Astrology

[Free]

Sorry @Free, I did not mean to give that impression.

You're right, this thread shouldn't be about a competition between the two. I'll only contribute if I have substantial things to say about astrology from now on.

OMG, no, Ren, I'm so sorry. Sometimes there's a disconnect and I can't see how my texting comes across to the reader. No worries at all! I actually do think it's an interesting subject to discuss, MBTI vs astrology vs other personality theorems. But we need another thread!

 

[Ren]

OMG, no, Ren, I'm so sorry. Sometimes there's a disconnect and I can't see how my texting comes across to the reader. No worries at all! I actually do think it's an interesting subject to discuss, MBTI vs astrology vs other personality theorems. But we need another thread!

Same! I wanted to add a little bit of self-derision to my message by using the word “preposterous” to sort of imitate myself from my supposedly scientific high stance, flailing my arms and grumbling: “this is preposterous!” :ha!:– but it didn’t come across that way. When I re-read my message I was like: lol

Anyway, glad we're on the same page. Let astrology come back to the foregound

 

[Free]

When I re-read my message I was like: lol

I made the same exact face when I re-read mine. lol
Thank you for understanding the disconnect thing, truly. Not many people do. ❤

 

[James]

@Ren if you want to see something truly preposterous, check out quantum mechanics.

And yet, it has been a stunning scientific breakthrough.

By no means am I suggesting that astrology is the "way to understand" the world. I know little about it.

Every week millions of educated, logical people attend churches, or temples etc, with many of them actually atheist.

As for MBTI, the scientific evidence for it is pretty thin. But I think it appeals or connects with people.

We have all kinds of ideas, thoughts and beliefs. Examined closely, many of them have little relation to logic or science.

 

[Ren]

@Ren if you want to see something truly preposterous, check out quantum mechanics.

And yet, it has been a stunning scientific breakthrough.

By no means am I suggesting that astrology is the "way to understand" the world. I know little about it.

Every week millions of educated, logical people attend churches, or temples etc, with many of them actually atheist.

As for MBTI, the scientific evidence for it is pretty thin. But I think it appeals or connects with people.

We have all kinds of ideas, thoughts and beliefs. Examined closely, many of them have little relation to logic or science.

Hi @James, I get your points. I don't want to pursue this debate here, but let me reiterate that I don't look down upon astrology. I consider it nonscientific but nonscientific forms of thought are important, and its universe is vast and fascinating. If I had more time, I think I would conduct some research on it. Voilà.

 

[James]

@Ren vous êtes un gentleman et un érudit.

 

[Free]

@Ren vous êtes un gentleman et un érudit.

@Ren truly is.

 

[John K]

First instinct - it's a load of old placebos. Powerful things placebos, they can cure sick people.

But ....

There's Matthew 2.2 - if Astrology's able to predict the birth of Christ and show the wise men where to find him there must be something in it mustn't there?

And then ... I used to think alchemy and astrology were (eg!) what medieval INTJs and INTPs did because there wasn't enough real stuff to work on and their brains raced away and generated these out of thin air to stop them from over-heating. But Jung put alchemy into a very different complexion. Don't see why the symbolism behind Astrology wouldn't be just as significant as in Alchemy, and just as significant in his psychology.

 

[jkxx]

And then ... I used to think alchemy and astrology were (eg!) what medieval INTJs and INTPs did because there wasn't enough real stuff to work on and their brains raced away and generated these out of thin air to stop them from over-heating. But Jung put alchemy into a very different complexion. Don't see why the symbolism behind Astrology wouldn't be just as significant as in Alchemy, and just as significant in his psychology.

It is significant - Liz Greene (and others) make the connection that the astrological elements really map to the Jungian functions so it is entirely possible astrology was a major inspiration for Jung in defining the functions as he did - or at the very least he saw that there was a clear overlap between astro and what he was seeing with his psychological work.

Disclaimer: I'm an astrologer

 

[hush]

First instinct - it's a load of old placebos. Powerful things placebos, they can cure sick people.

But ....

There's Matthew 2.2 - if Astrology's able to predict the birth of Christ and show the wise men where to find him there must be something in it mustn't there?

And then ... I used to think alchemy and astrology were (eg!) what medieval INTJs and INTPs did because there wasn't enough real stuff to work on and their brains raced away and generated these out of thin air to stop them from over-heating. But Jung put alchemy into a very different complexion. Don't see why the symbolism behind Astrology wouldn't be just as significant as in Alchemy, and just as significant in his psychology.

I was about to get into a discussion about religion and faith, and how placing faith in religion can be even more nebulous than placing faith in astrology. Astrology could, indeed, be considered more tangible than the majority of religions - I can see parts of the cosmos, so if someone can place their faith in there being some significance there, how is that more of a stretch... leap of faith, one could say, than placing one's belief in a god one can't see? Our moon, for instance, affects so much on this planet. It's not surprising to me that at one point, and to this day, we continue to look to the stars, the heavens for answers. I'm just a pensive stargazer, as many before me. It's casual curiosity, not a firm belief.

But I think this is also another thread, altogether.

 

[Ginny]

It is significant - Liz Greene (and others) make the connection that the astrological elements really map to the Jungian functions so it is entirely possible astrology was a major inspiration for Jung in defining the functions as he did - or at the very least he saw that there was a clear overlap between astro and what he was seeing with his psychological work.

Disclaimer: I'm an astrologer

Which would be which, exactly?

 

[James]

But I think this is also another thread, altogether

I think we should call the new thread " dear lord smite the heretical non believers" but as that's me half the time, maybe not .

 

[jkxx]

I was about to get into a discussion about religion and faith, and how placing faith in religion can be even more nebulous than placing faith in astrology. Astrology could, indeed, be considered more tangible than the majority of religions - I can see parts of the cosmos, so if someone can place their faith in there being some significance there, how is that more of a stretch... leap of faith, one could say, than placing one's belief in a god one can't see? Our moon, for instance, affects so much on this planet. It's not surprising to me that at one point, and to this day, we continue to look to the stars, the heavens for answers. I'm just a pensive stargazer, as many before me. It's casual curiosity, not a firm belief.

But I think this is also another thread, altogether.

That's an interesting view point and one I subscribe to myself. For me I actually thought of astrology as a bunch of nonsense until 17 when an INFJ friend introduced me to it - studying it since then has shown a rather alarming consistency between what ought to happen astrologically and what happens in reality. However I want to respect others' viewpoints (and alternative equally valid world views) on it so I try to not push it too much.

Which would be which, exactly?

Please elaborate (can't brain this morning so want to make sure I'm following.)

 

[Ginny]

Please elaborate

Which would be the corresponding element for each function?

 

[jkxx]

Ah this
Intuition = Fire [Aries, Leo, Sagittarius and planets placed in them or ones they rule such as Mars, Sun, Jupiter] (m)
Sensing = Earth [Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn with corresponding Venus /connection rather than identity/, Mercury /same/, Saturn] (f)
Thinking = Air [Gemini, Libra, Aquarius and Mercury, Venus /connection again/, Uranus] (m)
Feeling = Water [Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces and Moon, Pluto, Neptune] (f)

There is a very loose (definitely not concrete or direct) typing of these as feminine (f) or masculine (m) in terms of having the attitude of either going out and taking steps to alter the environment or adapting to changes in the environment.

Not sure if this helps as an answer though.

 

[Ginny]

Ah this
Intuition = Fire [Aries, Leo, Sagittarius and planets placed in them or ones they rule such as Mars, Sun, Jupiter] (m)
Sensing = Earth [Taurus, Virgo, Capricorn with corresponding Venus /connection rather than identity/, Mercury /same/, Saturn] (f)
Thinking = Air [Gemini, Libra, Aquarius and Mercury, Venus /connection again/, Uranus] (m)
Feeling = Water [Cancer, Scorpio, Pisces and Moon, Pluto, Neptune] (f)

There is a very loose (definitely not concrete or direct) typing of these as feminine (f) or masculine (m) in terms of having the attitude of either going out and taking steps to alter the environment or adapting to changes in the environment.

Not sure if this helps as an answer though.

Well, it gets me thinking. Which is perhaps even better.

Does this calculation perhaps help determine whether something is prominent in your chart/personality/type?
https://astrolibrary.org/interpretations/balance/

 

[jkxx]

Yes, it does, and it also reveals conflicts and "subpersonality clusters" which may work together or against each other in the psyche - psyche meaning the totality of the person, their conscious and unconscious factions included. If it would be of interest I could post an example of how this works out with my own chart (or look at yours, whichever way.) Some interesting revelations come out of it once you add it all up.

 

[Ginny]

Yes, it does, and it also reveals conflicts and "subpersonality clusters" which may work together or against each other in the psyche - psyche meaning the totality of the person, their conscious and unconscious factions included. If it would be of interest I could post an example of how this works out with my own chart (or look at yours, whichever way.) Some interesting revelations come out of it once you add it all up.

I guess some example would be nice. Did a calculation like that last night, but you never know... I don't mind which chart is used, could be a random one too (though either way I suppose you'd have to post it here to illustrate your point).

 

[Sandie33]

For our expansions ... Astrology & Typology:
https://www.astrotheme.com/astrology_houses.php
*saddle up, it's a really big site with lot's of info, disregard the celebrity pollution if you like

The Hemispheres
The Northern hemisphere comprises the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th houses. It is the lower half of the natal chart and indicates a personal, egotistical, subjective, and internalised typology.

To illustrate the Northern hemisphere, you will find thousands of celebrities horoscopes who have a dominant Northern Hemisphere.

The Southern hemisphere comprises the 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th houses. It is the upper half of the natal chart and indicates an active, objective, externalised, and group-oriented typology.

To illustrate the Southern hemisphere, you will find thousands of celebrities horoscopes who have a dominant Southern Hemisphere.

The Eastern hemisphere comprises the 10th, 11th, 12th, 1st, 2nd, and 3rd houses. It is the left half of the natal chart, near the Ascendant. It indicates a typology marked by independence and personal action.

To illustrate the Northern hemisphere, you will find thousands of celebrities horoscopes who have a dominant Eastern Hemisphere.

The Western hemisphere comprises the 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th houses. It is the right half of the natal chart, near the Descendant. It indicates the importance of communication, dependency on other people, as well as actions taken in relation with, and according to others.

To illustrate the Western hemisphere, you will find thousands of celebrities horoscopes who have a dominant Western Hemisphere.

 

[John K]

I was about to get into a discussion about religion and faith, and how placing faith in religion can be even more nebulous than placing faith in astrology. Astrology could, indeed, be considered more tangible than the majority of religions - I can see parts of the cosmos, so if someone can place their faith in there being some significance there, how is that more of a stretch... leap of faith, one could say, than placing one's belief in a god one can't see? Our moon, for instance, affects so much on this planet. It's not surprising to me that at one point, and to this day, we continue to look to the stars, the heavens for answers. I'm just a pensive stargazer, as many before me. It's casual curiosity, not a firm belief.

But I think this is also another thread, altogether.

I think we could take a step even further back and discuss the very nature of belief and knowledge, the tension between them, what they are, how we use them, how they use us. I'm fascinated with that subject, but that may well need a whole new Forum rather than just another thread - it would go way outside the scope of this Forum to explore properly. I'd better shut up now, or I'll be off down the Yellow Brick Road!