






                                                                        Ivor