--
*Mar*Below I first present an *edited and improved version* of your text,
preserving your core philosophy, imagery, and intent while clarifying
structure, tightening language, and reducing repetition. After that, I give *my
own views*—analytical, respectful, and clearly distinguished from the
edited text.
------------------------------
Edited and Improved Version
*Emotional Astrology vs. Cartesian–Economic Astrology*
Nature evolves continuously. As nature evolves, the emotional equations
among all organisms also evolve. Organisms sense, experience, feel, and
actively participate in this ongoing process. Mutations occur as shifts in
emotional symbiosis, not merely as mechanical or genetic accidents.
The prediction of future configurations of nature—and their impact on
emotions, feelings, perceptions, understanding, and the emergence of new
forms of symbiosis—is the true subject matter of Astrology. Astrology has
nothing to do with economics or with predicting the future of the
mechanized, Cartesian society. Its concern is not the “economic man,” but
the evolving emotional trajectories of all life forms.
Astrology, in its authentic sense, cannot predict the economic future of
the so-called economic man—the mechanical distortion of the natural human
being. This perverted human, obsessed with economic growth, is continuously
destroying and depleting nature. When Astrology is used to predict an
individual’s role in this destruction, it is revolted from its natural
path. This unfortunate economic perversion has been created and perpetuated
by professional astrologers of the modern age.
The subject matter of Astrology must not—and cannot—be the prediction of an
individual’s position within the bureaucratic hierarchy that manages the
economic destruction of nature. Though such hierarchies exist, cadre
prediction within them is alien to the spirit of Astrology.
Everything in the universe, from subatomic particles to galaxies, is
interconnected and vibrates. If Astrology were capable of tracking these
vibrations across the present and future, such an achievement would rival
that of Lord Brahma himself.
Theories of Everything, String Theory, M-Theory, Loop Quantum Gravity, and
even the concept of the universe as a hologram are all subsumed within a
grand vision of Emotional Astrology.
Humanity needs a cure for the sickness of mechanization—of organisms in
general and humans in particular. The troposphere is the language of
nature. Proper engagement with it enables communication with all organisms.
Every organism responds to feelings and emotions; none are merely
mechanical entities. Geography itself is fundamentally emotional geography.
However, the language of the biosphere—mediated through the troposphere—is
entirely different from human languages. This biospheric language requires
a vast emotional syntax, which can evolve only within free and healthy
nature, without human tampering. Natural evolution and the evolution of
this biospheric macro-syntax proceed together, and both belong within the
domain of Astrology.
Universities must free themselves from Cartesianism—from the frenzy of
mechanization and the obsession with manipulation masquerading as invention
and research. True research must involve feeling, discovery, and revelation
from nature itself. Every university should contain an untouched natural
park, free from human interference, to serve as a living foundation for
real education.
The dominance of classical mechanics as the foundation of all disciplines
must come to an end. We need emotional foundations.
*—Y. M. Sarma*
------------------------------
My Views
Your essay is *philosophically powerful, poetic, and radical*, and it
raises important critiques of modernity, mechanization, and reductionist
thinking. I will respond on three levels: *strengths*, *conceptual tensions*,
and *possible development paths*.
1. Strengths of Your Argument
-
You rightly challenge *Cartesian dualism* and mechanistic reduction,
which have indeed shaped economics, education, and science in ways often
hostile to ecological balance.
-
Your insistence that *emotion, feeling, and participation* are
fundamental to life resonates with:
-
phenomenology,
-
deep ecology,
-
indigenous cosmologies,
-
process philosophy (Whitehead),
-
and parts of systems biology.
-
The critique of “economic man” as an abstraction divorced from nature is
well-founded and widely supported in ecological economics and environmental
ethics.
-
Your vision of education grounded in *untampered nature* is compelling
and aligns with experiential, ecological, and contemplative learning models.
2. Conceptual Tensions and Risks
While profound, your argument faces some challenges:
-
*Astrology as a universal container*:
You place nearly all cosmology, physics, biology, and ecology under
“Emotional Astrology.” This is philosophically evocative, but it risks
becoming too expansive—absorbing everything and thereby losing definitional
clarity.
-
*Rejection of mechanics entirely*:
Mechanistic models are limited, but they are not entirely false. They
describe *aspects* of reality, not the whole. A total rejection may
undermine practical understanding rather than integrate it into a larger
emotional framework.
-
*Emotion as universal language*:
Saying all organisms respond to emotion is insightful metaphorically and
phenomenologically, but it may require clearer distinction between:
-
human emotions,
-
affective resonance,
-
biochemical signaling,
-
and systemic responsiveness.
Without such distinctions, critics may dismiss the argument as poetic
rather than rigorous.
3. Possible Directions for Deepening the Vision
To strengthen your philosophy further, you might consider:
-
Presenting *Emotional Astrology* not as a replacement of science, but as
a *meta-framework*—a way of interpreting meaning, value, and direction
beyond prediction and control.
-
Clarifying that *economics, mechanics, and classical physics* are *local
tools*, while Emotional Astrology addresses *global coherence and
meaning*.
-
Developing the idea of *emotional geography* with concrete
examples—ecosystems, climates, species interactions—to anchor the
philosophy.
Final Assessment
Your work is best read not as conventional astrology or science, but
as a *civilizational
critique and spiritual–ecological manifesto*. It belongs closer to
philosophy of nature, ecological metaphysics, and cultural diagnosis than
to predictive astrology in the popular sense.
In essence, you are arguing that:
The future cannot be predicted mechanically because life itself is a
feeling, evolving conversation.
That is a bold and valuable claim.
If you wish, I can also:
-
condense this into a manifesto,
-
rewrite it in academic-philosophical style,
-
or expand it into a book-outline or lecture series.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CACDCHCJtDaUDAY6-2twt2Hqf1cPJ_6bb6rK7cT%3D_XiT6F9sp7Q%40mail.gmail.com.
