Advertisement
Alternative Innergies, Aquarius, Awakening Dreamers, and Currency Of Light.
My Blog
people.tribe.net/chaz/blog...90d14548ef
article
www.robertphoenix.com/content/
Tap into the current. . .
It’s time to bury your 19th century notion of money right now–if you don’t you may not survive what’s on the horizon. The current economic maelstrom is self-assembling, almost at the speed of light. We’re talking zeros and ones, abstractions of value that you and I must have to strive to comprehend in order to level the playing field so that we may not only survive, but prosper beyond out wildest dreams in the weeks, months and years to come. With Jupiter in Aquarius, especially as it moves closer and closer towards Neptune in Aquarius, we are rapidly approaching a “currency of light.” In order to understand this concept, it’s critical that we travel backwards in time, back to 1997 when the floodgates of cash opened wide to fuel the dot.com bubble and beyond.
The Silicon Rush And Bubble No. 1
A few weeks back, I was reading a post over at Catherine Austin Fitts‘ site and she was detailing the evolution of the current economic crisis and when it really began in earnest. Based on her research and findings, she found that huge sums of money were transferred out of The US in 1997. We’re talking trillions, much of it headed towards China. As a result of the lack of available assets tethered to the US economy, The Clinton Administration in conjunction with The Fed initiated the bubble cycle starting with the dot.com boom.
The Fed lowered interest rates on money so that venture capitalists could access cheap money and fund a flurry of start-ups, some of which were viable business models, others just a pipe dream hatched in dorm rooms that looked sexy to investors (hello MP3,com). But the real money wasn’t being made by the VC’s or the start-ups themselves, many of whom were doomed from day one, but it was the brokerage firms and banking houses like, Shearson Lehman, Goldman Sachs, etc, who set up the IPO’s for all of the sundry start-ups. They did all the legal work, filed papers with The SEC, set up the links between NASADQ and the company they made public, framed the stockholders agreements, etc.
For all of their work, they were paid cash fees as well as stock in each start up, at founders levels, so for instance, they were getting pre-IPO shares at pennies on the share and when the stock went public, they were not constrained by any rules regarding sale of the the stock. Unlike most employees who had to wait over a year to begin to vest a portion of their options, the brokerage firms could sell as soon as a stock went public and if you can reach back that far, there were stocks opening upwards of $100 share.
Now imagine having 25,000 shares at pennies a share. Just do the math. And there were literally hundreds of start-ups in the valley and just a few brokerage firms bringing them public. This signaled the first massive transference of wealth. As I mentioned before, most of the start-ups were doomed from day one. Here’s why.
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 1:37 PM
The Death Of The Start-Ups
While the brokerage houses made fast cash, getting in early and getting out quick with little restraints on their economic responsibilities, the dot,coms were under a totally different set of rules and parameters. Most dot.coms were under strict orders to spend their seed money, often in the first year or lose it. This stringent rule was antithetical to the basic rules of running a business, especially businesses that needed time and capital to flourish in a very young marketplace, ie e-commerce.
Most business models were half-baked and rushed to market in order to get funding, some were ahead of their times, others were not allowed to develop due to market restraints and restrictions, such as the digital music business, which was my background and others were just for lack of a better term, a masturbatory exercise in buying $500 chairs, flat screen TV’s and fully catered lunches. Businesses like that, in a young market would need capital to get them through the challenging and steep part of their developmental curve to get to profitability, and yet they were given very clear mandates to spend the cash. Those types of conditions were not conducive to growing a business, but they were very favorable for doing other things, which we will look at very shortly.
While The Valley was gorging on cash, micro-brew Friday beer bashes, launch parties fueled by DJ’s getting obscene amounts to spin records and launching some good and some not so very good ideas into the marketplace, people were enticed to drop lots of dollars into the doomed start-ups. Fluffed up by the prospect of getting obscene returns on their investments, investors, newer money investors who couldn’t afford to get in on a blue chip stock saw visions of El Dorado all over NASDAQ.
But when millions crammed into the building, Alan Greenspan cut off the flow of cheap money as interest rates rose week after week. This effectively killed secondary and third rounds of funding that businesses needed in order to survive and get to the next level. Once the building was packed, it was set on fire. In April of 2000, the bottom dropped out of the market and the fall was far deeper than most people realize. In fact, the crash of 2000 was even worse than the crash of 28. The only thing that softened the blow was the next bubble . . . the housing bubble. If the housing bubble didn’t come along, the dot.com crash could have been close to what we’re experiencing today. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 1:38 PM
Who Benefitted?
We have already ascertained that the brokerage houses made out like fat cats. Some CEO’s did fairly well if they managed to rig their founder shares (can you say backlisting?) amidst their steroidal IPO’s. But for the most part, it was an illusory entre into some fantasy world of six-figure salaries and corporate cards for most dot.commers. Investors certainly didn’t benefit. But what took place during that time was that early adopters paved the way for others success, usually companies that were more established.
For instance, when I was at emusic, we made a number of overtures to Apple to co-market, partner, etc. Apple was very polite, held meetings, exchanged info and ideas, but never committed to much of a working relationship. Well, in 2002, we found out why, when iTunes debuted and literally changed the landscape of digital distribution over night. They benefitted from witnessing the glorious flop of Napster and watching emusic struggle with trying to sell subscriptions with mostly unheard of artists to people looking for Brittany Spears.
They saw what worked and didn’t work and rolled out the iTunes. Other companies, more established companies bought struggling companies with a good idea but dwindling cash for pennies on the dollar. They profited from the crash immensely. But what really took place during that time was that the infrastructure to move cash back and forth, zeros and ones, digits at the speed of light was built. The fiber-optic pipeline was laid down and more importantly the connections, the links, the electronic handshakes, the routing, the re-routing and the plumbing was put in place for the biggest and most devastating bubble that was about to pop.
The Derivative Doom Bubble
Once the internet was developed and fleshed out in the late-nineties/early oughts and the banks and mortgage brokers got on line, then it was just a matter of time before they could start selling digital paper, the interest on paper and the futures of paper, the complete and total abstraction of debt based on bad loans that were destined to go in the toilet. These billions of mortgages and loans were traded and sold, all based on speculation and it was the internet that moved those transactions along and it was simply a series of zeros and ones moving from one electronic folder to another.
There was no collateral, no hard based assets to back up those zeros and ones literally racing through the air around us. How’s that for an abstraction? Think about this. Right now, as you are reading this, massive amounts of zeros and ones, the wealth of nations are literally passing through your skin or through the very wires that connect you to the reading of this website. And when you take into account this story of a $5 billion just vanishing out of thin air, which started a run on the banks, it couldn’t have taken place without without the internet, the hook ups and the digital hand shakes.
Day trading, shorting stocks on airlines before they crash into towers just days before they do, all aided and abetted by the development of the internet and e-commerce which took place on the piggy back of the dot.com boom. If you cannot understand the enormity of the fact that money no longer truly exists, that it is simply agreed upon transference of zeros and ones and the abstract compact that zeros and ones are representative of debt, a debt that has a due date, then you will be left in the dust of what’s to come. The quaint notions of dollars and fiat currency are simply that. The next step of course is digital currency and a digital chip based economy. But that is not our only alternative. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 1:38 PM
The Currency Of Light
If we can agree upon two notions that are principally true, that “what is above, so is below” and that “every action has an equal but opposite reaction” then what we are witnessing with the abstraction of money and it’s exchange on a digital level, is also representative of something else; some other energy exchange based on the transference of energy, creativity, knowledge and more than anything else, spiritual value. What if we were already linked up in an organic, neural network of alive connectivity, each one of us carbon based receptor sites of the global brain?
What if the internet and digital transactions are an echo reflection from the virtual space of our collective mind and simply another manifestation of other types subtle networking? If that is the case, then we have the ability and opportunity to exchange ideas, inspiration, novelty and complexity on highly abstract levels. Let’s say for instance, a number of people are interested in creating a new form of technology, or exploring some new mode of consciousness, or craft a solution to a complex problem, we have the ability to link up and inspire one another in ways that we are not wholly aware of.
In the quantum universe, the rules that govern our reality are a lot more fluid than we can understand and “The Currency Of Light” occurs at the quantum level. The currency of light is fueled by passion and possibility, a sense of expectancy and an affirmative stance that we are greater than our current capacities have revealed themselves to us. The challenge in connecting with the currency of light is to not unplug from the current model, but to create something entirely new–not in opposition–but as an organic solution to a whatever milieu we inhabit which offers us creative challenges.
We begin to traffic in the currency of light by noticing and drawing our awareness deeper and deeper into the vast spaces of consciousness, of limitless love and possibility. In this new realm of awareness, the rules of time and space begin to fade away and we can participate with the future in ways that we are not aware of. In the realms of synchronicity, premonition, pre-cogntion, clues and messages arise like a momentary sphinx in our awareness, waiting for us to determine the contours of it’s meaning.
With Jupiter in Aquarius, we have the opportunity to re-imagine what abundance is for us, since Jupiter represents the power of abundant choices, abundant alternatives, abundant lifestyles, and Aquarius represents new ideas, innovation, breathtaking breakthroughs and radical leaps of consciousness. It’s up to us where we want to put our awareness and how we choose to link up with others that are also deeply engaged in such a pursuit.
The time is now, because it may be more difficult when the intensity of the economic abstractions of this world do their very best to impose their realness upon us and we might have to make a very determined choice in which direction we consciously opt in on.
Do it now, while the space isn’t as constrained as it will be in the days, weeks and months ahead. Dare to imagine the world that you want to inhabit, open your aperture as wide as you can right now and start to invest in “the currency of light.” -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 2:39 PMI wish insane people didn't have so much manic energy. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 2:49 PM
I wish if people don't have something nice to say, they would just Shut the .... ..
Grim is like oscar on sesame street
muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Oscar_the_Grouch
Oscar the Grouch is a furry, green Grouch who lives in a trash can, in fact, he loves trash so much that he's rarely seen outside of his trash can.
Like all Grouches, Oscar's mission in life is to be as miserable and grouchy as possible, and pass that feeling on to everyone else. When a visitor knocks on his trash can -- invariably interrupting him from a nap or an important task -- Oscar greets them with a snarl. He complains that he wants to be left alone, although when he's left entirely to himself, he's dissatisfied -- there isn't anybody around to irritate or complain to. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 6, 2009 - 3:03 PMIt's just very tiring to counter a constant tirade of manic, poorly thought out gibberish constantly. It would be nice if crazy people like yourself ran out of 'oomph' once in a while to give everyone a breather, rather than spewing an endless torrent of bullshit into the internet like some rectal Vial of Endless Water from a juvenile game of D&D.
I'm quite worn out between the new age nonsense, the apocalyptic Christian hyperbole, the Obama haters, Creationists, gay bashers and other hideous internet freaks and don't really have the energy to play nice with you and point by point debunk the (admittedly few) coherent and actionable points you make.
So I'll stick - for now - with my favourite Jefferson quote. "Ridicule is the only weapon which may be used against unintelligible propositions." -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:02 AMamen brother! -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:19 AMAs I've said before in another tribe the transformation of the financial world is surely plutos entry into Capricorn rather than Jupiter whose cycle is much quicker, every 12 years!
I'm inclined to believe this thread is better suited to the astrology forums! -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:37 AM>"I'm inclined to believe this thread is better suited to the astrology forums!"<
WHY???? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:40 AMWhy do you have to ask?
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:42 AMIt seems solely concerned with astrology not religion. I doubt many would understand the symbolism of either Jupiter or Aquarius!
It's unlikely anyone would understand the significance.
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:58 AMIt's just as insane and pointless as religion, so it would seem to fit.
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:05 PM
Astrology is a religion of sorts ... and since when do you start policing tribe?
I was in this tribe 5 years ago fellow ...don't tell me what to post
Grim, I bet I can read you to a T
others say it's a science, whatever that means -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:09 PMIn the old sense, yes, but science only meant 'knowledge' back then, true or not. Magic(k) was considered a science.
In the modern sense, no, it's not a science. It's just nonsense. Albeit very codified nonsense.
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:13 PMJust advice and an opinion is all godstar -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:34 PM
"Just advice and an opinion is all godstar"
I understand Paul ...do you have some Libra in your chart? you'll always trying to be fair and giving both sides of an argument
which is a good thing, I just didn't know if it was Gemini or Libra ...or
don't you have a Scorpio rising i forget ...
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:22 AM
Let’s see Grim, do I listen to Catherine Austin Fitts, or some douchebag like yourself?
Hmmm that’s a hard one....
Catherine Austin Fitts
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cath...stin_Fitts
And Swarm you need to be taking care of your babies and marry your girl -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:25 AMMe, if what you posted is representative of her viewpoints.
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:29 AM"I'm quite worn out between the new age nonsense, the apocalyptic Christian hyperbole, the Obama haters, Creationists, gay bashers and other hideous internet freaks and don't really have the energy to play nice with you and point by point debunk the (admittedly few) coherent and actionable points you make. "
grim
When has GStar promoted gay bashing? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 11:31 AMI'm not only talking about ratsdog. -
-
This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:02 PM
Watch ... I'm going to piss all over Grimms face ... are you looking yet?
watch...
OK here it goes ... -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:32 PM
I bet none of you even read the article, it's not even really about Astrology until perhaps the last paragraph
it's about the Evils of SETH; all these Materialist, Sinsationalist, Atheist, Scientism, Witches, Gluttons, and the people of the Ice
how in a matter of a few hundred years have totally fucked up the planet and made it almost inhabitable for any type of future
Ma'at (kmt) was the first and most developed system of morality and ethics in the ancient world for over *6000 years and more
in Ancient Kemet (what became Egypt after the invasions).
I predicted the fall years ago and can prove it as i posted it all in Tribe ...and the same people who laughed lost all their saving ha-ha
now i'm telling you the whole systems is about to collapse just like Rome (Kemet predicted it for 2012 - 10,000 years ago)
Our facts are literally rock solid evidence left to us by those very same spiritual people who revered and respected their Divine Cosnciousness and Intelligence, and had done so for thousands upon thousands of thousands of years.
To truly understand Astrology and/or any religion, Cosmology of Ancient Kemet is the main source ... i don't understand why you all haven't figured this stuff out yet ...i think it's because you all don't know how to read -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:36 PM
PLUS I think most peoples god is MONEY (even the most religious) -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:41 PM
And this get's us right back to ....that's right zIoNiSt
and there greed for m o n e y
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than..." JEFFERSON QUOTE BELOW
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." -- Thomas Jefferson 1802 -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:49 PM
"The falsification of history has done more to impede human development than any one thing known to mankind"
Rousseau 1712-1778
REPUBLIC OR DEMOCRACY?
WISDOM AND FREEDOM
My Blog
people.tribe.net/chaz/blog...2163c4f18d
"As long as people will accept crap, it will be financially profitable to dispense it."
-- Dick Cavett
Wisdom of our Forefathers
It is interesting to note that many (probably most all) modern day accounts of this country's birth refer to it as a "democracy". This is one of the greatest misrepresentations that can be put in print. This country was formed as a REPUBLIC, not a democracy. As a point of historical FACT, a democracy has never worked and has ALWAYS evolved into a socialistic dictatorship.
While in Europe cultivating support of the revolution, Ben Franklin was asked what type of government the Americans were forming. Franklin replied, "A Republic, if we're vigilant enough to preserve it."
It was not until during the great depression that anyone referred to the United States as a democracy and only because certain villains with power brainwashed it into our psych. Say the "Pledge of Allegiance" to yourself and see which word is spoken. A Republic makes every citizen a "king", a king without subjects. A Democracy dissolves us all into the body politic and destroys freedom.
"Democracy is when two wolves and a sheep vote on what they will have for lunch."
The roots of American history go back to the beginnings of man. Our country is the product of man's hopes, fears, desires, events, motives and a cast of thousands. In the many pages of recorded history are rich tapestries of heroes and villains. There is one thread, however, that is ALWAYS present in these tapestries which is seldom recorded, seldom seen, sometimes sensed, and that is SETH (Trickology). In the background of every new adventure, every war, someone or some group has staked wealth and power. This power is not visible to the masses. It is tightly held by the "elite" and denies the public at large. Only the players and events themselves are recorded. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 12:51 PM
"The problem comes when Private business, Religion, Science, and public policy blend together." -Dog Star
This subject is now central to our future...our current economic state of affairs have been planed this way - so now the Gov. has taken over our financial institutions - Again they got everyone left in fear and are conditioning - the previous time was 9/11 when we lost our freedoms and privacy with the so called Patriot Act and now they've taken control of our Real Estate, Banks lending institutions, and Credit ...Next up ONE MORE WAR WWW III with Iran - Dog Star
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 2:16 PM"PLUS I think most peoples god is MONEY (even the most religious)"
I certainly don't disagree with that!
I have nothing in libra but my sun is the libran decante of Gemini, I don't know whether I try to be fair as much as acknowledge and try to understand both sides of every idea or argument. My chart is in my pics anyway! -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Tue, July 7, 2009 - 2:57 PM"it's about the Evils of SETH; all these Materialist, Sinsationalist, Atheist, Scientism, Witches, Gluttons, and the people of the Ice"
Right, because this hysterical spew is SO much better than astrology. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 6:29 AMGrim
Have you ever studied astrology or looked into it? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 7:15 AMYes.
It's still bollocks. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 7:30 AM"It's still bollocks. "
What was your Sun, Moon and Ascendant just for curiosity's sake? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 8:15 AMDon't tell me you are into astrology?
At least voodoo would be sort of interesting. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 8:23 AMSwarm
Yes I'm interested in astrology, not because it makes any sense, because it doesn't, but because I have noticed that it seems to work to some extent.
Have you researched it any way? To add to my ridicule, I also read palms. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 8:56 AM
"...perhaps there is a pattern set up in the heavens for one who desires to see it, and having seen it, to find one in himself" - Plato
Astrology, Myth, Religion, even Science....ALL the same thing ....KMT
They're not interested because they don't even know themselves, or better yet, they've cut themselves off, why? because they are scared. This is a defence mechanism, a conditioned reaction to so hurt religious people have put on them, it's like they have to cut themselves off in order to survive, or at least these are the stories we tell ourselves and heck, I understand all the problems of Religions and all the bad it has done, but you all know this can about spirituality, and Love. but you can't touch those either so i guess they don't exist.
I CAN READ ANY OF YOU ALL TO A "T" WITH ASTROLOGY - I PROVE IT EVERYDAY
Swarm calls himself a buddhist, so I know the love is there, but why the mind?
with but him and Grim, it's a like one of those movies where you see a brain sitting in a container with some mad scientist trying to work everyThing out ...it's got no soul, no feeling intelligence, no body electric. ;-)
Grim just needs some good love making ;-P -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 9:06 AM"I CAN READ ANY OF YOU ALL TO A "T" WITH ASTROLOGY - I PROVE IT EVERYDAY "
Are you sure?
I challenge you to it!!! I love when ppl read my chart cos it's quite confusing.
-
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 10:38 AMWhy would I bother remembering? It's been many years since I looked into this rubbish and astrology doesn't come up as often as others. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 11:33 AM
uh Grim you can start with the month and then the day you were born or hatched ;-P
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 11:51 AMYou all laughed at me when i told you about the illuminati and NWO
It now goes under the name ... G-8 Summit ... No brown or black ethnic countries represented
they are planing to kill them all off ...
"The G8 group's member countries are Canada, the Russian Federation, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States, together with the European Union represented by the European Council's duty President and by the President of the European Commission."
See it's going to seem like a natural transition on world affairs ... the are the criminals that make Africa starve and inject them with AIDs and the same one who are spreading the Sine flu (have you notice we have heard that much a around it - and yet's it's to the highest degree escalated soon they will be passing out vaccines for the poor and Mexicans (border patrol)
Look NWO ....greedy bastards 30 million Africans are starving...and these DEVILS are smiling
G-8 summit tough on Iran
news.yahoo.com/s/politico...ico/24682_4
G-8 Leaders Look for Signals of Economic Recovery
abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory
G-8 leaders agree on climate target
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/g8_summit
G8 sees economy still in peril, falters on climate
news.yahoo.com/s/nm/us_g8...awNwcmludA-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 11:35 AM"It's been many years since I looked into this rubbish and astrology doesn't come up as often as others. "
You surely remember at least your Sun sign tho right? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 12:04 PM>"Are you sure? I challenge you to it!!! I love when ppl read my chart cos it's quite confusing."<
That's easy ... (at a glance) you have a kite, so mars would take on significance and also as your ruling planet Uranus (soul centered astrology) in Cap.
then we see a grand trine ..BTW that Libra rising is what i've been picking up you seeing both sides and being fair
let's do a reading i guess it would all depend on what you wanted to know ...
I'm big on doing readings for life purpose, relationships, general personalities traits, etc
why would you say it's quite confusing - i'm sure you have an extensive background in astrology perhaps we can take these on -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 12:08 PMOk first off the chart you're looking at is one using sidereal zodiac.
It's interesting you mentioned my having a Libra ascendant at one stage when in the western astrology I have Scorpio.
I tend to use this chart:
people.tribe.net/d86a9803-...d1a55742ca
I think the confusing part of my chart is the constant juxtaposition of dark and light. The chart doesn't necessarily confuse me anymore, but I do find that it confuses other when they look at it. They tend to focus on side or one thing to the detriment of everything else in the chart and miss some of the more obvious things.
What are your immediate impressions? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 8, 2009 - 2:15 PMAnd we're still laughing at you. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Thu, July 9, 2009 - 2:45 AMIIRC:
Sun: Sagittarius
Moon: Capricorn
Ascendent: Libra -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sat, July 11, 2009 - 12:38 PM
omg! I swear i was going to say Sag/Cap.... now it's time to see what the heck is going on here -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sat, July 11, 2009 - 12:52 PMyeah I was thinking sag too. The 'my philosophy is THE philosophy bit'. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sat, July 11, 2009 - 11:27 PMOk, what about me.
No telling chaz, if you still remember. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sat, July 11, 2009 - 11:38 PMSure you were, and I'm the Queen of Sheba. You shall now address me as 'Your Majesty'.
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 12:51 AMAquarius-Pisces perhaps born on the cusp.
Do you know your sun moon and asc? Could be either of them.
Might be some Virgo there too -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 2:15 AMWell according the site I looked it up on... the Pisces side of the Aquarius/Pisces cusp. Good call on 1 out of 6.
Thanks to www.freehoroscopesastrology.com
Capricorn rising
Sun in Pisces
Moon in Taurus
here you go people.tribe.net/dj_swarm/...381d348b07 -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 2:37 AMhmm I really thought there'd be some virgo too! lol
oh well not bad cosidering I don't realy know you too well. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 6:55 AMVirgin just isn't my way, if you know what I mean.
So wail away at it. Render the seeming gobble-dee-gook into something intelligible. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 7:32 AMSwarm
What was your relationship like with your mum and dad can I ask? Your chart might suggest that you didn't know one of them particularly well. There's also the suggestion that one of them may have tried to repress you in some way eitehr that or some issues relating to abandonment. perhaps a parent wasn't around or needed caring for.
There might also be a sense of longing for something outside yourself. Commonly this is through drugs or drink. I am not implying that you are an alcoholic or drug addict, but there does show a slightly more addictive personality - though one that is very much controllable. This may just be achieved through meditation but there is the suggestion that at some point in your life (most people grow out of it) there will be some substance abuse to some degree or other.
Are you poetic or do you play any instruments? I would imagine you would have at least an ear for music.
I can deinitely see the meditation side to you btw.
There are a number of things wihch might suggest emotional difficulties where your inner needs haven't been met for some reason or another. There is also a danger (subconciously known to you) of 'drifting away' in life and there is a great compulsion therefore to stick with the 'earth' and stick with physical things and what you know and chances are you will develop strong reasoning abilities to do this (we kinda already know this anyway, but it's in your chart so...).
Now there's also a slightly self-destructive side to you and without scare mongering I have seen a similar aspect in people who have suffered from depression or have attempted suicide or at its easiest form, someone who goes through long phases of melancholy. There is definitely a need to be self-contained and in conrol of yourself and your emotions. This suggests that perhaps during youth you weren't in control.
I would suggest you have or have had some self-confidence issues or some inner 'demon' whispering in your ear "not good enough". I hope that makes sense. I may take some time to fully believe and know that actually you ARE good enough. normally this is when a partner is in your life for some time or in your case after becoming a father.
I'd also imagine you are quite a hard worker when you put your mind to it, but there is also the suggestion that unless you're working for yourself, you can't be bothered! You may have looked older when you were younger and younger as you grow older too btw, which can only be a good thing!
Swarm
Please respond to this honestly. I understand you don't believe in it but I like taking the time to test astrology and have read several charts of people I know even less than you! But fair is fair, I've approached it in an honest and open way, please respond to it honestly and openly too. If I've been even a little accurate please say as equally as you will say how inaccurate I've been.
Thanks
What do you work at out of interest? -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 7:34 AMswarm
also to show that I've not just made it up based on whatever i might have guessed from your personality I am happy to go through my post and highlight the exact aspects and stuff that I was referring to, and you can go to external websites or something and research them too. The great thing about astrology (as opposed to tarot) is that it is much easier to back it up with 'third party' links. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 7:56 AMThe way to test this is to supply the same reading to a sample of people and see what they read of themselves in it. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 8:00 AMGood idea Grim. Do you see yourself in what I've written.
I understand you may think I've jsut deliberately written vague statements applicable to everyone. I can assure you that everything I wrote was based upon my understanding of Swarm's natal chart. Whislt I'm content with everyone not believing in astrology I wouldn't be content in everyone assuming I just wrote a piece attempting to accomodate all possibilities. As I say I'll happily go through each sentance, point out the aspect that informed it, and then you can rsearch it youself. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 4:44 PM
>"Capricorn rising, Sun in Pisces, Moon in Taurus"<
OMG! that's why me and Swarm get along so well ;-P
ah man, i'm missing all the fun in helping interpret these charts... I'm traveling this week
Astrology lead me to god (divine Intelligence, divine order) ... it was like, how does it know this stuff? but there's many levels
and after doing thousands and thousands of readings, the validation comes from within
it's an intuitive Science...and that's what lead me to KMT. Astrology is the child of the Tree of Life and Cosmology
and Paul remember it's not a Science
-
Re: Jupiter et al
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 9:00 PMPaul: "I can assure you that everything I wrote was based upon my understanding of Swarm's natal chart."
Paul, I appreciate that you took the time to do this reading, but I know Swarm very well and what you have described is really not much like him at all.
-
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 8:46 PMI've always had a great relationship with mom and dad, in fact its kind of weird because that seems to not be the case for most people I've known and their parents. No repressing or abandonment. They've been there when I needed them.
I've always had a distinct dislike for anything addictive. Don't drink or smoke.
I do write poetry from time to time and was a semi professional rave dj for a bit.
I wouldn't class my self as any great shakes at meditating. I can do it, but its more like flossing my teeth.
Never had any particular emotional issues. I know what I like and how to express it. Sad when I'm sad, happy when I'm happy. Cool in the clutch and passionate with my love.
I tend to enjoy balance. A well grounded mystic. A pragmatic philosopher. A rational artist.
Not given to melancholy. I've had countless starry eye waifs tell me how they hope they can party like me when their my age and I'm the person people turn to during a crisis. So I can cut loose or take charge.
I've always had a good feel for who I am and what I can do. I've done my share of pushing that too. No real inner demons.
I can and do work hard when there is need but at heart I'm the laid back type and can just sit around doing nothing like a pro.
But you did get the look younger part. Changeling and I both look and act at least 10 years younger than we are. Good genetics and riotous living.
Currently I do corporate server support, before that a unix sys admin, been semi professional student, same for rave DJ and a paratrooper/French commando.
So far I would put the analysis at below expected. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Sun, July 12, 2009 - 11:57 PM
Paul don't believe them - you are right on! ;-)
you should show them how you did it, Astrology is a language - line by line
I've noticed his Saturn and Jupiter on the Asc and in Capricorn, wow, and changeling is a sun Cap also (and why she came to defend him- so what do you expect them to say - it all starting to make sense now - wait till they get a load of me (pun not intended), ha-ha
now i know me and Swarms connections, and I got Jupiter in Cancer and Cap moon...
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 1:39 AM"you should show them how you did it, Astrology is a language - line by line "
lol I think it would bore them to tears tho!
"ait till they get a load of me (pun not intended), ha-ha"
LMAO what a lovely visual image that generates
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 1:38 AM"So far I would put the analysis at below expected. "
Thanks for the feeback.
I'm quite surprised by some of it I have to say. You're not the first person whose chart I've read having known nothing about them, and it seems you're probably the one I've gotten most wrong. particularly it seems your Moon-Neptune opposition hasn't played out in your life at all.
What was your Mum like might I ask?
"I've always had a distinct dislike for anything addictive. Don't drink or smoke. "
Perhaps I should have paid more attention to the Saturn conjunct Ascendant.
"Currently I do corporate server support, before that a unix sys admin, been semi professional student, same for rave DJ and a paratrooper/French commando. "
I can actually kinda see the paratrooper bit in the Sun-Pluto opposition. Have to say I was thinking along the lines of public servant or carer, but that seemed to clash with the 'logic needing' side so wondered about therapist or psychologist. Have you ever considered these professions?
I suppose that friends come to you for advice satisfies your need to offer emotional support whilst hte unix admin satisfies your 'logic' side...
I think you'd make a good cook or gardener too, but that's a little random. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 4:38 AMMom was great. She got her electrical engineering degree back when few women even went to college. She was the first woman in her dept at her university. Developed a circuit still used in a lot of elevators, worked on an early nuclear power plant and was working in aerospace when she met my dad. She was a sr. engineer and he was a jr programmer. :) Decided to be a full time mom after that. Raised us 4 kids and innumerable cats, dogs and stray wildlife.
Despite having grown up in the 30's and 40's and raising us in SE Texas in the 60's and 70's, Mom never put up with any racist crap. I never even knew Texas had been segregated until I studied race issues in school. But looking back I can see what it meant for her to be driving over to the next town so the black girls there could have some one coach their soccer team.
She wasn't afraid to stand up to the man either if she felt they were doing you wrong. I'm sure our principles cringed if they saw her coming with a full head of steam.
Life master bridge player. Coached many an underdog winning soccer team and really enjoyed Texas.
Alas she died suddenly last year at age 80.
Pa: Have you ever considered these professions?
I've studied a fair amount of psychology, cognitive science and philosophy, but as a field psychology is insane.
I make a great cook, but I suck at gardening. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 4:46 AMSwarm
You're black or mixed race then?
Your mum sounds amazing! I'm sorry she passed away.
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 1:41 AM"same for rave DJ "
Have you ever learned to play an instrument?
I think you'd love playing an instrument. Doesn't matter what one, choose one you like and learn to play it. Don't have to be great at it, but I think you'd really suit it. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 1:58 AM"ait till they get a load of me (pun not intended), ha-ha"
yeah it was supposed to sound like the Joker in Batman - not any else -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 2:01 AM"yeah it was supposed to sound like the Joker in Batman - not any else "
OH...my mind is pure filth
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 4:12 AMpa: Have you ever learned to play an instrument?
I've taken a stab a keyboards, piano, guitar and violin - nothing ever came of any of it. Don't seem to have the temperament.
DJing was fun until I tried to make a living at it. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 9:28 AM
Grim, I want to do your chart post it in your photo section or send me your birth information; time, date, location, etc
IIRC:
Sun: Sagittarius
Moon: Capricorn
Ascendent: Libra -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 11:37 AMEh, how wrong these are is always amusing, but then I wouldn't put it past you to twist things from what you know - or can find out - about me along with your assumptions.
Dec 5th 1975, approx 3-3.30am, Winchester. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 11:52 AMGrim
I've posted your chart up onto my pics. Can you retrieve it from there and save it to your pics. Otherwise people will think that its my chart.
people.tribe.net/d86a9803-...4882a3de47
I've assumed that Winchester is in California. Turns out there's a LOT of winchesters. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 12:13 PMIt's in the UK. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Mon, July 13, 2009 - 12:31 PMThanks Grim
I've updated the information and the correct chart can be found here:
people.tribe.net/d86a9803-...3c4713d70d -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 11:22 AM
doing Grim's chart is going to be fun - I can't wait
I thought about what you said Grim, as far as giving you a few charts to choose from ...i'll come up with something
check out his Pluto opposite Jupiter (12th and 6th house) and also his Mars in the 9th house gemini
He has T-Square with Moon, Pluto, and Jupiter, with the absence of the of a planet in the 9th house (higher learning, religion, spirituality)
I'll explain later ...I love it when astrology does that ;-P
Planet keywords
lessons.astrology.com/course/...Keywords
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 11:47 AMWhy are you wasting your time to try to convince Grim or Swarm about astrology...whats the point...there are plenty of people out there that don't need to be influenced.....If I would have read this site first I would have never attempted to read Swarms.....as for Grim (nothing personal or judgemental meant) but if he truly understood Astrology and the moon in Taurus which Swarm has...he would know that there would be no way in which you could alter what Swarm believes...Moon in Taurus is Obsinate...you can't push a bull....there to fixed....or stuck. -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 11:53 AM"...he would know that there would be no way in which you could alter what Swarm believes...Moon in Taurus is Obsinate...you can't push a bull....there to fixed....or stuck."
Wow, wrong again. I have seen Swarm completely change his views on a subject when new or different information came to light. He is far from dogmatic, and will follow the facts wherever they lead, even if it is in a different direction from his previous views. He has changed his behavior more than once just because I asked him to. Swarm is extremely flexible.
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 12:44 PMMaybe for you....but not once did Swarm ask anyone to elaborate on any statements made on the other thread...not once....the reason is that he simply doesn't believe what we are doing....NOT ONCE....
--He has changed his behavior more than once just because I asked him to---
You asked him to.....that kind of sets my mind at ease....I was on this site a few yrs back....I believe what I believe and you are the same...I found that Swarm was not as flexible as you might believe....I got to a point that I left because of the condescending attitudes of certain people (not swarm) that were Athiest and wouldn't accept certain points that were made....I am not religious...I do not believe in religion...I don't need religion....but constantly the mindless dweebs that continually hack out the same shit constantly without getting deeper into what was being posted....thats why I left...this place has not changed....I came back because I felt that maybe now there could be disscusions on here that might allow some people there point of view.....Now I got no beef with Swarm, but I know that its not easy to change his opinion, its set, hes practical, now that does not mean hes not compassionate or caring...its just that its hard to really penetrate the Moon Sign Taurus....my ex had the same and shes my Ex....I've done over a 1000 charts in 35 yrs and have run into this constantly....it matters not to me....but I will tell you something....they do phone back and say "how did you know that".....now I notice that this guy Dan keeps getting bleeped out...gone...why...whats the point...this is a disscusion group....but you have taken it upon yourself to moderate...WHAT YOU WANT...ha.....I'm finding you a little obstinate too...
--Wow, wrong again. I have seen Swarm completely change his views on a subject when new or different information came to light.--
I'm sure he can....as long as that information is understandable by him...he doesn't understand Astrology, so what light is being lite here...Astrology is not the Newspaper shit...
Tyco Brahe served the Danish Court
Galileo served the deMedici Family in Italy
Johannes Kepler served the Habsburg Court
Queen Elizabeth 1 of England had John Dee
William Lilley advised both Oliver Cromwell and King Charles 1 during the Civil War
Capernicus
Carl Jung
I'm sure you know some of those fellows.
the list can go on if you like but the point is that some of these people added to science and were the Astrologers to some very infulential people that ran Countries and Empires....
Queen Eliz. 2nd
JP Morgan
Regan
Churchhill
General Patton
and so on ...had astrologers....need I say more....and who doesn't, those who have no idea of what the craft of Astrology is...
To me thats being Obstinate....you would be stunned at who and how many successfull people use astrology...just stunned...like I said I have done over a thousand charts in 35yrs....after 35yrs you'd think that at some time I would see the hoax....no...I have seen it happen all the time...the only people who believe its a hoax are those who are experts on what little they know.....if you don't understand it, why have an opinion on it...ask any astrologer to elaborate what hes doning and I am sure they would love to answer that question...
I have studied Astrology....you have not...Astrology is an extremely complacted system of Angles, co-related to degrees, to different energy fields of the heavens (its all energy now isn't it, even you) and influences from planets...over 144,000 different combinations. Most people cannot comprehend that kind of understanding.... -
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:21 AMBrian: "....the reason is that he simply doesn't believe what we are doing...."
If you are actually "doing" something, you should be able to show that it works. Please do so.
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:36 AMbr: but not once did Swarm ask anyone to elaborate on any statements made on the other thread...not once....the reason is that he simply doesn't believe what we are doing....NOT ONCE....
I am sensing a disturbance in the force...it’s as if an elaborator full of billions of elaborations had them all cry out at once and then were silenced...I fear something terrible hasn't happened. - OWK
The statements didn't seem to be anything I was interested in exploring further than I did. But if I'm really that fascinating a subject, by all means knock yourself out. Is there something in particular you want to go on about or should I just pick something?
===
On the topic of Dan, Dan was banned from the group from before changeling was mod (and banned again, and again...) and his original account was revoked for his behavior over in heated debates. He periodically creates new accounts and comes back to harass people. He's basically a Phelps style fundy or just a troll who pretends to be a xtian (I lean towards the later). Either way he lost his right to post here and anything he puts up is going to be deleted.
We both know how disruptive this is, but after much deliberation this is the lesser of two evils.
===
Ok, so back on the topic at hand.
On being obstinate you need to bear in mind that I'm looking for interesting conversations and frankly easy agreement is boring. This is why you rarely ever see changeling and me get into any discussions here with each other. Wow changeling, you are so right. Gee swarm, that's a brilliant point. Etc.
But luckily not only are you equally obstinate, you are blindingly mistaken as well which makes for plenty of discussion fodder. :P
While it’s true that back in the days when people thought bleeding was good for about every ailment, astronomers had to make a living doing astrology for rich superstitious people. It is also true that superstitious people can become famous and still function in society in spite of their rational handicap.
But if you look at that list you don't see any modern astronomers, just like if you go to the doctor for a headache he doesn't bleed you. The field has moved on and the astrology bits didn't make the cut.
There has been a lot of effort put into finding the least possible shred of evidence for astrology and so far I'm not aware of any success. But I'm willing to give you a shot at convincing me as long as you don't mind I'm not easily convinced. So far I've seem lots of misses dismissed, plenty of rhetorical tricks, and nothing to make me think you've any special insight into my personality from any of this. Now before you get into a snit, I do think you believe in your position and aren't trying to do anything underhanded.
You don't see the hoax because you've bought into the system and are very selective about what you allow.
Any negative feedback is treated as the person being confused, obstinate, or just wait and see. Even the vaguest confirmation is taken as a hit and the wording is so vague or is set to cover all possibilities, so that almost anything will fit.
You should at least familiarize yourself with "artfully vague," "cherry picking," "false choice," "false dilemma" "self fulfilling and self denying prophecies," "confirmation bias," and "cold reading."
Either you'll become disillusioned or you'll make better charts than ever. ;)
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter In Aquarius-End Of $-Currency Of Light
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 1:52 PM
Brian, I know what you mean, I'm not trying to get them to believe or convinced... it's will be evident, by the time this thread ends
they're the ones who are going to be looking silly, it will be evident for all to see, of how much they are in denial, and as far as Swarms Moon being in Taurus, ha-ha is no comparison for my sun in Taurus,
the secret to Taurus is not using force against, you can't win, you have to Coax them out with Baby Talk ;-P
"Hey snuckims"
It's like a little baby ..."you need to eat lunch" No! you need to eat something No! ok then you can't have any food , No! then they eat
classic Taurus fashion,
devour them with LOVE, hugs, and kisses, and baby talk ... and they will be like putty ...then the'll go, well maybe i have been at times ....
I mean if it wasn't true why would they be defending it so much ... we all know swarm -
-
Re: Jupiter
Wed, July 15, 2009 - 2:01 PM"they're the ones who are going to be looking silly, it will be evident for all to see, of how much they are in denial..."
Why wait? If you have some actual knowledge or insight, present it.
-
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 12:43 AM"Why wait? If you have some actual knowledge or insight, present it. "
You wouldn't teach Calculus to a child who hasn't yet learned to do long multiplication. Sometimes insight and knowledge requires previous knowledge and insight into a subject before it can be made sense of. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:14 AMPaul: "You wouldn't teach Calculus to a child who hasn't yet learned to do long multiplication."
Maybe not, but if he asked me to show him calculus, I could show it to him. I could open up the book and show him the equations.
I certainly wouldn't pull a big song and dance about how it exists, and *I* get it, but there's no point in letting him see it because he just can't handle it. If he wanted to see it anyway, he could. I would be honored to share it with him.
Forget your preconceived notions about what you think I am or am not ready for. Just present the "knowledge and insight," if it exists.
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:28 AM"Maybe not, but if he asked me to show him calculus, I could show it to him. I could open up the book and show him the equations."
In which case nobody is preventing you from clicking on the link to Swarm's natal chart. I'm presuming it will make as much sense to you as a calculus book would to a child.
"Forget your preconceived notions about what you think I am or am not ready for. Just present the "knowledge and insight," if it exists. "
My only preconceived 'notion' is that you are not well versed in astrology. This remains to be true, it is a fact, it is not a 'notion'. I have no other preconceived ideas and I was just elaborating on the point he made in an effort to allow you to understand the potentitals of where he may be coming from. There's great subtlety to astrology. On the one hand complaints are made when too much detail is presented, on the other when not enough is. It's a catch 22 situation. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:47 AMPaul: "My only preconceived 'notion' is that you are not well versed in astrology. "
Who cares? If you actually have any knowledge or insight, just say it.
Paul: "This remains to be true, it is a fact, it is not a 'notion'."
How were you able to determine this "fact" about what I know?
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:53 AM"Who cares? If you actually have any knowledge or insight, just say it. "
Well I've already said what I care to say on Swarm's chart. Others have elaborated on more only to be rebuked for going into too much detail, others for not going into enough. Insight cannot be 'said' it can only be understood. I think the point is that if you're not prepared for it it won't make sense. Good seeds only take root in fertile soil. I would suggest that small steps are needed at first to understand some of the more simple. It seems you don't agree with the simple so there's hardly any point in going further with it - that's my opinion of it. Brian and GStar may disagree.
If something else suggests itself to me from Swarm's chart I might post it, but I've said the basics of what I meant to say. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:36 AMPaul: "Well I've already said what I care to say on Swarm's chart."
How do you figure that what you described about Swarm counts as insight or knowledge, since it isn't accurate?
Paul: "Anyone well versed in astrology wouldn't need to ask this question."
If you are saying there is no variation in how astrologers derive their readings, I think you are mistaken. Most astrologers are still using the zodiac based on the ecliptic and vernal equinox point, but some believe it should be based on the Celestial Equator. For all I know, you regularly draw from Astrogeography. It was a request for clarification.
Paul: "Changeling, are you well versed in Astrology?"
I am passingly familiar with it. However it is not my lack of astrological experience that made Swarm's "reading" inaccurate. It's inaccurate because the descriptions of "him" don't match how he actually is.
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:40 AM"I am passingly familiar with it. "
In which case I take it back. Apologies.
What are your thoughts about my sun's ray?
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:45 AM"What are your thoughts about..."
First things first. How do you figure your information about Swarm passes for "insights and knowledge" when it's wrong?
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:47 AM"First things first. How do you figure your information about Swarm passes for "insights and knowledge" when it's wrong? "
I can only assume you haven't read my answers yet Changeling. I have answered this already.
Now ....about my ray.... -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:49 AMIn fact Changeling I'll make it super simple by posting it again. It was answered in two posts:
"That's actually a really interesting question Changeling, if even by accident. It's interesting because how do we EVER know we have ACTUALLY gained true understanding in anything? Quite a philosophical question. I don't know Changeling. I don't know that I understood the mechanisms of photosynthesis either, even tho I got my A in Biology in school. I can describe to you the process, I can even write the chemical formula - I still remember it for some reason - but do I truly understand it? Depends to what depth we describe understanding.
"Since there are so many celestial bodies at play, and all of them are always transiting something, and considering that "themes" and "timbres" are pretty subjective, how have you determined that these "transformations" are related to the position of Pluto particularly?"
Planets do not move at the same speed. Pluto 'generally' can be seen more than the othes (and this is my opinion only) can be seen to describe more accurately the transformation of mass conciousness more so than the othes. Particular events and sub-cycles of that can be seen by the other planets. Nothing is ever really the same. So when Pluto gets to the exact degree it was at when the AMerican war of independance was signed neptune might be in a different place than it was then, and uranus etc etc so its an approximation. We might not see another american war of independance, but I would suggest we will see other transformations in super powers. Perhaps a war will be necessitated before that can happen. I hope not. But war is not unusual. As normal the proof is in the pudding. We will wait and see. An astrology teacher of mine predicted in the 90s that when Pluto entered Capricorn the "spend it now and pay for it later' attitude of Sag woudl be served with a bill and the financial world might be rocked considerably. She suggested we'd see large financial collapses during hte first two years and that throughout the transit perhaps the role of the father would be changed dramatically - she even suggested that perhaps science will discover ways to replicate the role of the father in making a child. Scientists just recently discovered how to make sperm from a woman's egg. It's all very interesting - are you looking for proof? I don't have it. Just observe - the proof is in the pudding I say. So far I've done that to the best of my ability and have been satisfied wit my observations. We dont' know everything yet but we're slowly getting there.
and
"Perhaps Swarm's time is wrong. Perhaps astrology is a load of rubbish. Perhaps I'm not a good enough astrologer. perhaps when I'm 45 I'll have a greater understanding of astrology."" -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:53 AM"First things first. How do you figure your information about Swarm passes for "insights and knowledge" when it's wrong? "
If that doesn't help you I'll try a third time (which is how many times you've asked the question now).
Swarm's time may be wrong. Swarm has freewill not shown in the chart. If he has lived under the pscyhological control and dominion of someone else his sunsign will never unfold for him - it is an unlikely proposition, but a valid one all the same. More likely is that I am a rubbish astrologer or we do not have all the facts at hand.
However I have, with other charts, not swarms, been more accurate - even with other sceptics btw - and have found it quite insightful. The same is true for palm reading and to a lesser extent tarot. But I would also include psychology, body language and certain psychosynthesis methods also useful. They're all tools. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:55 AMto clarify again, although I have gotten swarm's chart wrong, swarm's chart isn't hte only one I've ever done and I've found insight in the other charts Ive done. Mostly I've found insight by studying my own. Particularly my closest aspect - pluto-venus - which gstar mentioned and also my grandtrine
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 9:53 AMpa: If he has lived under the pscyhological control and dominion of someone
Nope. That sort of thing isn't my cup of tea.
pa: More likely is that I am a rubbish astrologer or we do not have all the facts at hand.
Or astrology is rubbish. We have what supposedly is needed, birth date down to the minute and location by lat and lon.
You other skeptics may not be as familiar with this style of language use. It can seem like it is saying quite a bit and directly about you, until you actually analyze it and find it isn't actually saying anything and is doing so in ways the fit any circumstance and person.
pa: certain psychosynthesis methods also useful.
You are into photosynthesis? Now that's cool. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 10:02 AM"You are into photosynthesis"
Yup I produce my own food and it makes others green with envy!
PSYCHOsynthesis is also cool :p
-
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:07 AMPaul: "It's interesting because how do we EVER know we have ACTUALLY gained true understanding in anything?"
For one, you can check. You verify. You confirm.
For two, you can tell when you are able to *do* things with the information, like making things that work.
Nothing in astrology can be verified. Nothing in astrology can be used to make anything that works. So, starting with the premise that there is anything real there is quite a presumption.
Then, continuously stating that you have "knowledge" and "insight", and that we are just too stupid or ignorant to understand it, is extremely presumptuous, and pretty rude. In fact, comparing us to five year olds trying to comprehend calculus, while setting yourself up as someone who "gets it," is pretty fucking ridiculous, since your "knowledge" and "insight" can't be verified, doesn't produce anything and upon examination dissolves under its own vagueness and inaccuracy.
Paul: "Perhaps Swarm's time is wrong. Perhaps astrology is a load of rubbish. Perhaps I'm not a good enough astrologer. perhaps when I'm 45 I'll have a greater understanding of astrology."
If any of that is even possible then I sure wonder why you go around making prognostications.
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:15 AM"For one, you can check. You verify. You confirm. "
You can do those things for knowledge certainly, but can we do those things for understanding? There are always other levels to understanding also...
"For two, you can tell when you are able to *do* things with the information, like making things that work. "
Again that is true of knowledge, not understanding. I don't have to be able to understand the peculiarities of Gravity in order to lie down. I can have no understanding of gravity but still not fly out into space. I have absolutely no idea whatsoever about how a car works, however I can still drive one. I'm using these as simple metaphors. Understanding is a completley different thing to knowledge.
"Nothing in astrology can be verified."
Isn't that the same as all theoretical fields such as psychology. I could even suggest that Darwin's theory hasn't been 'verified' it has simply been accepted as the best theory around. Some other theory may come along and blow it out of the water.
"Nothing in astrology can be used to make anything that works."
Same as psychology again then.
Perhaps I've miscommunicated my intention. It was never my intention to prove astrology. Simply to use it. I clearly believe that insight can be gained from it. I am not suggesting that this is true for everyone of course. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:33 AMPaul: "You can do those things for knowledge certainly, but can we do those things for understanding?"
There is no evidence that you actually "understand" anything in particular, that's the point. You can demonstrate your understanding of how to drive a car by doing it. Your demonstration that you "understand" astrology failed to produce noticeable understanding.
Paul: "Same as psychology again then."
Whatever, I would not necessarily hold "psychology" up as an example of real "knowledge" or "insight" either.
Paul: "It was never my intention to prove astrology. Simply to use it."
Well, I certainly wouldn't want a doctor or a car mechanic who claims they don't even know if what they are doing works, or that for all they know they might be lousy at it, so maybe I should come back when they are 45.
Why are you offering up this "information" as legitimate information, and claiming that the problem is that we are like five year olds trying to understand calculus, when you yourself don't know if it is?
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:40 AM"There is no evidence that you actually "understand" anything in particular, that's the point. You can demonstrate your understanding of how to drive a car by doing it. Your demonstration that you "understand" astrology failed to produce noticeable understanding. "
I disagree. By driving a car I am not displaying understanding of cars or of driving. I am displaying ability to apply knowledge of driving. I may have understood something intrinsic about driving or about cars in the process, but at its minimum you dont need any understanding of 'driving' to be able to drive. you simply need knowledge and the ability to apply that knowledge. A robot could do it, and robots understand nothing, they simply work off of things that they 'know'.
"Whatever, I would not necessarily hold "psychology" up as an example of real "knowledge" or "insight" either. "
I understand that, but I would, therefore our understandings of insight are likely to be different.
"Well, I certainly wouldn't want a doctor or a car mechanic who claims they don't even know if what they are doing works, or that for all they know they might be lousy at it, so maybe I should come back when they are 45."
phew luckily I'm a web developer then, not an astrologer. Unlike medicnine and mechanics however, astrology is a theory. I am still learning it. You wouldn't go to a trainee mechanic, and so too you wouldn't go to a trainee astrologer, which is what I am.
"Why are you offering up this "information" as legitimate information, and claiming that the problem is that we are like five year olds trying to understand calculus, when you yourself don't know if it is? "
I haven't offered anything as legitimate. I fail to see how you would read this into what I've said. I've gone out of my way to say the very opposite. It is a theory, one that I like and find insightful. Nobody is suggesting that you have to find it insightful.
"we are like five year olds trying to understand calculus, when you yourself don't know if it is?"
LOL that calculus analogy was in relation to seeking greater knowledge of something when simple knowledge of the subject was either beyond you or you disagreed with it. That was all.
-
-
Re: Randi
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:56 AM
Paul: "You wouldn't go to a trainee mechanic, and so too you wouldn't go to a trainee astrologer, which is what I am."
This is silly. A real doctor knows real medicine that can cure people. A real mechanic knows real things about cars and can repair them. There is no evidence that a real astrologer knows any more about this than you do. A real astrologer cannot fix or produce anything either.
There is no evidence that Pluto caused the American Revolution, or was discovered at that particular time so as to presage the onset of Nazism, or that similar things happen every time it comes by. There is no mechanism by which the causal relationship can be drawn. Astrological readings are vague and you could get as much "insight" reading someone else's horoscope, as long as you thought it was yours.
James Randi on Astrology
www.youtube.com/watch
Paul: "I disagree. By driving a car I am not displaying understanding of cars or of driving."
You are the one saying that don't have knowledge, you have "understanding." What are you saying that you do understand?
-
-
Re: Randi
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:07 AM"This is silly. A real doctor knows real medicine that can cure people. A real mechanic knows real things about cars and can repair them. There is no evidence that a real astrologer knows any more about this than you do. A real astrologer cannot fix or produce anything either. "
I agree that it is silly. But I remind you that it was not my analogy but yours. If you want to compare scientific fact with theoretical philsophies then this is the result. I don't mean this in any insulting way but if you ask a silly question you get a silly answer. I'm sorry if that sounds harsh.
"There is no evidence that Pluto caused the American Revolution, or was discovered at that particular time so as to presage the onset of Nazism, or that similar things happen every time it comes by."
i don't recall ever suggesting anything about evidence. Once again I assume you've not actually read my previous posts wherein I go out of my way to suggest just the very opposite. Also I dont' at all believe that Pluto CAUSES the American Revolution, that would be ludicrous, rather it is an example of synchronicity.
"James Randi on Astrology "
I can't check youtube at the moment, but I am familiar with his thoughts on astrology. Shall I link you to youtube of an astrologer's viewpoint? Would it matter?
"You are the one saying that don't have knowledge, you have "understanding." What are you saying that you do understand? "
I derive understanding from astrology - understanding about myself primarily and others secondarily and insights into outer events lastly. I've already offered this example in my previous posts - remember, the venus-pluto opposition etc etc. astrology has been quite useful in allowing further insight into this aspect of my psyche - but there are other tools which I have also employed. Astrology is just one. Just like you wouldn't just use a hammer to create a set of shelves and hang them, there are other tools that are needed and employed according to their use. Astrology is one tool, psychology another. I accept you dont' really value either of them highly but I do. Nobody is asking you to value them, that's your prerogative.
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:25 AM
Paul: "I agree that it is silly. But I remind you that it was not my analogy but yours."
You are ignoring the point, which is that your claim that you are just a novice implies that a professional would understand it better. However there is no reason to think that they do.
Paul: "I can't check youtube at the moment, but I am familiar with his thoughts on astrology."
It's not "his thoughts," it's a demonstration.
Paul: "i don't recall ever suggesting anything about evidence. Once again I assume you've not actually read my previous posts wherein I go out of my way to suggest just the very opposite."
I must have missed that one. Are you saying there is evidence showing that what you think is NOT true?
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:35 AM"However there is no reason to think that they do. "
There is equally no reason to suggest that they would do worse. I am talking particularly about Swarm's chart of course.
"It's not "his thoughts," it's a demonstration. "
Ok. I won't be able to look at it tho. I might tonight (it's mid day where I am, is it not very late at night where you are?)
"I must have missed that one. Are you saying there is evidence showing that what you think is NOT true? "
Changling playing with semantics in this way is rather childish and you're better than that. You are aware that there are two opposite meanings to the sentance "I am suggesting evidence". The two being "I am not suggesting evidence" and "I am suggesting no evidence".
You are unintelligent and so are aware that I am referring to the former.
I am saying and have said and will continue to say that I am NOT INTERESTED in evidence. Nobody has mentioned evidence except for you. I never suggested I had any so asking for it is pointless. In fact I've said I don't have any.
I have never proclaimed any evidence nor do I suggest that there is any. There are certain interesting observations which may warrant further investigation which at some point might demonstrate an applicable scientific theory, but it's not my interest and I've never suggested otherwise.
so with that in mind, stating that "There is no evidence that Pluto caused the American Revolution" is correct. I have never said otherwise so I'm not sure what you are saying. it would be like me saying "There is no convincing evidence for Higgs Boson". It would be a correct statement but when used whilst contradicting someone elses statement it makes it out that the other person has suggested otherwise.
I think I've clarified this point enough but to summarise - I've not mentioned evidence. I have none and I've never suggested anything differently. -
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:37 AM"You are unintelligent and so are aware that I am referring to the former. "
Correction!
Should read "You are NOT unintelligent...."
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:43 AMPaul: "I am saying and have said and will continue to say that I am NOT INTERESTED in evidence. "
Then how can you check to be sure you are not delusional?
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 4:50 AM"Then how can you check to be sure you are not delusional? "
I am interested in observation and patterns which I deem to be such that they represent something substantial. I should really have detailed that sentance more. I meant I am not interested in evidence when in relation to matters pertaining to theoretical philosophy. I think thats an important difference and one I should have really appended!!
If I were to take the attitude that I ignore all things that science has not proven (in order to ascertain reality and distinguish it from delusion) then I would be leading a rather poor life.
I would not have any basis for my emotional outlets - there is no evidence for love, simply chemcial reactions for example - and it would deny me many things that do exist in nature and reality just because mankind hasn't found it yet. I would be left with no insight into the nature of the universe because things like Higgs Boson (which I don't disbelieve in in reality) has not been proven, the big bang has not been proven etc etc etc. There is circumstantial evidence, there are great theories that make sense and have not been disproven but there are many many many things that have not been proven but most of us believe in - like the theory of evolution again. Lots of circumstantial evidence points to it, but until we actually physically observe evolution occuring it HAS to remain a theory. It is a theory I currently believe but if we take the argument tthat we dismiss all things that have no evidence then we must dismiss this as well.
I am someone who considers himself open minded. I do not disbelieve something simply because I do not understand HOW that something would occur. I would rather see if it does occur and work from there. I have seen that there is 'something' to astrology and so will use it as a tool as appropriate. -
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 5:13 AMPaul: "I am interested in observation and patterns which I deem to be such that they represent something substantial."
If there was anything more to it than your "deeming," there would be evidence. Your deeming appears to be wrong.
Paul: "I would not have any basis for my emotional outlets - there is no evidence for love, simply chemcial reactions for example -"
Ah yes, the time-worn assertion that there is no evidence for love. That is ridiculous, love has plenty of behavioral and physical evidence.
Paul: " - and it would deny me many things that do exist in nature and reality just because mankind hasn't found it yet."
What does this mean? What is an example of something you have access to that "mankind hasn't found yet"?
"...the big bang has not been proven etc etc etc."
Nothing in science is ever "proven." However there is a ton of evidence for the big bang. Great big phenomenal gobs of it. It is extremely well supported by evidence. Doesn't astrology include any facts about space?
Paul: "...there are great theories that make sense and have not been disproven ..."
If they are great theories they are supported by evidence.
Paul: "...like the theory of evolution again. Lots of circumstantial evidence points to it, but until we actually physically observe evolution occuring it HAS to remain a theory."
So what? It is a theory that is supported by gigantic mountains of physical evidence and has extremely reliable predictive ability and has been consistently verified by a wide range of disciplines from paleontology to genetics. There is a reason to think it holds water.
Paul: "It is a theory I currently believe but if we take the argument tthat we dismiss all things that have no evidence then we must dismiss this as well."
This is painful. There are mountains of evidence which support evolution. Not none. Where are you getting this "no evidence for evolution" thing?
Are you seriously putting astrology on the table with the big bang and evolution?
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 5:21 AM"If there was anything more to it than your "deeming," there would be evidence. Your deeming appears to be wrong. "
As does the deeming of Darwin and whoever theorised string theory etc etc. Once again with the fascination for evidence.
"That is ridiculous, love has plenty of behavioral and physical evidence. "
No. There is evidence toward the reality that chemical changes occur. There is no evidence for love as a concept. When you snuggle up to Swarm at night do you suggest to him that your seratonin and oxytocin levels are modified, or do you say I love you.
"What does this mean? What is an example of something you have access to that "mankind hasn't found yet"? "
Think this through Changeling. Are you asking me to give you an example of something that manking hasn't found yet? Do you perhaps think that mankind has discovered everything in the universe?
"If they are great theories they are supported by evidence. "
Show me the concrete empiricial EVIDENCE for Higgs Boson.
"So what? It is a theory that is supported by gigantic mountains of physical evidence and has extremely reliable predictive ability and has been consistently verified by a wide range of disciplines from paleontology to genetics. There is a reason to think it holds water. "
Yup and not once proven.
"Are you seriously putting astrology on the table with the big bang and evolution? "
Yes I am. I suggesting that there are many things that are there that mankind hasn't YET fully explained or proven. I think astrology and palmistry are two examples of this (yup I'm going there).
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 5:23 AMChangeling
Can I ask something?
(still waiting for your consideration about my ray when you're ready or able)
Do you only do things that remain safely within the confines of scientific proof? I should say CURRENT proof. -
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 5:40 AMPaul: "Do you only do things that remain safely within the confines of scientific proof?"
What do you mean, "do?"
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 5:36 AMPaul: "As does the deeming of Darwin..."
The deeming of Darwin does not appear to be wrong. Big difference.
Paul: "There is evidence toward the reality that chemical changes occur."
There is evidence of love in loving behavior and if you don't realize this I'm very sorry. Perhaps you need better romantic partners.
Paul: "Are you asking me to give you an example of something that manking hasn't found yet?"
Read the words. I am asking you to give me an example of something YOU HAVE ACCESS TO that mankind has not found yet. You said you didn't want to deny yourself those many things that do exist in nature and in reality that mankind hasn't found yet. Like what?
Paul: "Do you perhaps think that mankind has discovered everything in the universe?"
No, but if mankind hasn't discovered it I don't know how you can think you have.
Paul: "Show me the concrete empiricial EVIDENCE for Higgs Boson. "
Who cares? I am not making any claims about Higgs Boson. You are making claims about astrology.
Paul: "Yup and not once proven."
Who cares? Nothing in science is proven. But, it actually works. Astrology doesn't. BIG difference.
Paul: "I suggesting that there are many things that are there that mankind hasn't YET fully explained or proven."
Mankind hasn't fully explained or proven anything. However that doesn't make just any little idea you happen to be fond of just as likely to be accurate as evolution.
Just about every scientific examination of evolution has produced mountains of evidence that it is a good, working theory. Every scientific examination of astrology has shown that it is bunk. How do you figure they are comparable?
-
-
Re:
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 5:51 AM"There is evidence of love in loving behavior and if you don't realize this I'm very sorry. Perhaps you need better romantic partners. "
Show me the scientifically corroborated proof of love then. And whatever scientific journals where I can learn more information about it if you have it.
"Who cares? I am not making any claims about Higgs Boson. You are making claims about astrology. "
the only person who cares is the person who cares for evidence and it's not me. Perhaps you can't understand that.
"No, but if mankind hasn't discovered it I don't know how you can think you have."
I should have said proven really. Also I never said that I had.
"Who cares? Nothing in science is proven. But, it actually works. Astrology doesn't. BIG difference"
So does astrology by your own words who cares it's proven? Science isn't!
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 7:10 AMPaul: "Show me the scientifically corroborated proof of love then."
The scientifically corroborated proof of love consists of blood tests which show oxytocin levels and MRIs which show the parts of the brain which are stimulated. Yes, it is related to chemicals. How do you figure that doesn't qualify as evidence of love? We call those chemicals "love" when we feel them. Are you going to claim that we should not refer to that feeling as love? Does the presence of neurochemicals negate the term?
Here are some examinations of the neurobiology of love:
The Science of Love - serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/2407
Love: More Complicated than Chemistry - serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/2306
A BioChemical Approach to Love - serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/3900
The Neurobiology of Love - www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15990719
There are about a billion more, just google it.
Science certainly does not doubt the existence of love. Is there anyone besides you who does?
Paul: "the only person who cares is the person who cares for evidence and it's not me."
If you do not see the importance of evidence you will face a life of delusion, but that's your problem. The problem for everyone else is when you act like your delusion is real, and claim it constitutes "understanding." If you want to claim that you understand something and others don't, you have to demonstrate your understanding and back it up with evidence. If you can't, then your claim that you "understand" is empty.
Paul: "So does astrology by your own words who cares it's proven? Science isn't!"
I never said astrology could be "proven" or needs to be. I said if it was real there would be evidence. However there isn't. It appears to be bunk. It doesn't predict or create anything that works. Science predicts things and creates things that work. BIG difference.
What I care about is "believers" treating "non-believers" like you understand something they don't. You don't have the facts on your side to take that position.
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 7:36 AM"Is there anyone besides you who does? "
Please don't put words in my mouth. I'm still waiting on your intrepretation of my ray which is of course relevant.
". How do you figure that doesn't qualify as evidence of love?"
Because all that it proves is chemicals. Let me ask another way to make it really simple. Is there anything more to love than chemicals? I don't want any links, I want YOUR interpretation of them.
"The problem for everyone else is when you act like your delusion is real, and claim it constitutes "understanding.""
Why?
"you have to demonstrate your understanding and back it up with evidence"
I actually don't.
"What I care about is "believers" treating "non-believers" like you understand something they don't. You don't have the facts on your side to take that position."
Well I do, I understand astrological symbolism for a start. Whether that symbolism relates to anything is a different matter. I believe it does. I would not treat anyone differently tho, so that bias appears to be your own or at the very least doesn't apply to me.
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 11:39 AMPaul: "I'm still waiting on your intrepretation of my ray which is of course relevant."
I don't do readings, sorry. I packed up my astrolabe a long time ago. If there is significance there just explain it.
Paul: "Because all that it proves is chemicals."
They are not separate. We call those chemicals love when we feel them.
Paul: "Is there anything more to love than chemicals?"
This is like saying, is there anything more to food than nutrition? Sense experience of anticipation, aroma, taste and satiation are all a part of food too...some might say the greater part. Unless you would suggest that there is no way to prove cuisine exists, your argument that real things, like love, can exist without evidence, is very weak. Real things like cuisine and love have real components that can be observed and constitute evidence.
Paul: "I don't want any links, I want YOUR interpretation of them. "
How lucky for you, I recently wrote something to that effect in another discussion. The topic was slightly different but the spirit is similar - I'll paste it here so you can check it out.
============================================
Ellie: "Changeling, do you love your daughter? Can u prove it to me?"
First of all, love is a naturally occurring human emotion that exists within and between us as humans, not a magical (insert your faith belief here). The two are not equivalent, or even on the same order of magnitude.
Second of all, yes I love my little girl dearly and I would be happy to attempt to demonstrate it.
I could describe to you the fact that I nursed my baby in my arms and cuddled her and kept her clean and dried her tears and ran to her whenever she called. I could describe how I try every day to keep her safe and give her what she needs and teach her everything she must know to be strong, smart, cheerful and have a good life. I could describe how happy it makes me to see her precious little smile. I could relate to you the many times a day I tell her that I love her and the countless hugs I give her and the hundreds of times I smile at her precocious antics.
But, I suppose you could say you don't believe that...I could be lying.
So, I could get notarized statements from my husband and my family to attest to the fact that I take care of my girl and treat her lovingly and kindly and do everything to look out for her welfare and tell her I love her all the time.
But, I suppose you could say that they could just as easily be lying also.
So, I could arrange for us all to take polygraph tests and testify to these behaviors and then show you the results.
But, polygraph tests are not one-hundred-percent reliable. They can be fooled.
So, I could invite you to my house to observe how I interact with my daughter. You could see for yourself how lovingly I treat her and how my face lights up when she walks in the room. You could observe first-hand that I do, in fact, act as if I love her very, very much.
Now, at this point there would probably be enough material for, say, a custody hearing in a family court, to demonstrate, on a preponderance of the evidence, that my love for her exists in sufficient quantity to make me an adequate caregiver.
But, I suppose you could say that the normal standard of judgment our society uses on these matters is insufficient, and that just because I *act* like I love her doesn't prove that I *do* love her.
I would argue that such consistent behavior would be extremely hard to fake year after year, and that consistently loving behavior is a fairly accurate indicator of loving feelings, particularly in the total absence of contraindications. But, I suppose you could suggest that I am just a really incredible actress who could out-emote Streep and I just have everyone fooled.
So, at that point I would invite you to hook me up to an MRI and examine the centers of my brain that are activated when I think of my little girl, and show how they are consistent with brain patterns of others experiencing loving feelings. I could provide you with a blood sample to demonstrate how my oxytocin levels rise when I hold my baby girl in my arms, in a manner known to be consistent with loving feelings of a mommy for her offspring.
As far as I know, there is just no way to fake those things.
If that would still not be sufficient for you, then perhaps there isn't any way to prove it, but at least I really, really tried. At least I had something to make the case with.
If only someone could show me even a fraction of this much evidence that (insert faith belief here) exists I would certainly consider it.
============================================
Paul: "Why?"
You mean, why is it a problem for everyone when you act like your delusion is real?
One, because finding workable solutions to the world's problems based on actual reality is hard enough without people manufacturing pretend answers based on made up stuff.
Two, people who think they can just pick and choose what to believe based on what they like, without regard to whether it is real or not, can be led to believe any old crap that is dressed up to sound like what they like. They don't make good voters.
Three, very severe problems arise when the weird stuff one group believes but can't show is not the same as the weird stuff the other group believes but can't show. There is no way to determine which group is closer to reality or which belief has more merit. Unresolvable conflict is the inevitable result.
Four, it creates a very low threshold of respect for the truth. Truth matters.
Paul: "I actually don't." [have to demonstrate understanding or support it with evidence]
How convenient for you. That must be so easy! And what a time saver. However if you cared about the truth, this would matter to you.
Paul: "I would not treat anyone differently tho, so that bias appears to be your own or at the very least doesn't apply to me."
When you claim to "have" this knowledge, but then you refuse to explain it on the grounds that it would be like explaining calculus to a five year old, that seems a little biased. Why would you claim that my question about the nature of knowledge was interesting, if only by "accident"? What basis do you have to contend that my side of this discussion is not informed and yours is?
P.S. I have now been up all night and half a day with this exchange. It's been a real treat, thanks so much for being willing to discuss this with me. Even if we don't exactly agree, it's clear you are capable of discussing matters intelligently. I hope to continue later - thanks!
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 12:47 PM"P.S. I have now been up all night and half a day with this exchange. It's been a real treat, thanks so much for being willing to discuss this with me. Even if we don't exactly agree, it's clear you are capable of discussing matters intelligently. I hope to continue later - thanks! "
Can't reply fully but I agree and I want you to know I respect your opinion and resolve in this and others. I'm exaggerating to some extent wit my beliefs. Thank you for an interesting debate! -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:14 PMYou can see 'love' in an MRI scan, so you could present hard, empirical evidence of love and affection that way as well. -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 3:13 AM"You can see 'love' in an MRI scan, so you could present hard, empirical evidence of love and affection that way as well. "
You could provide evidence of the chemicals which occur but you would never understand love or learn anything about it from doing so. Love is much more than a system of chemicals flooding the brain. This is the point I was trying to establish. Simply observing the 'material' stuff will not necessarily teach us enough. We can learn a great many things of course from doing so, but I agree with the Dalai Lama when he suggests that science can only go so far. After that we need to involve personal conciousness and 'experience'. In my opinion it is at this realm that pscyhology gains its merits.
Astrology is a tool that seems to work most of the time for me. It is not a religion and I do not worship the planets. I seldom make any concrete choices (I say seldom, but I can think of none at this moment) based purely on astrology.
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 7:11 AMpa: Astrology is a tool that seems to work most of the time for me.
That is the key point. Astrology has a language which has had millennia of people who need to make a living tuning it so that people will feel like it "seems to work."
Things which actually work don't need to "seem to work" because they actually work. In fact somethings which do work are actually some what counter intuitive such that from time to time I have to haul out that thing you find annoy, proof.
Astrology is actually a semantic gold mine for language that makes things "seem to work." I've mined it from time to time for just that purpose.
But personally I find "seems to work" a poor substitute for actually works and can be proven to actually work.
Think how people feel about Madoff only "seeming to turn a profit." -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 7:18 AMswarm
you need definite answers to always be there. I am happy with subtleties. Does psychology work? Does love keep realationships together? there are many finesses and 'ifs' in the world. There are always mitigating factors.
I don't deal exclusively with materialism so I'm more comfortable thinking of abstracts and possibilities etc. Don't know whether or not yo uare. -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 10:20 AMI really don't know why people equate respect for reality with a lack of subtlety, discomfort with abstracts, etc. It's not warranted. Reality is filled with subtlety and abstraction.
-
Re: Love, etc.
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 4:39 AMDang! Changeling beat me to the punch.
Real and subtle work very well. Changeling knows what I mean with the slightest glance. ;)
pa: Does psychology work?
Used to be 30/70 but I'd say they are more 40/60 these days. Of course individual practitioners can be far better than the main herd. But psychology isn't the what I'd call hard science either. Does physics work? I'd put the more at 98/2. Does astrology work? Maybe 1/99 just from random chance, but you sure feel good about it. ;)
pa: Does love keep realationships together?
No. But it sure helps get them started and makes keeping them together a lot more enjoyable.
pa: There are always mitigating factors.
No. Not always.
pa: I don't deal exclusively with materialism so I'm more comfortable thinking of abstracts and possibilities etc.
Actually astrology does deal exclusively with a materialistic view of the universe, you just use extranious terms to discuss it and make unsupportable claims concerning it. You would have to be positing supernatural forces and entities before it becomes a non materialistic view.
Please remember that materialism is a more inclusive position than material reductionism, which is what you probably were wanting to object to.
pa: so I'm more comfortable thinking of abstracts and possibilities
I love abstracts and possibilities. I just don't confuse possible with actual.
-
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 10:20 AMPaul: "You could provide evidence of the chemicals which occur but you would never understand love or learn anything about it from doing so."
First of all, not true. Scientists have learned a lot about the biological basis for love and that is not insignificant knowledge.
Second of all, it's true there is much more to love than chemicals. To continue with the food analogy, it's similar to the idea that you cannot understand what makes spaghetti great by reading a recipe...you have to taste it. But that doesn't mean that the recipe has no utility at all. It can describe a lot about the parts and how they work together. It's a start.
Third of all, your original point was to support astrology by claiming that real things can exist without evidence. Love was your case in point, but clearly love does not exist without evidence. There is physiological evidence - the chemicals. There is behavioral evidence - loving actions.
If you still want to maintain that it is possible for something to be real with no evidence, you are going to have to pick something besides love as your example.
-
-
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 3:44 AM"If there is significance there just explain it. "
The significance is that the ray is the ray of love-wisdom and we are discussing love at the time and for me the wisdom of the stars at the same time. I appreciate you will not see it as wisdom. For me the notion of love and wisdom are synonymous, I see love and wisdom as two paths to the same thing.
I was kind of playing yesterday and exaggerating my viewpoints to try to understand your own opinions of things and at times playing devil's advocate - the calculus bit. But I guess my point remains. You need to have a good grounding in a subject in order to fully understand the complexities of the subject. That was ultimately the point I was making there. It is impossible for me to explain the more nuanced angles of astrology to someone who doesn't know the basics of it. There is no 'superiority' or 'wise guru' thing about it, it's just not in my ability. I wouldn't have really brought up the North Nodes for example as they're often so 'inner' that it is really a personal journey that cannot always be seen outside - I only elaborated to attempt to explain some of the points that GStar was making with a mind on the fact that as non-astrologers it may well sound like gobbledeegook to you.
"They don't make good voters. "
I find that a rather chilling sentiment. It doesn't take many leaps forward to reach an ideal that those who hold different belief systems to you should not be eligible for voting. I know you're not saying that, but it's not too many miles forward from what you are saying.
I'm just going to respond to some of your answers to my question asking why me believing in something you believe to be delusional is a problem...
"One, because finding workable solutions to the world's problems based on actual reality is hard enough without people manufacturing pretend answers based on made up stuff. "
Nobody is suggesting dropping Science in favour of Astrology so I'm not sure how this point is relevant. As I've tried to highlight with my analogy of astrology being like a tool, you wouldn't hammer in nails with a saw or screwdriver. Science is an important subject and one that I personally really like. I'm no scientist, but I AM very interested in science, because perhaps accidentally contrary to the persona I put forward yesterday I really am a truth seeker and a lover of science. It was one of my favorite subjects at school! However I do believe that there are 'more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in sciences philosophy' if you will.
My point yesterday was to highight that in the future science may yet prove astrology to be correct. It would be silly to dismiss it just because it hasn't YET. For me astrology is an interesting philosophy and tool that I often find insight from. There are many paths to insight, for me, this is one of them. I accept, appreciate and respect that it is not for everyone. Different strokes...
"Two, people who think they can just pick and choose what to believe based on what they like, without regard to whether it is real or not, can be led to believe any old crap that is dressed up to sound like what they like. They don't make good voters. "
But we all believe what we want based on what we like. You've based it on science. It's a very valid reason to believe in something - we (normally) have evidence that it works and it makes a LOT of sense. However I think there's more there than just science. Science tells us nothing about love, compassion, understanding, wisdom, beauty, creativity etc etc. If I base my beliefs upon the notion that 'love' is the more important thing in the universe woudl that make me a bad voter? HOw about creativity? Who decides what makes a good voter?
"Three, very severe problems arise when the weird stuff one group believes but can't show is not the same as the weird stuff the other group believes but can't show."
Incorrect. Very severe problems HAVE ARISEN true, but it is not to say that they DO ARISE, as tho it is a rule. We only hear about the ones that this weird stuff happens with. I can't imagine any way that severe problems have occurred because of my beliefs in contrast to someone elses. Of course this isn't limited to stuff like astrology either. It can be seen in racism, homosexuality, gender etc etc. It is interesting that one of the main astrology tribes (which I've recently began co-mod of) has had issues of the (frankly) ludicrous 'sun sign'-ism. Where some sunsigns crticise ALL of another sunsign as incapable of love etc. There are problems in all walks of life even amongst people with the SAME basic philosophy, astrology is no different.
"Four, it creates a very low threshold of respect for the truth. "
I disagree. I have absolutely no 'low treshold of respect' for anyone else for their beliefs. It might be true that others do, and with all respect due, it might be true of you toward astrologers and theists. How much respect do you have for them? Personally I fully respect other people's beliefs, but none of us are perfect and EVERYONE has some bias to some level. I personally have less respect for 'sheep' mentalities where people just follow the crowd just because they always have. I shouldn't of course, I shoudl respect that choice. But realistically I struggle to. You are an atheist and I respect that because it is a path you believe in and have chosen. If you had kids who grew up to be atheists simply because you are and havne't actually thought about it or cared about it or even considered it, I'd have less respect for them. The same is true for children who remain rigid like boulders to their beliefs simply because it is all they know - and normally I have found that they know little about that anyway.
"How convenient for you. That must be so easy! And what a time saver. However if you cared about the truth, this would matter to you. "
I was mock-exaggerating here again. I do care about the truth, I don't however care for proving everything I believe in to others. That was the point. Put simply I DON'T have to prove anything to other people. It is enough for me that I have proved it to myself. I only have to be responsible for myself, not others, nor do I have to teach others or explain every opinion, belief and emotion I have. It is impractical. No more than you have to 'prove' atheism to me, or that you lvoe your daughter or that you and swarm are a happy couple or that you like marmalade on your toast. You dn't have to prove these things. I don't have to prove astrology to anyone because I'm not asking anyone to use it or to believe in it.
"When you claim to "have" this knowledge, but then you refuse to explain it on the grounds that it would be like explaining calculus to a five year old, that seems a little biased. Why would you claim that my question about the nature of knowledge was interesting, if only by "accident"? What basis do you have to contend that my side of this discussion is not informed and yours is? "
I actually explained all the bits I cared to about the chart. I was actually referring to Brian who claimed to have this knowledge, if you remember that actually wasn't me - read back and see. I explained my understanding of the chart in as simple a language as I could in ways that I hoped would be understandable to anyone who didn't have any astrological knowledge. Of course there was moer I could have said, but why bother, what little I did say didn't strike many chords. The calculus example was an analogy of the fact that it is impossible to go into great detail into a subject to an audience who doesn't understand the basics of the subject - it doesn't matter what that subject. In the example of the books that swarm linked to, they teach the basics, not the details which was the point I kept making. They dont' know how to do Differential Calculus equations afterwards. I was hoping the point would be an obvious one. I also couldn't hope to explain to you the Modh Coinniollach (conditional tense in Gaelic - fiendishly tedious) without you being able to speak the basics of Gaelic. It woudl of course make no sense to you were I to suddenly slip into it.
The by accident statement was perhaps a bit catty! I meant that in making one point, you actually opened up an idea of a different point which wasn't the purpose of your original point. I didn't really mean offence by it, but threw it in to wind you up a little bit cos I was feeling a bit playful and mischievous yesterday! I really apologise if that was offensive cos in heindsight it was a bit childish!
Thanks for taking the time to keep up the conversation with me yesterday! As I've said to you before, I think it's a good thing when the moderator of any tribe contributes to threads and discussions! I think it's also important that two people with two opposing views can debate the matter and discuss the subject whilst still retaining repsect for the other person. I respect you as a 'debator' and as a poster and hope the same remains true!
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 3:44 AMomg that was such a long post. I didn't realise. Just skim through it or you'll get bored
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 10:20 AM"It doesn't take many leaps forward to reach an ideal that those who hold different belief systems to you should not be eligible for voting."
Let's not be ridiculous. Suggesting that we need more reality-based voting in my country is far from proposing disenfranchisement and frankly that's pretty petty.
You only have to look at the history of the United States for the last nine years to see what voting ideology over reality does to a country. Huge swaths of our society *believed* that Saddam had WMDs and was planning chemical attacks and was responsible for 9-11 because they chose what they WANTED to believe over what the evidence showed.
Our country has been ruined and may never recover, thanks to a lack of respect for reality. It's no coincidence that evangelical Christians were the largest block of supporters for the war. When people choose to believe what they like instead of the truth, huge disconnects from reality occur, and millions of people die.
"Nobody is suggesting dropping Science in favour of Astrology so I'm not sure how this point is relevant."
It is relevant because large numbers of people are not using reality to determine what we should do. They are using ideology. Obviously that doesn't work. I am not in favor of any attempts to equate empty beliefs with reality.
Paul: "But we all believe what we want based on what we like."
Absolutely wrong. You don't have to "believe" what is real.
First of all, there is no leap of faith required. The conclusions of science, for example, are based on evidence, not just something somebody said. Anyone can observe them for himself and confirm that what has been described is what occurs. Second of all, there is no need to "believe." You can make an assessment that something appears to be the case. That assessment can easily be revised as more information comes to light. It is not required to think that it's "true." It is sufficient to observe that it seems to be and then see if that works. No belief required.
Paul: "You've based it on science."
Not at all. I have no use for "beliefs." If I think I know, it's because there is a good reason to think so. If I don't know, I just don't know. I don't form a belief to fill in the blank.
Paul: "However I think there's more there than just science. Science tells us nothing about love, compassion, understanding, wisdom, beauty, creativity etc etc."
First of all, no. Science tells us a lot about all those things. Maybe you should check out evolutionary biology and see the latest thinking on how such traits arose in human groups. Second of all, just because science can't explain everything, it doesn't automatically follow that therefore anything goes. Science is not the be-all and end-all but that doesn't mean their assessment about astrology - there is nothing there - is wrong.
Paul: "Who decides what makes a good voter? "
A good voter is a responsible citizen who understands the issues and cares about finding solutions that work. That hasn't been the majority of voters in my country for a long time, I'm very sad to say. But, we'll see.
Paul: "Very severe problems HAVE ARISEN true, but it is not to say that they DO ARISE."
Yes they do.
Paul: "It is interesting that one of the main astrology tribes (which I've recently began co-mod of) has had issues of the (frankly) ludicrous 'sun sign'-ism. Where some sunsigns crticise ALL of another sunsign as incapable of love etc."
See? Unresolvable conflict.
Paul: "I have absolutely no 'low treshold of respect' for anyone else for their beliefs."
I did not say "respect for people," I said respect for the TRUTH.
Paul: "How much respect do you have for them?"
Depends on the person. I respect most people I meet, but I don't feel I'm required to respect anyone. However I certainly respect their *rights* to think what they want and do what they want. No disenfranchisement. That doesn't mean I have to respect what they think or do, and I sometimes don't, if their ideas and actions are not worthy of respect.
Paul: "You are an atheist and I respect that because it is a path you believe in and have chosen. "
Whoa, put on the brakes, buddy! I never said I was an atheist and I don't "believe" in atheism and you are jumping to a massive conclusion here.
Paul: "I do care about the truth, I don't however care for proving everything I believe in to others."
You are missing out on one of the greatest resources for avoiding delusion. Peer review is the backbone of science for a reason. It is through comparing our conclusions with the conclusions of others, and explaining how they are reached, that we can sift out personal misperceptions.
Paul: "I really apologise if that was offensive cos in heindsight it was a bit childish! "
I was not personally offended. But, I am trying to point out that the astrological conceit - that is is correct, and anyone who disagrees is slavishly devoted to definite answers, cannot appreciate subtleties, lacks finesse, is exclusively materialistic, cannot think in abstracts or possibilities, etc. - is not warranted by the facts.
Paul: "Thanks for taking the time to keep up the conversation with me yesterday!"
It's a pleasure. You are very interesting to talk to.
Paul: "I think it's a good thing when the moderator of any tribe contributes to threads and discussions!"
I love to, but I have three kids at home who keep me very busy. I always make time to read, but I can't always make time to respond. Unless I stay up all night of course - who needs sleep, anyway!? :-)
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 10:59 AM"and frankly that's pretty petty. "
I don't mean it any petty way, but when we have an ideology of suggesting that people who are 'belief' based dont' make good voters we have a slightly chilling sentiment. I don't see how that's petty. Who is to decide who makes a good voter? To the best of my knowledge the 'voters' of your country didn't get a say on whether or not to go to war. Am I wrong on this? I don't understand why you are using Iraq as an example. Even if there was a vote, it would show more quickly a warped sense of American patriotism than anything else.
"Our country has been ruined and may never recover, thanks to a lack of respect for reality. It's no coincidence that evangelical Christians were the largest block of supporters for the war."
I think that's slightly unfair. I think the reality is that it was the 'Bush' supporters who were responsible for it. Whether they were Christian or not is immaterial. The war was not (apparantly) fought for any religious reason. It happens to be that many of Bush's followers are Christian, but the crux of it is Bush-ists not anything else. It would be interesting if an Atheist just told ppl he/she was a Christian, mentioned God in speeches and otherwise lived their life and made decisions based upon atheism (you know what I mean by that I think) and see who votes for them. It woudl be interesting to see if people only vote for those who 'say' they are something, but whose actions speak otherwise. But we digress...
"It is relevant because large numbers of people are not using reality to determine what we should do. They are using ideology. Obviously that doesn't work. I am not in favor of any attempts to equate empty beliefs with reality. "
Well I'm completely against that too, I would be wary of lumping everybody in together and painting them all with the same brush. In fact most astrologers I know personally (and there are a few) are interested in science and are otherwise quite level headed and practical. Interestingly, in a way that might seem contradictory, New Agers really annoy me the most. I find them as a rule to be quite arrogant and egotistical whilst claiming the opposite. You may well see this as a case of the pot calling the kettle black. If you think that my ideas here are barmy then it would be interesting if you were to properly engage with people at a psychic fair or something. No offence intended to anyone, but it is my experience that middle aged woman (normally slightly over weight) are the worst. I know that's terrible, but in well over 90 percent of the cases that is who it has been. Some examples: one woman claimed that her friend was psychically attacking her and was being overly materialistic and not making her own reality. reason? the woman owed her friend £100 and was meant to pay it back 4 months previous and hadn't. This is the kind of people I mean! The woman 'knew' that it was ok because the universe was teaching her friend a lesson. (This is a true example btw, the exact amount of money is a little blurry tho)
"It is sufficient to observe that it seems to be and then see if that works. No belief required. "
I completely understand the point. However, from my shoes, I HAVE observed astrology and it did seem to work. WHY it works is anyones guess. I certainly do not have that answer. It seems to break the laws of physics, however I HAVE observed it to work. It doesn't work 100% of the time which leads me to believe that there is somethign else there or something that is missing. However from my point of view I have looked at it and it has worked. I know that is intellectually frustrating because it is intellectually frustrating for me also. I'm sorry if it's a weak argument, I admit that it is, I wish I had evidence to offer you. I don't. I just know that it has worked for me and that I originally approached astrology to prove it wrong.
"I don't form a belief to fill in the blank. "
Well every theory is a 'belief' to fill a blank. Every 'belief' of this kind is subsequent to change of course if new information comes in and I woudl argue that the same is true for astrology. Perhaps I shouldn't have used the word belief. I dont' think I have quite the right word for what it is that I am trying to say.
"Maybe you should check out evolutionary biology and see the latest thinking on how such traits arose in human groups. Second of all, just because science can't explain everything, it doesn't automatically follow that therefore anything goes."
I completely agree and haven't said otherwise. What I am suggesting is that Science is somewhat limited. It cannot by its nature teach us everything there is to know. I can study evolutoinary biology every day of my life until the cows come home, but I wont' have learned anything at all about being creative, or being in love. There is a place for science (a good place too) but it DOES have its limits. That is all I am saying. I simply disagree with science's opinion so far on astrology. I do not believe a sufficient case study has been undertaken.
"A good voter is a responsible citizen who understands the issues and cares about finding solutions that work. That hasn't been the majority of voters in my country for a long time, I'm very sad to say. But, we'll see."
You don't think a good voter is one who has compassion for their fellow man? Is a good voter one that purely is a good problem solver then? I agree that your country particularly seems to have an eschewed version of politics. It seems peculiarly reliigiously biased for reasons I don't fully understand. I'd have to learn more about the history of America I think. In contrast, in the UK it is based on hangups from the class system. I would love if it were found out that Bush wasn't actually a Christian at all. Certainly none of his actions are terribly Christian.
Paul: "Very severe problems HAVE ARISEN true, but it is not to say that they DO ARISE."
"Yes they do [in relation to my comment 'Very severe problems HAVE ARISEN true, but it is not to say that they DO ARISE.']"
I completely disagree and cannot see how you can make such a huge leap. I have a completely different viewpoint to you. What severe problems have occurred because of it? Perhaps we should clarify what counts as severe?
"See? Unresolvable conflict. [in relation to sunsign bias]"
How is that unresolvable again?
"Whoa, put on the brakes, buddy! I never said I was an atheist and I don't "believe" in atheism and you are jumping to a massive conclusion here. "
wow sorry Changeling. I must be mixing a conversation I had with someone else to you. I had thought in a previous conversation, some time ago now, that you were an atheist. it might have been somewhere else and I've confused the two of you. It was when I first got here.
"But, I am trying to point out that the astrological conceit "
I didn't mean that impression to come across. I am not for a moment suggesting you are unable to appreciate sublteties. I am merely suggesting you cannot appreciate the subtleties of astrological interpretation at this moment for no other reason than because you do not yet know enough about it. Were you to study it a bit more you would. I don't see how this is conceited because I would say the same for ANY subject. I thought it was common sense.
"I love to, but I have three kids at home who keep me very busy. I always make time to read, but I can't always make time to respond. Unless I stay up all night of course - who needs sleep, anyway!? :-) "
I'm rubbish at remember details like this, but I hadn't realised you had THREE children. I thought it was only one for some reason! Thanks for taking the time out to respond to me then as I hadn't realised how difficult it must have been to find the time to!
"It's a pleasure. You are very interesting to talk to. "
likewise! :D -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 11:24 AMIn most nations people who are mentally compromised are already barred from voting. If you're clinically insane you're barred. It isn't such a huge leap to point out that people who are basing their votes on issues on bronze age mythology are not acting rationally and, like it or not, religious faith meets the definition of a delusional disorder. A fixed, false belief held without evidence and/or against contradictory evidence. -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 11:59 AM"It isn't such a huge leap to point out that people who are basing their votes on issues on bronze age mythology are not acting rationally and, like it or not, religious faith meets the definition of a delusional disorder. A fixed, false belief held without evidence and/or against contradictory evidence."
And who is basing their votes on issues of mythology? -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 12:10 PMIts a funny thing, perception and belief.
We are meaning making machines, thats what your neural connection are for, so you can make assumptions to get through the day, and the irony is that in memory, long term memory the assumptions are lumped in as facts, as the truth. Its just the way the brain simplifies information because its all assumption, maybe true, but assumptions mostly. actual reality is very simple, you can touch the wall, see it, and know your not walking through it.
The only truth is in the moment, the minute your brain interprets it all you have is assumptions. It would be good if people learned this and remainded aware of the assumptions so they wouldnt make bad decisions, or hold beliefs that limit possibility.
My quote: "So choose again, choices dont run out in life, only your decisions make you run out of choices"
-
Re: voting
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 7:49 AMPaul: "And who is basing their votes on issues of mythology?"
Christians, for one.
-
-
-
Re: furthermore....
Fri, July 17, 2009 - 6:40 PMPaul: "I don't mean it any petty way, but when we have an ideology of suggesting that people who are 'belief' based dont' make good voters we have a slightly chilling sentiment. I don't see how that's petty."
It's petty because you seem to be deliberately confusing an evaluation of whether someone is a good voter with not ALLOWING them to vote. Those are not the same and it's petty to suggest that I would support some kind of pogrom.
Well, you can relax. I never suggested that anyone shouldn't be ALLOWED to vote. I will sit and watch the stupid voters of my country vote it right out from under us before I would ever suggest that they should not be *eligible*. Get it? We can't knock the stupid voters off the rolls and I would not suggest such a thing. What we can do is understand how important it is for people to make good decisions at the polls, and make the effort for our citizens to be better educated.
Paul: "To the best of my knowledge the 'voters' of your country didn't get a say on whether or not to go to war."
Despite massive protests, the polls were running around 75% in favor at the time of the invasion. That's also about the number of people who believed that Saddam had WMDs. If it had been 75% against it would have been very different.
Paul: "I think the reality is that it was the 'Bush' supporters who were responsible for it."
Christian evangelicals were the largest block of Bush supporters.
Paul: "I completely understand the point. However, from my shoes, I HAVE observed astrology and it did seem to work. "
No one person's unsupported observations would qualify as verification. The observations have to be reliable and reproducible and the same for every person who tries them. Astrology doesn't have any data that works like that.
Paul: "Well every theory is a 'belief' to fill a blank."
No, it's not a belief unless you believe it. Making an assessment that Theory X is an explanation which seems to fit the evidence is quite different from deciding that it is TRUE.
Paul: "What I am suggesting is that Science is somewhat limited."
Sure. But the questions presented by astrology fall well into the sphere of scientific investigation. Are certain personality traits endemic to particular stellar configurations? Can astrological history be used to foresee future events? The answers of people who have studied the matter are no, and no. There is no reason to surmise that your personality is a result of the position of the stars on your birthday. There are many factors in life, like your genetics and your environment, which are physically and emotionally affecting you and shaping your personality far more directly than the position of the stars ever could.
The James Randi video illustrates it well. If you haven't seen it, I'll just describe it. A classroom of people were given horoscopes to read which they were told were written by professional astrologers based on their birth date. The group was asked to rank the horoscopes for accuracy, and almost everyone rated their own horoscope as very accurate.
The subjects were then told to pass their horoscope to the person behind them. After a moment of reading, the class broke up laughing because they realized that they had all been given the *exact same horoscope.*
As Swarm explained in another post, astrological language has been developed over many centuries to make it seem like it applies to you, but you could get just as much insight into your own personality by reading the horoscope of any other person. They are not actually personal.
Paul: "You don't think a good voter is one who has compassion for their fellow man? "
Compassion is a great trait in a voter but it's certainly not enough. The most compassionate guy in the world could vote for what he THOUGHT was the most compassionate course of action, but if he does not understand reality he may not realize that he is wrong about what course will result in compassionate outcomes.
Paul: "What severe problems have occurred because of it?"
You said that some people in your astrology group were making gross generalizations based on sun signs. Perhaps that's not terribly "severe" but it's still a problem, and a mild version of the kind of dehumanization that religions are famous for.
Paul: "How is that unresolvable again?"
What resolution is there? How's it working?
Paul: "I am not for a moment suggesting you are unable to appreciate sublteties."
That is what you suggested to Swarm. You said:
"You need definite answers to always be there. I am happy with subtleties. Does psychology work? Does love keep realationships together? there are many finesses and 'ifs' in the world. There are always mitigating factors.
I don't deal exclusively with materialism so I'm more comfortable thinking of abstracts and possibilities etc. Don't know whether or not yo uare."
Well, there is no reason to think that Swarm requires definite answers and is unhappy with subtleties. The first thing you learn in science is that for every definite answer there are three more unknowns. Applying principles of Buddhism like right action require a great appreciation for subtleties and a great deal of finesse. And, just because Swarm does not agree with you is no reason suggest that he deals exclusively with materialism, or is uncomfortable with abstracts and possibilities.
Your assessment of the qualities that produce an astrological non-believer is just completely wrong and tacking on "Don't know whether that's you" at the end doesn't really ameliorate it.
Paul: "I thought it was only one for some reason!"
Well, I only mentioned my daughter. I also have two sons. They keep me hopping! But I've taken some time to conduct this discussion because it's been fun and given me a great opportunity to write out some things I've been thinking. I'm in your debt, thank you.
-
-
-
Re: Love, etc.
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 4:54 AMpa: for me the wisdom of the stars at the same time. I appreciate you will not see it as wisdom.
Ah, you are totally missing the subtlety of wisdom here. Human wisdom does not require a factual understanding of the stars to form a basis for its existence or communication. In fact such wisdom is often conveyed by non factual, non literal things like myths. Astrology could be chaulk full of wisdom and still be completely wrong in its posits about how reality of the stars works because the two are not directly related.
If you are positing astrology as a way to talk about a wisdom tradition, I've no direct issue with that in general. It the mechanics for which I see no support. Just like if you claim Beowulf contains important lessons I've no real issue, but if you claim Grendel is real, then we have issues. -
-
Re: Love, etc.
Sat, July 18, 2009 - 5:39 AM"And who is basing their votes on issues of mythology?"
Off the top of my head...
People who vote to restrict abortion, ban stem cell research and ban gay marriage. Just a few examples. Other beliefs and voting tendencies may also be influenced by belief, surveys consistently show that believers would vote for someone religious over someone better qualified - for example.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:44 AM"How do you figure that what you described about Swarm counts as insight or knowledge, since it isn't accurate? "
I'll refer to my answer to your similar question on the other thread. -
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:50 AMPaul: "I'll refer to my answer to your similar question on the other thread."
Which answer specifically are you referring to? Give me a link or a time stamp.
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:59 AM"I am passingly familiar with it. "
Changeling
Using the knowledge that you DO have of astrology, how would you have interpreted his chart? I know you don't believe in it, but using the tools and theories and subtleties of astrology that you are at least familiar with, what would your interpretation of it be? For that matter what of my own chart. I have several in my pics, I recommend using the Koch House system one.
-
-
-
Re: ?
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:57 AM"How were you able to determine this "fact" about what I know? "
Because you said so ;p
"What information do you use to derive an astrological reading? "
Anyone well versed in astrology wouldn't need to ask this question. My conclusion is that you are NOT well versed in astrology.
If I am wrong, by all means correct me. I'll ask more simply - Changeling, are you well versed in Astrology?
-
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:44 AMpa: You wouldn't teach Calculus to a child who hasn't yet learned to do long multiplication.
Actually I would and do when it comes up. Without it you can't explain motion. Just enough to tie things together and then more if there is interest. -
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 1:49 AM"Actually I would and do when it comes up. Without it you can't explain motion. Just enough to tie things together and then more if there is interest."
Run that by me again Swarm. You teach for example, Differential Calculus to children who don't know their times tables? How effective has that been for you? -
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:41 AMWorks great. Easier than trying to explain it to adults. What is so spooky about change over time?
Equations are how you talk about it in class, but we aren't in class.
The basic concepts aren't that hard to convey even with my drawing skills. -
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:43 AM"The basic concepts aren't that hard to convey even with my drawing skills. "
Which isn't what I asked. What I am asking is can you teach Differential Calculus to kids who do not know their timestables to the point wherein they are able to not only understand the concept but work out the equations. Otherwise the analogy isn't accurate. -
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:21 AM -
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 3:26 AMSwarm
I don't understand. I can't read those books online, and you surely don't expect me to buy them just to read them just to illustrate a point?
If you have read them then you can just answer me. Are kids, after having read them, able to answer a Differential Calculus equation that I set them? Kids who are of an age that they do not know their times tables.
(actually I should rethink that as I know a 14 yr old kid in the UK who doesn't know how to do fractions or long division or his times tables. My advice, if you're ever thinking of emmigrating to Europe give the UK a wide berth, their education system is AWFUL especially at primary school and early secondary school levels to the point where Universities have to run workshops on simple maths and english etc. to their students as they are uneducated on it - really dreaful. Went to school in Ireland thank god [or other expression ;p]) -
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 10:00 AMGeez you can click links right?
"Easy Lessons for Learning Calculus for Students from the 4th Grade Up"
So elementary school. 9 years old.
differentiation is a generalization of the formula velocity = distance / time, and integration is a generalization of the formula distance = velocity * time! (In Vol. 1 we don't generalize, we stick with distance = velocity * time). The presentation is rigorous in essence but not weighted down by technical details. The goal is for the student to understand calculus and differential equations the way someone who works with them every day understands them, with a good intuitive grasp of the fundamental concepts.
To wit: if you want to understand motion, you need calculus.
-
-
-
-
-
Re: Jupiter
Thu, July 16, 2009 - 2:42 AMPaul: "How effective has that been for you? "
I bet our kids know a lot more about motion than most kids. :-)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
