--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "hugheshugo"
> <richardhughes103@> wrote:
> >
> > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the 
> > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be 
> > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. 
> 
> It sounds a lot like the math involved in saying
> that one's spiritual teacher is "the best," or
> that one's spiritual path is "the best." Those
> beliefs are based on the person who thinks that
> appearing to be at the center of the universe, 
> too.  :-)

For the record, since the time of Copernicus
(1473-1543), astrologers have known that
retrograde motion is only apparent. Sorry, but
they don't "believe" that planets actually turn
around and move backward. They're also well
aware that the earth revolves around the sun.

And retrograde motion never did have anything to
do with "maths." You don't need "maths" to
detect retrograde motion, just careful
observation of the night sky.

> Personally I think that astrology is hogwash,
> *except* as tricksterism. That is, some people 
> whose intuition and "seeing" skills are present 
> but latent can *trick* themselves into utilizing
> their latent ability to "see" by gazing a chart
> of the position of the planets.
>
> For other people, it's tarot cards. For still
> others, reading tea leaves.

Interesting. Here's what I said back in May
of last year (I'm sure Barry didn't, you know,
read it or anything):

"My guess: Any sufficiently complex system of
correspondences, such as astrology (any flavor),
works as a tool for focusing the intuition--
i.e., collecting and integrating all one's
little intuitional inputs into a coherent whole
so that a prediction can be generated from it.
The system's correspondences themselves don't
'mean' anything at all, they're just a framework
to hang the intuition on and organize what the
intuition knows.

"Tea leaves, in other words, could work just as
well as astrology for anyone with a highly
developed intuition."

Oh, heck. As long as I'm quoting myself...

I had a vague memory of a post I'd made years
ago on alt.m.t on astrology and went looking for
it. It was in response to someone (not Barry)
who was dissing astrology as primitive 
superstitious nonsense:

Consider the magnitude of the realization, way back in 
prehistory, that while the pattern of the stars overhead changed 
from month to month, they always came back to the *same* 
positions at harvest time each year; they were always in the same 
positions at planting time.  What a stunning discovery, that 
their positions were correlated with the seasons! 

And then there were the "wandering" stars--their positions were 
not at first at all predictable.  Why should a few of the stars 
not follow the pattern? 

Think also about how significant the stars must have seemed to 
primitive humans.  We take them for granted, but just imagine 
what a hunter camping on the plain must have thought as he looked 
at the night sky.  The stars were a much more major feature of 
the environment than they are to us, and infinitely more 
mysterious and awe-inspiring.  It's not at all surprising they 
were thought to be divine. 

So when humankind had progressed to the point where it could 
accurately chart the stars' motions, it was natural to assume 
they were a guidance system given to humans by the gods.  The 
"wanderers" took on special significance, because they moved 
through the "fixed" constellations and were constantly forming 
different patterns with them.  But even *their* motions, although 
much more complex, were regular and could be predicted.  And 
obviously the sun and moon were the overlords of the heavens, 
playing different but complementary roles. 

What gives me the shivers is that if you wanted to *design* a 
system for divination for human beings on earth, you could hardly 
do better than the sun, the moon, and the planets in the 
constellations.  The system seems tailor-made for that purpose. 

It's also no surprise that astrology was the earliest "pure" 
science, in the sense of observing and charting nature's 
regularities just for the joy of ferreting out her secrets.  What 
a magnificent vehicle the night sky is for inspiring scientific 
curiosity! 

We tend to look down our noses at these primitive, superstitious 
magi who spent all their time gazing at the heavens, but that's 
totally unwarranted.  The impulse that motivated them to wrest 
regularity from an otherwise chaotic environment over which they 
had little control was precisely the same as the one that 
motivates modern scientists, and it took just as much energy and 
intellect and sophistication.  The first ephemeris was as much of 
an accomplishment as the Human Genome Project. 


Reply via email to