On Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:09:21 PM UTC-4, John Clark wrote:
> >> it is disconcerting to learn that after trying to make logical points
>>> with somebody for over a year to find out that there is not the slightest
>>> possibility of logic making any change whatsoever in their beliefs.
>> > This is exactly what I and some others thought, and said, about your
>> posts when you pretend to not understand, or to refute, the first person
> I have no trouble understanding first person indeterminacy. I (the first
> person) don't know with certainty (indeterminacy) what I am going to see
> next and even if I did I wouldn't be certain what I would do next until I
> did it. All that is crystal clear, however you claimed to have found a new
> sort of indeterminacy unrelated to Quantum Mechanics or what Godel or
> Turing found, and despite your repeated efforts I was unable to understand
> that at all. With some embarrassment I admit that there have been times in
> my life when I pretended to understand something when really I did not, but
> I can honestly say that except maybe for a short time as a joke I can't
> recall even one time that I pretended not to understand something when
> really I did. Some would say I'm stupid enough as it is and don't need to
> pretend to be any dumber than I am.
> > It is more easy to see the irrationality of others than of oneself
> In general that is certainly true but Bruno let me ask you a very serious
> question, doesn't all this astrology stuff bother you and make you question
> how you allocate your time? Doesn't it bother you to learn that Craig
> Weinberg, somebody you have spent a lot of effort debating with, would say
> things like "embody the Aquarian tension of revolutionary rationalism
> symbolized by the Saturnian-Uranian co-rulership of Aquarius." and "With
> their interesting combination of Mars in Libra squaring their Moon and
> trining their Sun" and "The Neptune Saturn conjunction with the Jupiter
> stellium in Neptune-ruled Pisce" and "There is nothing in numerology or
> astrology which is even remotely as flaky as modern cosmology." and
> "Astrology is extremely rational" ? I've got to tell you that finding out
> that I have misjudged somebody that massively bothers the hell out of me.
I can see why astrological terms would frighten you, but they are no
different from any other specialized language. I will try to translate if
it will make you feel any better:
"embody the Aquarian tension of revolutionary rationalism symbolized by the
Saturnian-Uranian co-rulership of Aquarius."
= embody the inherent conflict within the rational futurist personality
between its rebellious-pioneering-genius impulses and its reverent,
intensely disciplined impulses.
"With their interesting combination of Mars in Libra squaring their Moon
and trining their Sun"
= They are guys who like open challenges, have issues with their emotions
but also natural leadership skills. These are people who are emotionally
reluctant to interact with the public, but excel in the public role that
"The Neptune Saturn conjunction with the Jupiter stellium in Neptune-ruled
= Strong themes of maturity and suffering. The personality here is like
stones worn smooth by the ocean. Devotion, sacrifice, melancholy...heavy
concerns, serious lives contributing to events with looong term
"There is nothing in numerology or astrology which is even remotely as
flaky as modern cosmology."
= Numerology is simple. Things with four sides have a certain, shall we
say, stability to them, do they not? Doors, walls, windows, tables...
squares and rectangles are good for reliable, utilitarian purposes.
Numerology takes these kinds of intuitions about numbers and refines them
to a very specific degree, mapping them to the letters of the alphabet -
which also have inherent personalities when you examine them intensely.
This is nothing but a heightened appreciation for the qualities of numbers
and a projection of that appreciation onto names and birthdates. The
amazing thing is that, confirmation bias or no, doing this yields
consistently insightful views on personality. Astrology is the same but
using the geometric relations which arise from the periodicity of the
planets. It could be tree rings or ice cores, or anything that has a long
term history of repetition and variation, but the planetary motions are
ideal because they lend themselves to these signifying configurations. The
archetypes of the zodiac do not necessarily have anything to do with the
planets, they just fall out naturally from intuitive reflection. The logic
that makes 1 independent, bold, and creative and 4 orderly and utilitarian,
makes this zodiacal sequence of action-reaction-transaction X 4 a perpetual
resource for archetypal insights. I found, for instance, that they can be
applied to the stereotypes of the USA:
You don't need to be afraid of these things because they are not supposed
to be taken literally. Astrology and numerology are just ways of examining
these subtle themes which run through any sufficiently rich set of
"Astrology is extremely rational"
Astrology is nothing but rational, but the 'belief' in astrology is not.
This is not a hodge podge of random ideas, but a meticulously gathered
canon of observation and interpretation over centuries. It has been rightly
been called the sum total of the wisdom of the ancient world. Before
computers, erecting an Astrology chart is about the most mathematically
challenging task that could be undertaken. It required precision and
patience, complex quantitative work. As I have mentioned previously, the
Astrology software out there is quite excellent, not written by irrational
goofballs but careful programmers committed to scientific accuracy.
> I've got to tell you that finding out that I have misjudged somebody that
massively bothers the hell out of me.
I don't blame you. I thought that astrology was obviously bullshit for many
years. I only reluctantly took a second look at it because I was so
surprised at how well numerology seemed to work. It's not my fault though
that reality is much different than you think it is. Congratulations,
you're now a part of science.
> John K Clark
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.