That Astrology Thing

What I've Been Doing

2005-09-02T06:53:00.000-05:00

The reason I have not been posting lately is because I have been involved in another website. I think it will either turn out to be a very good idea, or a spectacular failure. You can find it here:

http://www.eagleandphoenix.us/

Multiple Posts

2005-07-29T08:48:00.000-05:00

"Casting Shadows" from back on the July 12th. This is the delayed post I mentioned before.

Fun with variables...new planet discovered!
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/050729_large_object.html

And would anyone like to go ice skating on Mars?

http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/SEMGKA808BE_0.html

Finally, via Raw Story (I still can't decide what I think of that site), comes this story from John Steinberg, which comes to pretty much the same conclusion as I did back in November about the way our Prez operates. Except Steinberg uses his own observations instead of astrology, and is not very even-handed.

Go Ahead, Make My Life Harder

2005-07-22T13:46:00.000-05:00

DST has always been the bane of my existence, at least in terms of astrological calculations.

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2005/2005-07-22-09.asp

*sigh*

Yeah...

2005-07-20T07:19:00.000-05:00

Still sitting on a post I wrote a week ago. I've delayed putting it up for a very good reason, but its still somewhat irritating.

Casting Shadows

2005-07-12T11:59:00.000-05:00

I have to say: there is a certain delight to knowing people through astrology. It simply feels cool to be able to understand what a person is trying to say the first time they say it, or to note this thing or that thing about a person's character to nudge them towards greater self-awareness in a time when they are feeling a bit fuzzy about things. And it is, of course, ego-boosting to witness someone's fascination with him- or herself combine with their fascination towards a person who simply should not know what he (or she) knows. All and all, it tends to be a gratifying experience, most of the time.

But then there are the other times.

Many months ago (I am not sure when, exactly), I wrote a lengthy character analysis for a friend I had recently made. I had, along with some other aquaintances, met with her maybe half a dozen times, enough for her to find out I was an astrologer and get curious. So I did a natal chart analysis for her, and in the process learned to know her character in the personal kind of way that naturally happens with astrology.

Anyhow, this friend was romantically involved with what I thought was a rather unpleasant individual, though I suppose he had his good qualities. Eventually, their relationship turned sour. I would get periodic updates on how things were going from her, as well as from our mutual friends. But having noted both her character and the events that surrounded her, I could see heartbreak manifesting even from my admittedly distant stance, well before after she withdrew from her social circles and interests (at his behest).

Everyone knew things were not going that well, but people remain hesitantly hopeful, and of course they would wish only the best for her. I wished the best for her, too, but I could tell this was not the best. More than simple intuition, I could see the downward spiral.

Recently, there was an update. Shortly thereafter I re-read the analysis I wrote for her, it seems downright prescient now. From how she began to what she did during, to her specific method of calling it quits, I could have been predicting the future - which is something I don't do. But with natal charts, once placed in context it sounds a lot like prediction. Not because of any true and actual foreknowledge of events, but because the underlying details of the personality are there whether the context is a bad relationship, a jaunt through Europe, a new job, or whatever.

The problem I have is having to watch it occur, knowing what comes next each time an event takes place, and recognizing that any interference would be unwelcome, improper, and ineffectual. All three of those things combined help reinforce my general policy of "non-directive analysis". Which is to say: illuminate, but do not advise (at least, not without being asked to do so). Even if not for that, I have a close friend who decided to tell me: "...you have to be careful, you have to watch what you say to [her]..." This friend knows that people whose natal charts I have done tend to take me very seriously thereafter. So I watched all this occur, mutely, feeling more depressed about the situation with each passing update, all of them verifications of the kind of entropy I had already predicted in my own mind. Although, I suppose it would technically be considered educated guessing (how exactly do you cross over that line between knowing and guessing anyways when it comes to the unformatted future?).

Whatever the case, I noticed that I had already written the storyline in that analysis...just without naming persons, places, and things. But there's something even more debilitating to the spirit about being aware of it all along...wanting to help, knowing the what and the why and the wherefore, but to be unable to provide meaningful assistance even as you watch a personal tragedy unfold. While this can occur to anyone and is certainly not limited to astrological awareness, I find it stings more than intuition or experience because of the logical certainty involved.

This is not the first time something like this has happened to me. It is thankfully rare, but knowing people via natal astrology is just not always a pleasant experience, especially when you have good cause to be concerned about their welfare. Or your own, because it has come into play for my life at least once.

That's all for now.

Woo hoo!

2005-07-11T08:10:00.000-05:00

So, my home computer is working again, which means I can finally catch up on the things I missed and could not get to from work. For some reason both Sabine's World and Garden of Irks and Delights are not acceptable to whatever website blockade the corporation has going...after reading up a bit on Lisa's blog I figured out why for hers, but I still am somewhat confused about weng's.

But, anyhow, that's good news. But I have some catching up to do, of course. To start with another item passed off to me, this time by weng:

Instructions:
List the things you enjoy, even when no one around you wants to go out and play. What lowers your stress/blood pressure/anxiety level? Make a list, post it to your journal [or weblog, in my case]...and then tag 5 friends and ask them to post it to theirs. [I'm going to skip that last part, with all apologies. Anyone who wants to pick up it can, of course...]

1. Astrology (bet you didn't see that one coming)
2. Instrumental or mainstream rock music in the dark, with my contacts out, drink optional
3. Walking somewhere I can hear my footsteps
4. Basking in the sunlight
5. Driving aimlessly down whatever road happens to look good at the moment

Ciao for now!

Why? No, Seriously. Why?

2005-07-05T08:41:00.000-05:00

Russian Astrologer Sues NASA Over Comet

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050705/ap_on_fe_st/russia_comet_case

She's seeking the equivalent of $300 million USD.

Perhaps Marina Bai was afraid that the public did not consider astrology quite ludicrous enough. Little else could explain her reasons for opening astrology up to such easy ridicule by embarking upon the astrological equivalent of suing McDonald's because you had hot coffee spilled on your leg.

It's an utter disgrace, and much worse than the kind of thing I was railing about here.

Sporadic Posting

2005-06-15T07:14:00.000-05:00

Due to recent computer issues and other things that I'd rather not post about, there will be a longer time in between my posts for an undetermined length of time. Though I will continue to post, and visit others.

The Musical Baton

2005-06-08T11:16:00.000-05:00

So, the musical baton has arrived on my…errm…virtual doorstep, courtesy of Lisa. And just for the record, I don’t hate you for passing this on. Free will and no obligation to do this, y’know?

Hey everyone, you can listen to Lisa sing Round Midnight live, here. (Hehe…also for the record, my comment was intended as a compliment, Lisa, and I was also pointing to my preference for live music and ambiance over recorded).

So, without further introduction...

TOTAL VOLUME OF MUSIC: Not as much as I’d like.

CDs: Somewhere round 100. If you count it by artists that drops to about 60, because if I like a CD a lot I’ll get the future ones. Batches include Enigma, Creed, Garbage, Switchblade Symphony, and Dead Can Dance. Some of which I do not listen to anymore. I am also fond of soundtracks and classical music compilations. Most with a variety of artists, of course; the only CD that is an exception is entirely Richard Wagner.

Cassette tapes, records: Not anymore. Used to. I had this whole box of 45’s when I was young, mostly hits from the 50’s and 60’s. Can’t remember many of them, but I do recall them with fondness whenever I hear something from those Cd’s on the radio. Last Kiss by J. Frank Wilson & The Cavaliers (revisited by Pearl Jam), for example, or Crimson and Clover by Tommy James & The Shondells, briefly touched on in Jimmy Eat World’s Praise Chorus. Nostalgia. It passes.

MP3 and various other hard drive formats: Gigs and gigs and gigs. I don’t steal music off the internet. It just seems to appear on my hard drive after I mention that I really, really like a particular song to someone close to me....like magic, really.

LAST CD I BOUGHT: A Foo Fighters single, Best of You.

SONG PLAYING RIGHT NOW: Ice Queen, from Within Temptation (and thanks for the introduction, M.V.V.).

FIVE SONGS I LISTEN TO A LOT OR MEAN A LOT TO ME: Okay, now this is hard. Outside by Staind, definitely, as I mentioned elsewhere in this blog. Gerard McMann’s Cry Little Sister (off the Lost Boys soundtrack). Evanescence’s Bring Me To Life. Umm, umm, yeah…Your Song from the movie: Moulin Rouge (originally an Elton John tune, I believe). And just because it may be the coolest score of all time: the theme to Phantom of the Opera.

FIRST RECORDING YOU EVER BOUGHT FOR YOURSELF? HOW OLD WERE YOU?: I was 15, and I got three CDs at once (and now pause, and swallow pride, and just spit it out).
Guns N’ Roses, Welcome to the Jungle
Ace of Base, The Sign
A-ha, Stay On These Roads

I’ll go cringe in the corner now.

ARTISTS WHOSE RECORDINGS YOU OWN ON MORE THAN TWO MANUFACTURED (not home copied) MEDIA -GIVE ARTIST AND MEDIA:
None, though I ended up with 3 copies of Pearl Jam’s Ten. I don’t know how. I only bought one.

PEOPLE TO WHOM I'M PASSING THE BATON: (To quote Lisa: “I had to get rid of this thing! Please don't hate me.”) Alphabetically...

Elephant (though I don’t think he ever reads my blog)**
VW
Weng

Update 6/22/05: I stand (sheepishly) corrected. That's what I get for making assumptions.

Posting to Resume Soon

2005-06-08T09:20:00.000-05:00

It's just been a very busy week for me.

Odd...

2005-06-01T11:42:00.000-05:00

I got a sudden influx of people to this page over an hour, all from other blogspots. Probably a bug. Quirky, quirky Blogger.

Flirting With Horary

2005-06-01T07:48:00.000-05:00

I have always had a problem with fate. It just rubs me the wrong way, to think that things are predetermined in some way. I have come to learn that some things are, and yet they are malleable at the same time.

Recently, I have taken a particular interest in so-called "returns". A return is basically when a planet ends up in the same location as it was found during birth. Supposedly, this creates a powerful effect specific to the nature of the planet in question. For example, a friend of mine just had her Venus Return (which marks our attractions in life), and as that passed her boyfriend became her fiancé.

Coincidence, perhaps. But I have seen too many things of this nature to comfortably label it such any longer.

So now I am watching returns. The inner planets, like Mercury and Venus, happen more frequently. One or more times a year, usually. Mars happens a bit more often. The Solar Return happens every year at birthday time (though sometimes one to two days off, because the exact return is thrown off each year by the wobble of the planet).

Then of course, you have longer returns. Jupiter, and the oft-dreaded Saturn Return, and Uranus return (if you live that long). Due to the length of time it takes for Neptune and Pluto to circle the sun, is impossible - without a major breakthrough in the science of longevity - that either return would ever be seen in a person's lifetime.

It is the closest I have come to being interested in horary astrology, because this really does lie in the realm of prediction, and not psychology. I wonder if my interest is going to last.

Surreal Shots VII

2005-05-27T08:24:00.000-05:00

He had wanted to watch the sunset. But somehow, he had missed it. The ocean had turned black before he knew it. Like Apollo had transformed into a falling meteor, and by coincidence he had blinked at the precise moment of the flashing plummet.

Now the moon held dominance over the sky. It was a new moon, and this caused him to sigh. First no gold, now no silver. It would be a long, dark night indeed.

That was fine. He had been blind before. And dawn would come in time.

The wind picked up, as though offering him respite from eternal stillness. Did its whispering sound familiar, or was that only a hallucination? Oddly, it was blowing towards the ocean. Into it. Drowning out the waves and making the water a silent, living blackness.

He looked at the ground. The mirror lay in pieces below his right hand. He had cut his palm on a shard, and his blood was as black as the sea.

That was fine. He had bled before as well. He knew himself, and he supposed that was all the life he needed.

The How Of It - Part Two

2005-05-25T07:41:00.000-05:00

Part One is here.

In the days and weeks after the aforementioned discovery, I spent a fair amount of time considering my original presumption: astrology is a silly notion at best, disproven and discarded by intellectuals for good reason. I had run into a number of hypotheses about how astrology could work, of course, and most seemed to be grasping at straws as they stretched the limits of scientific plausibility.

Utterly determined not to be taken for a fool, I had thrown my lot in with the intellectuals. The irony was that doing so was purely a matter of faith. Now, in a way, I needed to reaffirm my beliefs. So, I went to look at studies and articles that refuted astrology. And there I discovered some things I had not been expecting to find.

A few articles and essays in, I realized I had learned a lot more about astrology than I was consciously aware of. I had, after all, been looking into it for years at this point. A large amount of astrological information had been absorbed and stored...much of it ignored because my aims were bent on comprehending people's belief in the system and not the actual workings of natal astrology. But that knowledge was still there, nevertheless.

What called this to my attention was the continual misconceptions upon which these anti-astrology arguments were based. One thing was becoming very clear: these very smart people (and I am not being sarcastic) had no idea how astrology worked. Don't get me wrong, they thought they did. They thought they had, at least, enough of grasp on it to debunk it. But I saw the same handful of mistakes made over and over again. It reminded me of this anecdote:

Sir Isaac Newton (allegedly...I have seen this quote attributed to Kepler as well) said to comet discoverer Halley when Halley challenged him on his belief in astrology: "Sir, I have studied it. You have not."

Whether or not this is a true quote doesn't matter...what it illustrates is right on. The people debunking astrology had not studied it, and did not understand or acknowledge its complexities. This was apparent from their sweeping and grandiose statements about what astrologers "believe" and "purport" and "posit." They only got it right in the most general of statements, and then almost inevitably spiraled off onto what more they believed astrologers believed, as though being right in those initial platitudes gave them authority on the specifics of astrology. To the layperson's eye, however, that comprehension was glaringly superficial.

I have found fault with pro-astrology studies for similar reasons. A friend once got me a book from a statistician who believed his statistical analysis had proved natal astrology worked. I found the same faults in that book. Sadly, the statistician's conclusion was false - even though it agreed with astrology, its initial basis was built upon false presumptions about the way astrology operates. This had undermined the entire study without him ever realizing it.

The other thing I ran into often is counter-argument. I respect this approach more, because a counter-argument demands of astrology that very valid scientific questions be answered. And those questions should be answered, even though astrology is not prepared enough or advanced enough to answer many of them at this time, and the general intellectual community is not prepared to have an open mind on it anyways. But the ability to create a counter-argument does not in and of itself disprove astrology. By that logic, any study that still has mysteries to be solved has been sufficiently disproven. Still, the burden of proof does lie with astrologers, not opponents.

In short, the best anti-astrology articles I read were - at most - conjectures on why astrology would not work.

All that reading led me to the next level of hesitation: doubt both claims. Those debunking astrology had failed to prove their argument. Astrologers had failed to prove theirs. Therefore, if I had to decide whether or not to give astrology credit, I would first need to have a reasonable and logical foundation. Empirical observation was not enough, but lack of hard proof did not change the fact that I had seen it apparently working...and had done it myself, no less.

For a moment, it brought to mind an old Oriental proverb: "A person who says a thing cannot be done should stand out of the way of the person doing it."

An enticing thought, but still not enough.

Sidebar

2005-05-24T08:37:00.000-05:00

I got tired of listing what sign goes with what Mode - and Element - every time I mentioned something. So now I can just go: (see Sidebar). Yay me.

Mars Attacks!

2005-05-24T07:11:00.000-05:00

That was such a cool movie...

Okay, all these things have something in common:

1. Being unhappily single
2. Playing a board game
3. Dealing with a malicious co-worker
4. Painting a portrait
5. Skidding across black ice while driving

So, what makes all those things alike? For each, there is a need to take action in order to effect change. To change being single, a person can act...seek out a date, flirt, go somewhere single people hang out, etc. Playing a board game is essentially a structured series of actions designed to change you from "player" to "winner" or "loser." Both maliciousness and skidding in a car are threatening in nature, one social and one physical. Both would require some kind of action to remove (i.e. change) the threat. And painting a portrait is another action taken to change the reality that exists...an empty canvas, at the very least.

A person's Mars sign essentially governs how we declare war on reality as it exists. The point is not always destruction, however, but a specific impact that alters things so that they are more to one's liking. For example, painting is to create, and yet it is still an act of alteration. We use Mars every day, whenever we confront a situation we want to effect or change, no matter how large or small, beneficial or dangerous.

Mars comes into play once the desired outcome has become known, because a strategy must be developed. It may be swift or slow, reckless or well-thought out, but goal attainment through activity is generated by the Mars sign.

Cardinal signs (Aries, Cancer, Libra, and Capricorn) tend to be natural at both goal-setting and achievement. Aries, the "natural ruler" of Mars, is particularly good at dealing swiftly with unexpected changes, but all of the Cardinal signs are talented when it comes to shifting course to achieve a goal they are determined to reach.

Fixed signs (Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, and Aquarius) are slower strategists, more oriented on the control they possess over their sphere. They prefer to let the "enemy" come into their world, where they have greater influence and power. If necessary, they will rely on their ability to withstand punishment while they bide their time.

Mutable signs (Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, and Pisces) can be stunning strategists, if for no other reason than that they swiftly and easily comprehend the entire picture. However, in this remarkable capability lies a critical flaw that will not deter Cardinal or Fixed signs. That is, if a Mutable analysis has shown a likelihood of failure, the sign is more likely to give up...perhaps before very the first shot is fired.

Other planets will have their influence on Mars, of course. Someone with a Moon (for example) squared to Mars may find it an emotionally difficult experience to take action and make changes, whereas someone with the Moon conjunct to Mars will not have that problem, and probably acts often in accordance with his or her emotional demands...the Moon speaks and Mars is spurred into action.

That's all for the moment. I am going to try and play with my Blogger template now.

Fun For The Weekend

2005-05-20T10:23:00.000-05:00

(Or: Finally! He Posts Something I Can Use!)

I don't usually go here, but I'm in a weird mood today...so I give you two words that usually bear an disproportionate amount of influence over the human psyche...

Erogenous zones.

Or...finding your partner's (assuming you haven't already) in two steps. Disclaimer - This is not an established theory, it is empirical observation of mine that has been consistently verified. I will not swear by it, or biological astrology (which is another field that, like horary, I don't really follow). All I know is that it appears to work reliably. On women, anyways. And I don't see any reason it would not be the same for men.

Step One: find the sign of your partner's Fifth House. That may not be so easy, but astro.com can help you out if you know the exact time of day and place of birth. The Fifth House Sign is at the line where the 4th borders the 5th, and that House rules (among other potential sources of joy like fun, children, and creativity) sexuality and pleasure.

Found the sign? No? Well, I'm going on anyways.

Step Two: Correspond that sign to its physical locations according to traditional astrology. If you don't know them (and why would you?), they are as follows:

Aries: Head/Face.
Taurus: Neck/Shoulders.
Gemini: Arms/Hands.
Cancer: Chest
Leo: Back
Virgo: Stomach region
Libra: Waist/Hips
Scorpio: The umm...reproductive zones themselves, shall we say.
Sagittarius: Upper legs/Thighs
Capricorn: Knees (especially the backs)
Aquarius: Lower legs, calves
Pisces: Feet

Physical contact - massages, kissing, touching - with those areas can invoke feelings of sensuality more readily than other physical zones. Note the emphasis on "more readily." You might think of it as a Good Place To Start. This isn't an Insta-TurnOn button, though if the Sun or Moon are in the 5th, that's doubleplus good.

Also, the later into the sign the 5th House begins, the lower the sensitive spots will be found in that region. For example, early Aries can be high upon the brow, whereas later Aries is probably closer the mouth and jawline. Or, early Taurus places greater emphasis on the neck, while a 5th House Taurus that is closing in on Gemini will shower greater preference for the shoulders.

And please don't ask me how I found this out. I'm an astrologer, I'm supposed to study these kinds of mysteries.

The How Of It - Part One

2005-05-19T07:29:00.000-05:00

"Skeptic; skep·tic, also scep·tic (skptk) n.
1. One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions. "

Storytime.

About four years into my study of astrology, I was living in Brooklyn. I was still completely skeptical about astro at the time; as I have mentioned elsewhere, my less-than-honorable intent at the time was a better understanding of what drew people to astrology (the better to exploit it - and them - for financial gain). While I had read quite a few books on the subject, and knew well what I considered to be its dogma, I had not yet embarked on any real human test.

I was looking for a bit of extra cash, so I started working for Miss Cleo, the imperious psychic-slash-hotline with a West Indian accent who seemed to dominate late-night television commericals at that time. I was completely convinced that she was full of it - and still am - but that hardly mattered. I presumed correctly that the job would be more about talking to people who wanted to hear some kind of answer, irregardless of being psychic. And for the record, I am not and have never been psychic (see my hypocrisy here).

So, I settled down late at night with the astro books open and my new phone headset on. Because I had the opportunity to ask for their date of birth ("you're 18 or older, right?"), I began using astrology even though I was supposed to be doing Tarot. For me, the logic was simple: at some point, it was likely that most people who would call a psychic hotline would also have examined their Zodiac signs, and therefore I would only confirm the beliefs they had already developed about themselves by covertly talking to them based on their astrological signs. Hence, I would seem psychic without having to be.

Yes, it was calculating. But I did get the opportunity to talk to some people that really needed to be talked to. I mean lonely, lost, or hopeless people who were just frantic for some kind of direction or human contact. So, although I hated the job with a passion and gave it up after 3 months, I don't really feel bad about the deception inherent in the hotline itself, and in pretending to be psychic. I never told people what to do, just gave them a way to think about it in a different light.

Anyhow, back to the point.

I tracked the callers, getting names and addresses, and so on so that the esteemed Miss Cleo's corporate thugs could assail them with junk mail later. I didn't want to, but I had to if I wanted to get paid in full. Beside these listings I would put the birthdates that they gave me, and their Sun Sign. I would also note how the call went, in terms of the person's response. This was not required and entirely empirical, but I was also using this experience to see for myself what astrologically-based conversation worked and what did not.

I was not always careful with the birthdates. After all, if astrology was basically a bunch of B.S., then actually getting it right didn't matter much. And every so often, I would get people who would tell me that I was completely off base. I figured that was to be expected, too.

Then one day day I looked back through my listings, and noticed the first of those bad calls. It was a man, born in mid-June. Beside it, I had typed: "Taurus." I remember him quite well, because he told me - laughingly - that I was full of it (but in other terms). It was an accusation that I had quietly agreed with at the time. There was just one problem.

Mid-June is Gemini, not Taurus.

So I started going down the list. Bad call...check the birthdate. Double check the signs. Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. Good call, check the birthdate and the sign...correct. I was looking at a track of rights and wrongs that clearly corresponded to whether or not I was using the right or wrong sign. Either the people I had talked to had all been influenced by astrology (or most, there were a handful of deviations), or I had just stumbled into the biggest coincidence of my young life, or...if I really wanted to go onto a flight of fancy...astrology actually worked.

Being cynical, I went with the first option, the concept of subconscious psychological influence. But that conclusion had a glaring fallacy as well. There many things people deeply believe about astrology that are not true or do not adhere to the astrological format I was using. Not only are there plenty of warped theories, but there are also alternate astrological forms such as Chinese, Vedic, or Sidereal astrology. These beliefs, too, would have had as much influence over their "subconscious psychology," but they do not operate on the same foundation as Western astrology. And remember, I was supposed to be doing Tarot, so its not like they knew I was subtly faking it with astrology instead.

In short, they would all have had to be influenced the subject of Western astrology (at least as it pertained to them). Again, that would require a startling coincidence, though not quite as large of one I mentioned before, due largely to astro's pervasive cultural influence. Nevertheless, this was the first time I began to grow skeptical of my own skepticism. The idea that astrology was bunk was a generally accepted conclusion, and yet I was suddenly faced with a reason to doubt that this conclusion was foregone.

I was not yet convinced, however.

Surreal Shots VI

2005-05-18T10:56:00.000-05:00

At long last, he was screaming the question into the night sky, as lightning ripped across the clouds and torrents of rain vomited down upon him.

The response was thunderous silence.

+ & -

2005-05-17T07:42:00.000-05:00

I started going here yesterday, but sort of went off way off the path for a diatribe that had little to do with astrology. My apologies.

With the Elements of an astrology sign, there are two that are called "positive" and two that are called "negative." Fire and Air are the positives and Earth and Water are the negatives. This is not the same as saying good and bad, as with the more social use of the terms positive and negative. In astrology, those two words are the same as they would be for scientific language, as with positive and negative magnetic fields, light and darkness, or immovable objects and unstoppable forces.

A handful of major psychological differences are:

- Positive signs prefer taking action to energize, negative ones move to stabilize. Expanding freedom versus defending security is probably a good example of these two contrasts.
- Positive looks forward, negative is more reflective. One adopts change and idealism while the other looks to history and tradition.
- Positive equates to optimistic approaches and negative to pessimistic ones, which I trust is self-explanatory.
- Positive is externally directed, while negative is internal in scope. For example, concentrating on what is said to the world versus what is felt inside.

Obviously, both positive and negative aspects can be socially good or bad. Too much freedom leads to anarchy and instability, too much security fosters oppression and stagnation. So finding the middle ground is usually the most profitable approach. Having both astrologically negative and positive personalities sharing the same world simply increases the chances of achieving that balance.

But for any individual, positive and negative approaches are mixed within the chart. Some people may be overwhelmingly one way or the other, but the majority will hold a fair amount of both positive and negative tendencies. Looking at what sign is where (and knowing what the planets and Houses represent) can go a long way towards figuring out the positive and negative approaches a person takes.

For example, someone I know has a Virgo Sun Sign. Virgo is Earth, and therefore negative in orientation. One of her greatest strengths is figuring what could go wrong with a situation. That could make her sound like a pessimist, but she's not. Her Mars, Mercury, and Moon are all in Leo or Libra, which are both positive signs. And when she approaches a problem, what people see and hear is: "we can" and "we will" deal with this problem. In saying "there is a way" she approaches the problem on track that is optimistic. As a result, she is an excellent person to go to for advice with personal problems, because she tackles it smartly and realistically without making things worse or churning up negative emotions.

On the other hand, the reverse has caused her to run into problems from time to time. She does not react well when something positive for her requires negative action. She can be self-indulgent and hedonistic, and does not always know when to stop herself even when she knows it is in her own best interests, and does not council people to stop doing the wrong things...her approach is almost always a call to action. While she does recognize the ill effects of excess, negative-oriented actions such as desisting, stabilizing, stopping, or "cutting back" are difficult concepts for her to embrace. And despite knowing the problem exists - and her Virgo Sun does point it out - she is not any more eager to adopt a negative strategy.

But if you veered off onto her Jupiter (influencing her method of personal growth), you'd find it in Taurus, which is negative-oriented again. Despite her more active lifstyle, her track record reveals a person who is cautious, steady, and security-oriented when it comes to choosing the major path her life takes (changing jobs, moving, getting engaged, etc.). Her Virgo Sun only reinforces her negative viewpoint on the potential problems inherent in being spontaneous, or taking risks, or bending the rules. So while she does not hesitate often in her day-to-day life, her major life changes are studiously examined and painstakingly plotted out. The point here is that positive or negative approaches relate to the planets the sign is in and what is actually going in a person's life.

That's all for now.

Morlocks and Eloi

2005-05-16T08:08:00.000-05:00

(Okay, so the creations of H.G. Wells were were a bit more symbiotic and caste-driven. But they do make for a nice contrast.)

There are those who believe in the basic goodness of humankind, and there are those who believe in the basic evil of humanity. Usually, those who believe in the positive aspects of humanity want to know that it has the freedom to spread. Those on the other side want the security to defend against the threat "They" pose. Threat to what? Sometimes it is a real and physical threat...but most often it is simply a threat to base desires or their way of living.

Sound selfish? It is, but many times the first group only wants the freedom to cater to their own basic desires and immerse themselves in their way of living. Selfishness, like everything else, is relative.

This is a basic polar relationship, viewed in extreme. For most people, the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but the overall stance of both sides remains clearly devisive.

Unfortunately, the savage will indeed kill the pacifist, even if the pacifist would never do the same in return. Instead, the pacifist would appeal to the basic principles of the savage, believing in a faith akin to religion that if the savage somehow understands he or she would do the right thing. It is - usually - not so much about believing in peace itself as it is believing anyone can make a peaceful choice and live harmoniously and well and lovingly...and free.

Most of the time, this approach is proven to be rather naive. The pacifist gets killed, believing to the end that the savage can't really be that...well, savage. I mean, not truly. Not that hard to reach, or bad or self-destructive or greedy or stupid or...

Oh, yes, they can be.

They can also be cunning, which peace-seekers tend to avoid. Because when it comes to these two sides, even the strategies employed by their thoughts diverge. There is the mentality that is openly shared and expressed because the outcome and intent may be perceived as positive, and then there is the mentality that must be hidden because its strategy, outcome, or both would obviously be perceived as negative. Deceit is a large part of how one uses cunning as a tactical employment.

It's a scene playing itself out in spades on the world stage right now. And its the pacifists that are going to get killed, because security-obsessed militants are on a rampage, led by cunning leaders, and the whole lot is pretty much power-mad besides. A sad state of affairs, really. Almost as sad as the fact that the pacifists are still clinging to that faith that somehow, the "informed" or "enlightened" person will make a different, smarter, and better choice. I think they will cling to that faith right up until the sword falls.

It's like watching a game and knowing who is going to win before it is halfway over.

I suppose that one can take heart in the fact that - eventually - yang will reach its epitome, and yin will kick in. In the heart of darkness there is that small white spot that never dies. And when the darkness is at its height, that is where the light begins its ascent.

Once the worst has passed, many of the survivors will see the decimation and pain they in part caused, and swear to seek a better path, and forego the barbarism they allowed to happen...or had a hand in. And the long struggle for enlightenment begins, and those that lead the way will give birth to the future peace-makers.

Sometimes, humanity strikes me as nothing more than a broken record.

That is the huge problem with polar relationships, including oppositional signs in astrology. Both presume that the other side can be like them, or do things like them. A pacifist believes that a more martial personality would choose positive things because that is what the pacifist does with greater understanding. The militant believes that intellectuals or peace-seekers have a sinister or threatening purpose that is bent on proving superiority, because that dominance is what the militant needs to remain secure. Both are way off because they miss or reject an essential component of the struggle.

They are not allied to the same thing.

Of course, common ground can be found. But that takes serious work...harder than merely thinking up a better world, and harder than forcefully reshaping it into one's ideal. Compromise between polar forces is even less possible when knee-deep in a clash of ideals. In the darkest of times, moderation is both the truest and most fleeting of hopes.

In May, 2000, five years ago, a very experienced astrologer I knew and respected told me she was leaving the country. I asked her why. She said she was frightened of the next 8 years. That was the term she used: frightened.

I got it now, M. I really do. But I'm still going down with this ship.

It Has Been A While

2005-05-13T10:20:00.000-05:00

There are reasons, of course. I am not going to go into them.

I will be blogging here again, though I have likely lost those who used to read this blog regularly due to my long silence. Such is the consequence to live with, I suppose.

Gaps

2004-11-30T17:14:00.000-05:00

Hey all,

I hope everyone had as nice of a holiday break as possible! Unless, of course, you’re from outside of the U.S. and are like “Oh yeah, the States have that Thanksgiving thing…”

Anyhow, I am going to get back to Bush, but I wanted to go off track for a moment on the matter of “behavioral gaps” brought up in a recent comment.

There are few ways a person deviates from the natal chart. The most common is probably free will, typically strongest in the Fire Element due to its independent nature. And it would be pretty much impossible to find a chart with no Fire perspective whatsoever (or a lack of any other Element), due to the way the Houses spread out. But in drawing a line between a person’s natal chart and their behavior, you create a kind of relationship, which any Fire influence may consider breaking (if for no other reason than to assert independence).

To look at it another way, if I analyzed a chart and it revealed a very vain and narcissistic person, I could presume that person would not walk by a mirror without looking in to check their appearance. However, if I told them they could not (whether I mentioned astrology or not), then by an act of free will they could force themselves to bypass a mirror without looking into it. Simply knowing allows deviation due to free will. On the other hand, it is likely that once the moment of rebellion had passed, that person would continue as they always had, ensuring their appearance was as perfect as possible.

Additionally, there are some charts where behavior is hard to pin down because unpredictable behavior is the norm. Water and Fire tend towards this more than the other two Elements, and Cardinal and Mutable Modes more than Fixed. Nevertheless, even for the most erratic person could say the behavior was “predictably changeable.” Orwellian, but true.

Another source of behavioral gaps is astrology’s due to astrology’s lack of mathematical finesse. I’m setting the bar pretty high here, and other astrologers would probably not like me saying astrology lacked capability because astrology can and does give out startlingly accurate information. Nevertheless, I consider it a far cry from being refined.

Warning: Here comes the math (but not too much).

Astrology uses the planets, as well as the Sun and Moon, to map a person’s universal location. I don’t know if these things have any direct influence over psychology as such, but celestial bodies do serve as excellent points of reference. And all of these points of reference are on a revolution. That means at any given point in time they are beating a circular path around any given spot on Earth (say, where someone was born).

That path is a 360 degree circle, divided into 12 signs by astrology. But one sign doesn’t just suddenly end as another begins. Pisces doesn’t just hit a point and – whoops! – now it’s Aries. The change is a gradual transformation, as a given planet slides through Pisces it drops Aquarius traits and acquires more Aries traits, even though it is neither one (or perhaps like yellow and blue, it is a shade of green). So simply stating Pisces has a specific behavior…well, that behavior is somewhat different at the beginning, middle, and end.

That is why I use 360 degrees for a smaller measure. But even so, degrees are the smallest astrological measure I know of that can reliably define personality. What about the parts of degrees: the so-called minutes, seconds, or even parts of seconds? The planets and such aren’t just warping from degree to degree as they move around us. Math tells us that between any two points on a line there are an infinite number of points. That means Pisces at a degree of three is different from Pisces at a degree of three-and-a-half, and also different from Pisces at a degree of 3.000001. That difference must include behavior.

Am I too picky? When it is that small, does it make much of a difference? Maybe, maybe not. But there is room for behavioral gaps there.

Don Quixote For President!

2004-11-15T06:30:00.000-05:00

I said in my last post that standard schooling can be cruel to people who have their Mercury sign in Leo. This is reflected in Bush’s own admissions that he wasn’t that great of a student, and had I examined his chart before hearing that it would have been no surprise to me. Understanding how the Mercury aspect works and understanding the Leo sign clarifies his educational difficulties, especially when viewed in relation to other aspects of his chart.

First off: the Leo Mercury alone. When it came to schooling, if Bush was not pursuing a self-determined direction (something most schools ultimately allow very little of), relating to what was being taught would be more difficult, even to the point of mental rebellion. “Sit here and learn this stuff” would not have made alot of headway unless it catered to his mind in an egocentric way. Though years away from school, this trait also applies to the on-the-job training of the Presidency.

“I don’t want to learn this. I don’t care about this. I’m going to think about something that interests me.”

Of course, people don’t really think much about what they are going to think of next, or think about how they are thinking (although, those with considerable Mutable and Air influences sometimes do). But the Leo approach sees The Self as the subject that all other things relate to, and therefore “I” and “me” are of paramount importance because that is seen as the constant variable. While it may seem hard to be anything but subjective when it comes to the thoughts in your head, there are people who trend away from subjective self-identity (one example of this could be a person who refers to him- or herself in third person). Also, not everyone self-identifies “I” in their minds very often, because there is no natural need. Yet in all probability Bush often does. This is exacerbated by his Mercury being placed in the First House, the House of self-identity, but I’ll get more into First House influences much later.

On Fixed matters, simplicity and efficiency rule, because those are stabilizing forces. Bush simplifies things in his head, which makes matters easier to deal with cognitively. This does not necessarily make him simple-minded (meaning unintelligent), although it is easy to perceive it in that way…and that perception is enjoyed by about half the nation. But I am defending Leo Mercury here more than Bush; just because there is a way to use his brain effectively does not mean he does…or ever had to.

Fixed also implies the ability to think in terms of units and teams, but the egocentric nature of thinking makes it not “I am just part of this team” but more like “I have strengths that make me a special part of the team.” Leo being Fixed, however, tends to think of others in a team as being important, too, because they also have unique contributions (Leo may be self-oriented, but it also sees reasons for other people to be egocentric as well, because of their individual strengths).

Tying that in with an ability to mentally relate to change and chaos and power (Fire orientation) makes certain team/chaos or team/power affairs simpler for him to work with. One example of this is team sports, which is very energetic and constantly in flux, yet also team-oriented and structured. War is like that, too. But Bush has a history of involvement in sports, including one of his attempts at being a businessman. Also, the constantly changing environment of the White House is something that he probably reacts well to because he has his Cabinet as a team. Again, though, he mentally identifies himself as possessing a unique central power, with everyone else in the team doing the things they do. That is front and center in his mental approach, and leads to his mentality of zero personal blame unless he was specifically responsible (it was someone else in the structure not doing things the right way).

Thinking in terms of change and power leads to thinking about how his power can cause change. He doesn’t consider outside influences as a part of him, but still thinks in terms of affecting those influences personally. He does not need to understand things as they are because if he plans to change them then there’s little point in spending a lot of time figuring it all out. After all, whatever it is, it is about to cease existing in the same way. And if you measured intelligence by the ability to cause change and create chaos, Bush would be considered brilliant. His mind knows that capability very well, for throughout his life he has mentally connected to and learned from exactly that kind of influence, however it appeared in his environment. Then again, once things start to settle, he loses interest.

Now, other planets, and especially his Libran Moon, do influence this to the contrary. His Moon sign in particular creates an emotional connection between himself and other parties. That can return him to needing to pursue a self-determined direction of thought, because his Libran Moon prompts him to work with others, creating a personal reason to mentally pursue something. As an example, he likely got through school with the aid of someone else (probably his mother). By having someone else there providing emotional support and impetus, he became more self-interested about the part he plays, which in turn aids his thinking process.

Bush’s Cancer Sun, on the other hand, would invoke a tendency to wander into daydreaming because it is a more interesting and subjective mental zone. If the subject of his attention was exciting and energetic there would be a better chance of absorption, but if it was too detailed and had little room for interpretation or multiple meanings, he would not relate to it as well. After all, if it is what it is, then why think about it if you can’t change it?

This plays well into the specific degree of Bush’s Leo Mercury (late in Leo’s 9th degree). That degree emphasizes mental meanderings that center on constant personal exploits, not unlike a mental Don Quixote ranging far and wide in pursuit of another conquest. With a Cancer sun, that increases the likelihood that such pursuits would be imaginative and faith-based rather than set within reality.

That he would bear incorrect assumptions about a war with Iraq, and rely upon fanciful reasons for waging that war, is no longer surprising to me.

Is Our Children Learning?

2004-11-11T16:13:00.000-05:00

It has been very easy to make fun of Bush’s mental acuity. But I’ll get to that later.

Intellect is a funny thing. There are as many ways to describe intelligence, because it comes in so many forms. In natal astrology, the voice-in-your-head thinking process is denoted by Mercury. It illustrates the way a person relates to their environment through mental activity. The root of it is simply this: you are not anything in your environment, but your thoughts are your way of relating yourself to what is not you.

Learning, by extension, is Mercury-based, taking into account that we continually build mental relationships between what we already know and anything new that we experience. The planet’s influence is not limited to learning, though, because it is more a measure of how a person thinks. In that respect, it could govern something like “how to travel from Point A to Point B,” a task that can often be done by any number of methods, but involves some bit of thinking.

Because active mentality has so much to do with coordinating relationships in the mind, Air sign qualities are naturally capable in this regard. Logic in particular involves relating one concept to the next, and Air signs are heavyweights when it comes to logic. In terms of “classical” intelligence, the kind measured by intelligence quotients instead of artistic genius or cunning or experience, Air signs tend to do better. Nevertheless, there are many ways to be brilliant.

Earth also tends to do well with schooling also because our school systems rely a great deal on defining the world and refining thought in specific and practical ways. Earth is sympathetic to such means, especially when given tangibles to work with, such as visuals, hard data, and facts. For most courses, this remains the standard method.

Fire and Water signs in Mercury are not so sympathetic to schooling in that regard, but for different reasons. How we use our minds is not always compatible with the way we are taught. For Fire, the mind takes tracks that interest the individual, and so being given learning material does not help them; if they are not interested they will not absorb it well. On the other hand, find a subject that they are excited about and they can be surprisingly adept and passionate thinkers.

Water signs in Mercury, on the other hand, find more interest in what is interpretive instead of concrete. While they may shy away from anything that drowns them in facts and definitions, creative and imagination-based studies such as music, art, or writing tend to capture their attention. Unfortunately, such things are not considered as seriously intellectual as basic reading and math.

Ultimately, though, Mercury learning revolves around teaching the mind by using pathways that fit the Element. If the teaching fits that, then the subject being taught becomes a largely incidental factor. For example, an Earth Mercury could learn music just fine but if they could look at it in a well-defined and tangible way it would be particularly easy.

In terms of Mode (and keep the Elements in mind), Mutable signs tend to find complexities and detail a good thing, and tend to process things swiftly. They also grow bored if they have to wait once they’ve figured it out. But that fades, especially as advanced learning comes along and greater complexity gets involved. Cardinal signs tend to be more interested in the active, larger picture – the goals and the answers – rather than any process by which one gets there. For example, they tend to learn more from competitive behavior and learn better under deadlines and pressure, and succeed more with projects than testing. Fixed signs in Mercury may seem slower to learn than the others, if given time and a reliable method they end up knowing it – and using it – better than most anyone else, having built the relationships solidly and capably. Because of that strength, they have an easier time using the full force of mental potential once they’ve garnered the knowledge. They also do well in structured formats such as teams and learn well in environments where teaching is kept simply efficient.

Bush has a Leo Mercury (Fixed Fire), and standard schooling tends to be somewhat cruel to a Leo Mercury. But I’ll go into that in another post.

My Pet Goat, Squared

2004-11-09T11:59:00.000-05:00

A person’s Moon Sign controls emotional reflection. What I mean by that is that anything that happens in a personal way causes an emotional reaction. This reaction could be strong or weak or middling, but as events happen to us, we reflect those events with our emotional response. Violence makes for a strong example here: for some, violence may be cause for fear or shame, for others it can result in anger or even ambition for glory. How (and how much) a person reacts to any given stimuli on an emotional level depends a lot on both the Moon sign and the nature of the stimulant.

Of course, if the Moon reflects events from the outside, it begs the question: Where does it reflect to? The answer is: to the subjective personality, which is most centrally and easily defined by the Sun Sign. Conversely, the subjective personality reflects itself on the world via the Moon sign, creating a personal ambiance and attitude that is not defined by the physical senses so much as it is perceived by feelings and impressions (further defined by one’s own Moon Sign). But this is a very internal process; even the concept of identity is too definable via stereotypes and caricatures to represent the Moon sign.

Bush’s Cancer Sun traits (as well as other internal ones) reflect off a Libran Moon, while outside events strike an emotional chord with him after being perceived through Libra. So the sign of Libra helps show what kind of emotional perceptions he receives, as well as his emotional expressions.

Libra deals with relationships, which leads to both logical thought and personal partnerships. When something profoundly emotional occurs, Bush reacts to it not as though he were alone, but as it relates to another person or a concept (again, this “we are” emotional response served him very well after 9/11, where Bush’s shock and alarm and pain was easily shared with that of the nation). This is the true hope of having him lead a bipartisan future.

It’s not that likely, though. First of all, he probably has enough partnerships among his immediate ideological associates to feel content. Libra is Cardinal, and so having many partners on the same course as he creates an emotional reinforcement for him. The foremost influence is likely to be his wife: his partner in life and emotional bonding.

Also, a desire to relate does not always translate well into an ability to do so. It is in this regard the Libran judgment usually comes in handy, by understanding what is good or bad for a course of a relationship. This means that if he already has the impression of a liberal or Democratic agenda as a flawed idea, then the emotional prod is to reject, not integrate, their preferred course. Disassociation is the more likely result, and when that is impossible, Bush will want to take the “iron fist in a velvet glove” approach, holding tight to his course while trying to calmly justify things to the Left in order to pacify them.

Bush also has a powerful split between a Cardinal Air Moon and Cardinal Water Sun. He has what astrology calls a “square” here, which is an angle that drags the personality in two directions that are incompatible without some kind of compromise. If Cardinal signs are the course setters, then which sign sets the course? Bush feels like he must turn to logic (his Libran Moon), but his strength is in emotion and faith (his Cancer Sun), not logic. If he cannot find a way to combine the two he will find himself discomforted by either approach.

Hence, the infamous My Pet Goat scenario. Bush was told America was under attack and BAM! Emotional reaction. We all had one. It was immediately reflected off Moon signs everywhere. In Bush, he related the event to himself (a HUGE relationship, with him being the President and all), and his Libra Moon would have desired the most logical and flawless course, an emotional insistence that was proportional to the severity of what was happening. But Bush was also alone: no one to ask questions, no partners, with nothing in his personal history that he could relate to on this matter. An emotional response – his Cancerian strength – held too many potential fallacies for his Libran Moon to feel comfortable with, which is an excellent example of a squared angle kind of problem for Cardinal signs. His greatest strength was countered by the fear of using it badly.

That was what was probably happening that day in that classroom. Alone and fearful of doing the wrong thing, the President froze. Simple as that. People have called it his Deer-In-Headlights look, and that is what it was. He was probably frantic to come up with any good course of action, but he needed something that could help him decide what that was in terms of good or bad, and dared not make a move until then. His paralysis was not mental or physical, but emotional.

But a short while later, after having talked to (related to) many people and found a course of action where he could lead people towards the emotions of hope and comfort, his display was nearly flawless. If such a thing were to happen again, he at least has an event in his past to relate it to, and so I doubt the Deer-In-Headlights look is coming back anytime soon.

Again, so much more could be said, but I have a feeling my posts are too long for people as it is. So I’ll leave off with this side note:

The overview method can be helpful for determining the stronger of two or more conscious influences between signs. For example, total Cardinal and Water for Bush’s Cancer Sun Sign, then Cardinal and Air for his Libra Moon sign, and see which is more likely to win in a draw. The closer the totals are to equal, the more equivalent the strength of influence. If one is markedly higher than the other, the higher one has the greater influence.

A Faith-Based President

2004-11-05T16:19:00.000-05:00

Those words bring to mind religion, but let’s keep faith and religion apart for a moment, because you do not need the structure of religion to have faith in something. That is important to understand about G.W. Bush, because his Cancer Sun Sign has a great deal to do with faith even without religion.

The Sun Sign can be likened to a source of energy that a person draws from to power everything else. Everything about a person’s psychology runs off of the Sun Sign’s power, no matter how that energy gets changed or used along the way. This, along with the ease of figuring out a Sun Sign, is why it is so often used as the central definition for a person. Without the planets and Houses such a definition is ultimately lacking, but it still retains both its presence and its importance as a capable identifier.

For G.W. Bush, Cancer is close to midway through the sign at 13 degrees (out of 30), and therefore he possesses solid Cancerian traits at his core. Cancer is a Cardinal Water sign, a fact which can be restated in several ways. But this might be the most accurate way to put it: He has a talent for guiding belief. That power is what drives all else that comes out of his personality.

On the Water side, he understands how to deal with (and deal in) feelings, emotions, and beliefs. On this matter, he can “feel things” around him, and is comfortable with matters of faith. This is an empathic man. He also gets the concepts tied to faith and belief, and understands that meaning can be unchecked by the constraints of reality. Imagination – even fantasy – can and does overrun actuality…and if this were not true, no world of the imagination would ever come into being. Consider that the idea of a woman having many rights was “pure fantasy” 100 years ago. The “reality” was clear and constrictive: women had few of the same rights as men. Or consider the phrase: “I have a dream…”

But fantasy and dreaming can also bring self-deceit and manipulations of thought. Too much of a disassociation from reality causes problems, and from the overview of Bush’s chart, this is often true for him. Things that make no practical sense are brought to life in the imagination, even if such things are contradictory. The doublethink and oxymoronic phrases that have been ripe throughout his Presidency are examples of this. Catastrophic success? Orwell was a Cancer too, you know. Even as the two words fuse together with meaning in the mind, to realists a catastrophe and a success remain oppositional thoughts.

But there is also the Cardinal side, which means he sets faith-based courses to be obtained, and everything about the outcome of that course is given magnified importance. It is his preferred method. He gathers the beliefs of those around him and directs those faiths, to wit: tells them what to believe. He tells the country what to believe, what to have faith in. He wants the world to imagine WMDs, for he believes it, and so he speaks and acts to get the world to believe. Even if that takes some deception, it is good so long as it puts your faith in line with his, towards the achievement of his Cardinal purposes. His faiths (and his hallucinations) become infectious, sometimes by any means necessary.

He speaks not just in words and acts, but in emotion, with passion and feeling. Make fun of his articulation if you like. He’s not trying to guide by phraseology, but by manifesting emotion in others. Everyone saw that at its height in the speech right after 9/11. It was not his words. It was how he said them that bought him the loyalty that for many people remains undying. His stature tapped into the emotions of many, and the power of that faith was guided with a single, unspoken command: follow me, for I can make this right again.

I often say that Water signs manipulate, but manipulation is not bad by default. The truth is that Bush guided our faith and was a comforting leader in a time of great despair. He was uniquely well-suited for that very thing. But for almost all that followed, choosing belief over reality led to greater discordance with what was happening. Yet he still believed himself, and he called on others to have faith as well. Surrounded by those who followed him (“we all believed he had WMD”) events ceased to be reality-based and became faith-based. And here we can insert God once more. Ultimately, G.W. Bush believes that his faith is reality, his steps lead to what is fated to be, and when that is defined by his religion: all is as God wills it.

Check that out very carefully, because it is crucial to understanding Bush. The world is what he believes it to be, and he clings to that belief even as he simultaneously pushes for it to happen. It is not unlike the self-fulfilling religious philosophy for monarchs in the Middle Ages: they were kings by God’s grace, for how else could they possibly have become kings?

Emotional obsession can spring from that mentality as well, like those romantic comedies where the hero or heroine pursues the (wrong) girl or guy because he or she believes “it is fate.” And if they succeed, to them it is because It Was Meant To Be, not because of their clinging pursuit of their addiction. In the real world away from the happy endings of a story, this obsessive behavior can cause problem after problem, especially when it gets tied to self-deception.

I could write much more on this, but I’m going to wrap it up now with noting how much Cancers like their privacy. Belief and emotions can make for fragile and sensitive pursuits, so those Cardinal goals are safer when hidden, and under personal control. So few press releases, such secrecy and silence from this White House. Bush wants his methods to remain securely tucked away, carefully and quietly shielded from harm. And so I know this to be true: there are few things on this earth that would rattle the very heart of him as much as having his private world opened up for all to see.

Let's Get Started

2004-11-04T16:17:00.000-05:00

Those who have followed politics closely are probably going to be surprised by the lack of surprise here. That’s because you already know a lot of what I plan to illustrate about G.W. Bush in the weeks to come. Sure, there will be some hidden things pulled the forefront, and some expansions on what is already known. But for the most part, I think the shock will come from the fact that you learned what I am going to say long ago, and now get to watch it unfold using techniques that exist apart from perception alone.

Just to be clear, this is all I need:

Date of birth - 7/6/46
Time of birth - 7:26 A.M. (EDT)
Place of birth - New Haven, CT (72 West 55, 41 North 18)

That’s it. Temporal and spatial data as numbers, the only information needed to get a snapshot of the universe that existed when the world population increased by one baby Bush.

I’ve already run his natal chart, and the first thing I am going to do is an overview of his conscious psychology (you can find that method here). The results are as follows:

Fire: 11
Earth: 3
Air: 8
Water: 6
Cardinal: 13
Fixed: 11
Mutable: 4

Forgetting the detail of any planetary or House sign Bush possesses, we can see that Bush leans strongly towards Fire, Cardinal, and Fixed qualities. All three of these have high ratings, and so it can be said that they dominate his way of operating. Generally speaking, he paves the way to change with Cardinal Fire, and makes that change permanent with Fixed Fire. Creates chaos, creates energy, creates power. Possibly good things, though unchecked chaos and energy is usually destructive. Additionally, Fire is individual- and self-oriented. He probably appreciates the many unique traits of America, but often places his own importance above that.

Because Fire loves individuality, he can warm up to many types of people. Because change can bring the destruction of darker things, Fire can be a beacon of hope. Even if you dislike Bush, these are very real and substantial traits to other people, and to himself.

Does having a high Cardinal make him a good leader? Well, ‘good’ is rather subjective, is it not? What he does do is pick a direction and go (with few, if any, adjustments to his plan). That is classically Cardinal.

Also clear in the numbers above are the methodology and alliances he all but ignores. Earth and Mutable qualities have decidedly low scores. As I have said before, Earth allies itself with reality and actuality and definition. It is concerned with hard truth, not blind faith.

(What’s that? Bush ignores reality? Say it isn’t so!)

But here is something: Fire leads into Earth. If you create change, you create a new reality afterwards. Bush pays little attention to reality because his focus is on recreating it. He sees reality as it exists as mostly irrelevant.

Mutable traits of adaptation and nuance and detail are de-emphasized as well. The Mutable Mode also tends to understand service and maintenance in a way the other two do not. Election Postmortem: Kerry is highly Mutable at a whopping score of about 18, and those who watched the elections saw that mega-Mutable versus Bush’s Simply Not. The contrast was blatant.

So what does this mean? As a sketch, it means that we have a public leader (Cardinal), but not a public servant (Mutable). Bush obeys his own will (Fire) far more than reality (Earth). That means the jokes about him being a puppet only hold true if the puppeteers are convincing him of what he really wants. And perhaps they are…he has enough Air to pursue some kind of relationship with those around him - even a negative one. Also note that the Water qualities are in the low-middle ground. Religion and belief is important to him, yes, but God is not placed on the same level as his own ideas.

Aside from that, you must completely trust in him. I mean, you have little choice now, and I do not say that because “the election’s over.” That has nothing to do with it. I am saying that if anyone re-elected Bush on the hope that he would change course or pay much attention to anything besides his own agenda, those people are going to be sorely disappointed. Bush and Kerry both told you so: “stay the course” in a Bush Administration, it means “more of the same.” It was one of the few truths to come out of that election. Don’t think that because Fire equals change Bush might change his way. Element is an alliance, not a way of doing things…methodology belongs to Mode. Mutable signs alter course, not Cardinal or Fixed. And success is a complete Cardinal validation…so while the other Modes may care about how much he won by, Cardinal sure doesn’t. I Won is all he needs to know how he was Right and can Keep On Going.

Anyhow, I’ll stop with the salting of wounds and dashing of hopes now. By clicking on an Element or Mode above, you can read (or refresh your memory) on what little I’ve written about the Modes and Elements already, and use the overview numbers to scale how important each one is to him. Remember, even with a lower rating in something, there is still a capacity for it. That means he can and does deal with Earthy reality and Mutable nuance every so often…though only when he must, and probably not very well. He’d rather not pay attention to it, and if using power and course-setting offers an alternative of any kind, he’ll go that route instead.

Of course, he now has great power to set his course with. They are already talking about his Administration’s “mandate” in the news.

Heya, Gee Dub...

2004-11-03T19:53:00.000-05:00

Click to enlarge, and all that. I know, the resolution isn't going to win any prizes.

Enough.

2004-11-03T08:39:00.000-05:00

And there went out another horse that was red: and power was given to him that sat thereon to take peace from the earth, and that they should kill one another: and there was given unto him a great sword.

My dear government...my country...I love you.

It is you, the great Eagle, who became both my mother and my father in youth. Indeed, that crest was a sterling shield which never failed to fail me. Do not think you raised me well, because you were - at best - a neglectful parent. And yet like any child I cannot escape that family connection, like unto blood. By writ of law and by truth of history, I am a child of this system, the offspring of this government and this country, the whole of which is my backyard. I have tread this land crosswise and back again, only to start again. And so I have seen your variety and your passion, your beauty and yes, even your ugliness. Even now I watch a divorce in the making that makes me want to break down in tears.

I know you. This is why I love you. And I say to you now, you have placed us all in grave danger. It appears that nothing can stop the self-inflicted wounding that is to come. And it will leave scars. Deep ones that ache in the cold winters of our age.

We will survive, but I have seen the hollow, cracked faces of "survivors." Not the victory stories of Those Who Have Overcome, but those surviving in the shadows of our gutters and our filth, for whom survival simply is. They survive though their better identity is gone, shattered until nothing but pathetic wretchedness is left behind. I have known them, I have seen them, and I have mourned the passing of what they could have been...even as no one mourned their last breath. This is the survival we have begun to face.

Not the heroic tales of some glorious recovery.

I have no more hope of turning you to a better path. Instead, I am going to help you watch and know what is being done to you. Know the mind that rules you. Because, you see, I have changed my mind about abandoning this blog. I have had a much better idea. Apart from my experience as an American in America, the most potent tool I have is the one no one would stop me from using. I do not fear any reprise, because there is no law that binds me in this matter. Few would believe it anyways. But that doesn't matter, because I have never relied on the belief of others to know what I know and do what I do. In this astrology thing, belief is irrelevant.

George W. Bush may very well become the next President. But even as he begins to ascend that throne, I will be pasting his psyche here for anyone who is interested in seeing it. Those who wish to learn how it is done can watch: this President is your case study, not unlike a frog in a biology class, picked apart in excruciating detail. Those who think this is a joke...well, they can feel free to laugh at the punchline that never comes. They always have.

Those Darn Vedics

2004-11-02T15:14:00.000-05:00

I'm going on record here...

I've gone through That Astrology Thing using Western (aka Tropical) astrology, which I have always found to be far more effective in determining psychology than any other variation of astrology - such as Chinese or Vedic (out of India). In fact, I don't really trust Vedic natal astrology, and Chinese is on a different scale altogether...though it has its moments.

But, in my personal experience, Vedic astrology in particular tends to be far more accurate about matters of prediction than Western. I don't know if the style is better suited or what the deal is, but when it comes down to nuts and bolts, I'd say the Vedic style trumps the Western style when it comes to prediction.

So what do Vedic astrologers say?

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/US_Elections/0,,2-10-1665_1612606,00.html

Oh, and do note the hard absolutes in their phrases....the certainty of it. Classically Vedic. That very trait damns their personality astrology to pigeon-holing and stereotypes that often prove wrong because they leave no room for the dynamics of human psychology. But, at the same time, that makes their event-prediction skills positively stellar.

No Title Today - Except This One

2004-11-01T08:24:00.000-05:00

To clarify on the matter of my last post: if G. W. Bush wins, this weblog will be discontinued. I will be devoting my time (and writing, and astrology) to something else.

But today I want to do a sort of overview of my style of charts interpretation, to cover the process in a sweeping scale. Hopefully, this will help those who have been reading to know what else can or should be done.

The most useful skill in natal astrology is understanding and comprehension. This is why experience doing charts cannot be undervalued. It is also why I believe knowing the nature of Elements and Modes help promote deeper understanding of the Zodiac signs. But, for a moment, I am going to set the signs aside and look at the varying aspects of astrology.

The sun, the moon, and the Houses are all present in everyone's chart, no matter what signs are there. I call them aspects, but I believe Luminaries is the more common term. Either way, they represent parts of life that all people deal with.

I mean, everyone is attracted to something (Venus), everyone has a way they perceive a lack of achievement in life (Saturn), we all have some kind of method of self-expression (3rd House) and a way of maintaining our day-to-day lives (6th House) and on and on. Understanding what a given planet or House represents to everyone is a major necessity for natal astrology. It is like a standard template with no definition. Definition will be given by the sign that ends up there.

Understanding a sign in a given place is probably the easier part, and this allows an astrologer to comprehend individual pieces of a personality. The harder part is putting it all together, because the natal psychology is interwoven and interconnected into a whole persona. For example, if a person has a Leo Sun, but Taurus rules Jupiter, then he or she may very well visualize personal growth with a non-Leo attitude: financial security, lifestyle safety, with nothing of great value risked. But that Leo Sun is still there as a central power source, giving that person strengths that are not well-suited for simplistic, "bloodless" undertakings. So even though such a person may desire that safe advancement, their skills may drive them to cut corners and answer reality with an expression of willpower.

And so the two merge. The person can be pushed hard by a Leo sun's fiery energy and sense of change, but the Taurean desire for safety tempers the pace of growth, slowing it and demanding an accounting of reality every step of the way. Saying: "Oh, you're a Leo, you take lots of risks!" can immediately feel wrong to such a person, especially if they are in the middle of some great expansion of their life. Then again, it might feel just right, especially for a Fire persona who is not often hampered by Earthy reality demands.

But what about taking the Mercury sign into account, too? That'll be important. And Mars, and Saturn, and the Tenth House, and...

Complication ensues. This is where angles and placements in Houses come in handy. These are astrological shortcuts that don't give the whole story, but allow an astrologer to zero in on personality "hotspots."

Angles work with the natural relationships between signs to point out situations where the personality gets stressed, and where it is at ease, and so on. The example above could be a square (in astrology, that is a stressful angle between two signs), because you have two Fixed Modes (Leo and Taurus) each trying to organize and construct. But Leo does it by directing energy and chaos, while Taurus does it with a well-defined sense of careful application. If you have limited resources to work with, who makes the call on how to use those resources: power or pragmatism? When one is changeable and the other is not, an internal struggle over how to use any available resource can develop easily...and given the permanency Fixed signs prefer, the decision made will have a long-term impact.

In the mind, it may fuse together, and appear like so: "I think I can do this, but I don't want to risk it unless I am pretty sure it will work." Note there: pretty sure is not good enough for Taurus, who usually wants utter certainty. Leo is diluting it to the point of pretty sure. And though Leo may be willing to Just Do It, Taurus causes some hesitation to Leo boldness, bringing in the rather un-Leolike statement: I don't want to risk it. But note also, it is not the absolute statement of won't risk it, but a leeway-giving statement: I don't want to...

Angles, though, are not the only shortcut. Looking at Planets-in-Houses is another way, which shows how planets lend their strength to a House, and vice versa. Every planet will be in a House, and multiple planets may even be in one House, an occurence which makes that House a more emphasized part of the personality.

For example, if the Sun is in the third House, it lends its strength most powerfully to expression. If the Moon is in the Seventh House, emotional issues lean upon the ebb and flow of relationships. Now, the Sun and the Moon would still affect everything else in life...not just communication or one-one interaction. If you saw the Moon was in the Third House, self-expression would certanly be tied to the person's emotional state, but that does not mean they wouldn't be emotional about love. The House a planet is in simply shows where that planet's influence gravitates most strongly. It does not make it the only place that planet has influence.

So, to be able to interpret a personality with competent skill, I'd say: understand the signs, understand the planets and Houses, et al. This helps you know the personality. To aid in dealing with the overwhelming amount of information that follows, narrow your study to the Big Stuff by learning the angles and the placements of planets in Houses.

Open Topics

2004-10-28T07:22:00.000-05:00

It's hard to know quite where to start with this. So, I guess I'll just go with it.

Whether or not this weblog will continue currently hinges on the outcome of this Presidential election. That may seem logically disconnected to people out there, for what does astrology really have to do with politics? But, I have my reasons.

Still, there have been some fairly constant readers, and I hate to return their interest in this subject with sudden silence (even though I still plan to visit their weblogs). So, in anticipation of the potential discontinuance of this blog, I wanted to forewarn those people - weng, VW, and Lisa especially - so that they might ask any questions that they really wanted to ask, or present any topics they wanted to hear more about.

So, I'll be paying close attention to the comments for the next week, and responding as I can, perhaps with more than one post per day. As for this weblog itself, we'll see what happens when the President elect is chosen.

Ciao for now.

An Overview Method

2004-10-25T08:07:00.000-05:00

Every person has multiple signs in their chart, each playing a part with a different kind of influence. Looking at those individual parts can provide a great deal of insight into specific areas, but each part is also merged and mixed to become the whole personality. Sort of like cookie dough is made up of flour and sugar and eggs and whatnot, but taken as a whole, it is still cookie dough.

There is a point-based method for getting an overview of a personality, but it is most helpful if you know the part Elements and Modes play in a sign (I've gone into both of those things in previous posts). This method ignores two very important things: specific details and the influence of the subconscious. But what it provides is a sort of bird's eye view of the personality, a way of noting what Elements and Modes are emphasized and which are ignored, in a person's conscious behavior. That way, you can make reasonable (but vague) assumptions about someone's general world view. To stick with my rather silly analogy: you can forego the ingredients and just identify the kind of cookie it is.

So here's how it works. First, you take a list of the signs and placements in a person's chart. For each placement, note the following point value:

The Sun, Moon, and First House each have a value of 4, because they are the most ever-present and conscious.
Mercury, Venus, and Mars have a value of 3, because they are less ever-present but still very active in the conscious.
Jupiter and Saturn get point values of 2, because they are introspective (and thus infrequently conscious).
Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto are all at values of 1, as they are almost never part of "awareness" but still present an subtle effect on the conscious.

Secondly, list 7 categories. You will have two sets: one for each element (Fire, Earth, Air, and Water) and one for each Mode (Cardinal, Fixed, and Mutable). These 7 categories will act sort of like scoreboards.

Then start with the first sign. Let's say it is the Sun Sign. Divide it into its Element and Mode (you can refer to this post for help). Since the Sun has a value of 4 points, then give 4 points to both the sign's Element and the sign's Mode. For example, if your Sun Sign is Leo, you would give Fire 4 points, and Fixed 4 points. Repeat this with the Moon, First House, and the various planets, keeping in mind the values listed above.

Then, if you haven't done so along the way, add up all the points for each individual Element and Mode. Those final figures will probably not be equal, but they should total 28 in the four Element categories, and 28 again in the three Mode categories.

Taking each individual category, you can see which Elements and Modes are emphasized in daily life, and which are not. The higher the number, the more it is emphasized, and vice versa. Generally speaking, you can use this chart for Elements:

A score of 0-4 means that Element is not acted upon as though it were very important.
A score of 5-9 means that Element has an "average" emphasis; it has its place, but it is neither profoundly important nor unimportant.
A score of 10 or higher means that Element has a strong dominance in day-to-day life, and most conscious thoughts and decisions will be cast in its light.

The same thing for the Modes goes like this:

0-6 means the Mode is less emphasized.
7-13 means the Mode has its place, but not far in either direction.
14 or higher means the Mode leans towards a dominant presence.

If you take the highest Element and Mode and put them together, you often find that it is not the same Mode and Element of the Sun Sign. A Pisces friend of mine, for example, has a strong Fire and Mutable emphasis, even though Pisces is a Water/Mutable sign. Thus, although he bears core Piscean talents, he also places a high degree of importance on Fire tendencies in day to day life, even more than Water concerns.

One other thing: I have a horrible time remembering names and sources, to the point where a required bibliography is a nightmare for me. This failing of mine is really too bad, because I have found this method quite useful, and I'd like to be able to give due credit to the astrologer who originally came up with it. If I ever find out (her?) name, though, I will.

Choice And Consequence

2004-10-21T10:09:00.000-05:00

(Author's Note: My hiatus has ended. Actually, it ended yesterday, but I was too busy catching up on work to do much of anything else. Glad to be blogging, though...)

I once knew someone with such dedicated drive and ambition, that she could have gotten almost anything she wanted to go after. It is a tragedy that she chose to pursue self-destruction...with a high degree of achievement.

The lesson there was not about personality. It was about choice, and the consequences that followed.

When an astrological source offers information on a sign's traits, it often carries a list of the positives and negatives associated with that sign. That is relatively helpful on a surface level, but I have seen very few texts which point out that the source of a sign's strengths is also the foundation for its weaknesses. The contrast is not always easy to see until you look at the structures of a sign, like with its Mode and Element. But the ability to choose remains inherent.

This means that "I am that way because of my chart" makes for a weak excuse when it comes to bad behavior. A Fixed sign, for example, does not have to be stubborn by default. That is a choice that has been made; perhaps long learned and much used (and cue the old dogs with new tricks), but it is still a choice. For example, the ability to be stubborn springs from the innate talent for stabilization that the Fixed Mode has, not the other way around. Or, to put it another way, stubbornness is a means to a Fixed end, not the source of Fixed behavior.

The same can be said for pointing at the Cardinal Mode to explain demanding or manipulative behaviors, or the Mutable Mode for shifty attitudes or aimless meandering. Or Fire Elements for violence, Earth for greed, Air for mind games, Water for deceptions. The list of examples could go on and on, but while all of these things manifest from the capabilities of any given Element or Mode, the choice to use them positively or negatively still exists.

That's not to say it is always an easy choice, especially when you are fully able to accomplish your goals by doing something in a specific way. The temptation to go that direction will be strong. But once you start down those paths it may can become harder to alter the habit. This is especially true for Fixed signs, and almost as troublesome for Cardinal signs. Mutable signs tend to have an easier time stepping away from bad habits, but they also slip back into them more readily.

Also, developing "bad" traits may be a more natural outcome, because using the same skills in a good way may require learning and development. As they say, life doesn't come with a training manual. Though "learning to live" is undeniably based on a personal history of events, a chart will also reflect complications in a personality that can aggravate learning in various areas. In most charts there are places where a person would have to go out of their way to learn how to use an inherent skill positively...no matter what their history was.

The opposite can be true as well, where someone may have to learn to use certain negative traits when necessary, because they overwhelmingly develop positive ones to the point of interference. For example, an Air sign usually finds it easy to give their decisions intellectual support, but an overwhelming desire to be socially accomodating can lead to an inability to say no! to others, despite the fact that they could back up any resistance with perfectly logical explanations.

Whatever the case, the natal chart is not a free pass. That's a mental trap that can be easier to fall into than one might think. I personally find it difficult to disapprove when someone (whose chart I know) does something detrimental. I get the motivations, the ideas, and the desires behind that choice, and this makes it harder for me to hold it against them. Nevertheless, a wrong choice is still a wrong choice, and I know there is another way for the same skill to manifest and be used.

Compatiblity is something natal astrology famously has to offer. But natal astrology can also be used to encourage self-awareness, so that strengths may be used wisely and personal fallacies may be treated accordingly. Though others might disagree, I consider this the most valuable aspect of natal astrology.

Surreal Shots V

2004-10-12T21:29:00.000-05:00

The wallpaper on my computer.

What doing this feels like:

Outside, Staind

Grace, Fire, and For All

2004-10-11T06:30:00.000-05:00

I was planning on posting something else today. Then I saw the news and thought, with the sudden shock of the unexpected: Oh, no...Superman is dead. And though Christopher Reeve was "only" a man, his personal tragedy turned medical crusade is as admirable as anything the comic book hero ever did, and it feels to me as though a bright light of the world has gone out.

It would be a monumental task to find a cultural icon in the West that has shaped and impacted our ideals as much as Superman. In this hero lies grace and strength and power, balanced with an equal love for humanity. Superman is, in many ways, the ultimate expression of Fire and Air in balance. That balance requires an effort that can be nothing less than Herculean...and so easily marred by tragedy.

So it is fitting that a man such as Christopher Reeve, who also was born with both of those elements powerfully guiding him, should breathe life into this comic book hero, taking him out of art and making him a cultural presence with few peers. And when cruel misfortune struck him, Christopher Reeve took the icon that he played and used its lingering presence to fight for the advancement of the world, for himself and for others. The line between a fantasy character and a true super man smeared and blurred. The man was shown to be just as heroic as the character ever was.

But I will declare that this is the truth:

Christopher Reeve was not merely defined by Superman. Superman was equally defined by Christopher Reeve.

The pure idealism and strength Reeve brought to the fore seems to have seeped into my mind despite the fact that I never was a huge fan. I know that because: with the passing of this flame, the world seems a little colder today. For me, a sterling example of all that is truly best about those two elements of Air and Fire - and all the great, uplifting potential of having them stand together as one - has passed now into still silence.

Binary

2004-10-07T08:36:00.000-05:00

You know that old saying: can't see the forest for the trees?

When it comes to the four Mutable signs (Gemini, Virgo, Sagittarius, and Pisces), they can see the forest, but the trees are their specialty. It is a matter of analysis, really, but typically at a very high speed. So if you want to get a better idea of how the Mutable signs work, it might be more helpful to put the DVD player in your head on Slow Motion for a moment.

Mutable signs take the inherent process of their Element and focus in on two main things. First, they notice the smallest individual parts of it they can recognize. That can range from verbal nuances to personal quirks, or the light in someone's eyes, pixels on a screen, musical notes, tones of another culture in a living room, the grooves left behind the scrape of a paintbrush, the slight tremble in a voice, you name it. If it is highly detailed and sympathetic to the Element of a Mutable sign, they will see it in the smallest grain they can capture. It is basically the ability to comprehend things on a cellular kind of level.

Secondly, they understand something akin to function: how any one of those detailed parts applies to the whole. This allows them to make determinations about what parts are crucial, what parts create flaws in the larger body, what does This and what That is for...all at a basic level. And once that is understood, a tweak here or there in the right spot can change the whole thing. The entire process is often fascinating to Mutable signs, especially due to the fact that so small a thing can have such a powerful effect.

This allows Gemini, for example, to be great talkers and debaters. They can fine-tune a topic of conversation or detect flaws in pieces of a phrase. Virgos can spot flaws in a plan or make minute yet positive changes to their environment. Sagittarius can comprehend points of disorder and the pieces of individual nature that makes everyone unique no matter how alike two people may seem. And Pisces, which is known for empathy and the ability to heal psychological scars, "gets" belief at the source, and sees what parts of the undefined help or hurt emotional health. And that's just a handful of examples of the varied ways Mutable signs might use their talents.

With any new experience of interest, a Mutable sign will usually enter exploration gear. Exploration goes on to become understanding as the underlying foundations become clearer. And this is what the Mutable Mode brings to the table for the other two Modes. Without the level of comprehension Mutable signs can promote, Fixed and Cardinal signs would be unable to make the kinds of decisions they do (or not as well, anyway). This is why Mutable signs are also called Communicator signs...they express the details of their Element for others.

Another important attribute of the Mutable Mode is what comes of being so close to the small details: All Mutable signs have a stronger duality than the other two Modes. (you should probably pause that DVD player now). Everything at its smallest component ultimately ends up being positive or a negative. This scientifically true, morally true, true for frequencies, true for relationships. The positives and negatives of an Element will often be hyperclear to a Mutable sign. This reason this is important is because it is this ability to perceive clearly that ends up emphasizing the Mutable duality and contrast.

Gemini is relatively famous for this (the whole good twin/bad twin stereotype of being able to be of two minds). Pisces can be emotionally powerful yet masochistic at the same time...even though this might seem like it should be a contradiction, it is not. Sagittarius can represent our basic human condition as a different kind of animal upon the earth, and yet can also tie that to the power behind human philosophy and intellectual worldliness. Virgo, for being a sign known for narcissim, also seems to accept having to do the work no one else will, belying the idea of ego inherent to narcissistic tendency.

For Mutable Modes, one thing is usually put forward while the other is held back. Sometimes those two sides flip around, but they are not often both openly present. It's just that standing so close to a basic positive also provides a view of its contrasted negative counterpart, and vice versa. But I don't mean having a "good side versus bad side" (though it can mean that). It works more like "plus or minus" at a foundational level. The ability to tap into either side of their Element on such a fine level is precisely what makes Mutable signs as utterly capable as they are. Compared to the way Fixed signs reject what they don't want and Cardinal signs choose paths (and by this decision another road is not taken), this lets the Mutable Mode have one foot in both worlds. It also gives the other two Modes information to base their decisions on.

When you hit Play again on that DVD player, you can see that at regular speed Gemini is simply being brilliant and engaging, Virgo becomes immensely smart and practical, Sagittarius becomes wonderfully accessible and human, and Pisces becomes easy to believe in and feel comfortable around. Yes, there's the flip side, too, but I'd rather accentuate the positive.

Surreal Shots IV

2004-10-04T22:04:00.000-05:00

"Sometimes, you're scary," she said.

It was spoken like a compliment, but lightning kept flashing honesty in her eyes, liquid white light illuminating the cracks of revelation.

"Remember," he asked her, "When you were young - or not so young, perhaps - and you wanted nothing more than to know there was someone out there who could understand you? Really, and truly?"

Her lips twisted. Pursed.

"Yes." The wind whipped lashes of her hair through the sky.

"So," he pressed, "Is this a case of Be Careful What You Wish For?"

No answer followed. Finally, he smiled half a smile. He seemed to do everything in halves.

"How about this, then, " he told her. "When I was young - or not so young, perhaps - that is what I wanted."

She sighed.

"Everyone wants to be understood," she noted softly.

"True," he said, turning his eyes back to the ocean, where the setting of the sun had swallowed all of history.

"But, I mean: I wanted to be the one to understand."

LEGOs (tm)

2004-10-04T08:00:00.000-05:00

I remember playing with those when I was a kid. Tinker Toys, too, but I definitely preferred the LEGOs.

Anyhow...there are four signs with the Fixed Mode: Taurus, Leo, Scorpio, and Aquarius. Like the other two Modes, they will be found somewhere in everyone's chart. To understand the psychology of a Fixed sign, it helps me to remember that they are the ones who build and establish their Element. In other words, they are out to create structures that last as long as possible.

To "create" often implies that something physical is being crafted, but this is not always true. One can create a good home without actually building it. It is likewise possible to create power structures, or emotional bonds, or social structures such as clubs or schools of thought. For the Fixed sign, creation is more a matter of organizing things in a new way to make them last as long as possible in (hopefully) the most positive way. This is why Fixed signs are sometimes called Organizer signs, too.

The traits that mark Fixed signs have their foundation in this process. For example, the tendency to see things as one way or another. You might find a Fixed sign rejecting something almost out of hand, without any discussion or in-depth analysis. Primarily, this is because a Fixed sign wishes to add everything they come into contact with to what they have already established. But they will not add something which weakens the structure. And so, inevitably, they run into things that just won't fit well, and those things are rejected.

Quite firmly, too. Fixed signs are notoriously stubborn.

While Taurus has the fame on this one, the attitude of Leo is also insufferably untamed, the emotional establishments of Scorpio are nearly unbreachable, and the core mental habits of Aquarius will not be altered. With any of those signs, you will find there are some things they just will not do differently. You can fight all day, and they will not give up an inch of ground. Because what they establish is meant to last, and the organization of it is made specifically to withstand. Fixed signs are loathe to reorganize, and they will fight hard against it even when it is for their own good. And being as well organized as they are, that fight can be a very hard one.

That organization is central to ensuring that things can last, for themselves and for others. Whatever they find acceptable is used to increase the stability of their world. Once their core establishments have achieved greater stability, a Fixed sign may then feel free to expand outward to find more. This is how Fixed signs grow and expand, often through absorption (Fixed signs prefer that things come into their world, not vice versa).

To get an idea of how well a Fixed sign organizes, though, one simply needs to look at their control over their Element. Taurus, for example, represents Earth, and therefore material finance (among many other things) . Taurus spending is very controlled, to the point that it seems they won't spend unless they absolutely must. This is the basis for their "miserly" reputation. Leo is Fire, and so energy and power are part of its establishment, yet for the most part they are graceful and smooth despite all that vibrancy, and not agitated and twitchy...their energy is carefully controlled, which can be an example of their reputation for laziness. Nor is Scorpio the weepy and moody Water sign of excess emotion. They can be controlled to the point that sometimes they seem to possess no emotion, and are called cold and unfeeling. And Airy Aquarians, odd as they may be, have a very controlled system of thought, even though they may appear scattered-brained, leaping incoherently from thought to thought.

But anyone who knows these signs well has experienced the power behind that controlled conservation. Fixed signs can bring strength of their Element to bear on something quite powerfully, and they often do. They can also be a constant source of that element...of comfort and strength...so long as their Element is released under specific, personally defined rules and guidelines. They can turn the flow on and off, but if you know their ways, so can you - assuming they trust you.

But that carefully controlled Element is much like a water reserve: it fills up if not used. Eventually, this will require growth, or else it overflows (sometimes destructively, like a bursting dam). So either continual expansion or a continual chance to use their talents is healthy for a Fixed sign, so long as the pace doesn't weaken their sense of stability.

By rigorously defending that which makes their Element strongest, the four Fixed signs ensure that things in life have a way to last.

Ascension

2004-10-01T09:27:00.000-05:00

Somewhere in everyone's chart are Cardinal signs. You'll find them in the Houses, if nowhere else. So even if they are not the dominant Mode, you can be sure that there is something Cardinal about everyone.

Cardinal signs can make for demanding personalities, but also guiding ones. Depending on the Element, this guidance may be subtle (Cancer and Libra) or it may be obvious (Aries and Capricorn). What is not always obvious to the observer is that this includes self-guidance as well as guidance of others. Also unexplained is the point: it is not about possessing authority, per say, but rather about reaching higher levels of achievement. Because authority is relative to the subject...Fixed Modes achieve authority through controlled expansion, and Mutable Modes achieve authority largely through knowledge and comprehension. Both can be different kinds of leadership and guidance. But Cardinal excels at choosing a direction that is (supposed to be) better and going for it.

Achieving these goals for improvement involves a lot of judgment. You'll find Aries judging the choices people make, Cancer criticizing how others feel, Libra arguing endlessly over ideas, and Capricorn rigidly rejecting the way things exist. Aggravating, to be sure, if you're on the other side. But what is going on is deeper than judgment and criticism, and it is the same thing that can make Aries so inspiring, and Cancer so comforting, and Libra so flattering, and Capricorn so supportive.

In essence, it is a test for worth and value. By inciting whatever is within their Element, a Cardinal sign gets a clearer picture of that Element. By continually pressuring and testing things, they are trying to force out flaws to reject...and purifying value to support.

Libra isn't debating everything under the sun to be a pain in the neck. Its a rigorous test to make absolutely sure that the ideas being presented have the most possible worth, and that any flaw in thinking is identified and removed. The same thing goes for Aries, who wants to see the most powerful form of an individual's energy rise up while weakness falls away...essentially, Aries incites to see your greatest strengths emerge. Cancer and Capricorn are both very pessimistic in their own way, but what they are basically doing is testing either beliefs or reality to ensure that if it is flawed - at all - those flaws are revealed and destroyed. And when you're not on the receiving end of that testing, you may note that they do this to themselves constantly.

And yes, they can go too far. Any Mode can.

But if you turn that judgment around, you'll find that Cardinal signs truly uplift the positives they find, and hold on to any actual value they find in their Element. That is also part of the road to the highest levels of improvement.

And it is very important. Very. Because for all the judging that goes on along the way, there is no harsher judgment for a Cardinal sign than that of their own success or failure in achievement. Failure drives itself straight into the Cardinal sense of self-worth. To them, failing happens because of flaws, and therefore their failure means they're flawed. Ultimately, a Fixed Mode will withstand failure and a Mutable one will adapt to deal with it, but failure can stick it to a Cardinal sign like nothing else. This is one reason why they are so demanding in their Element, and why The Plan is so important (having to abandon a plan is seen as the equivalent if its failure). Also, success is cause for a kind of self-glorification...a celebration of the validation of the direction they chose, because if it is good that makes them good. Either way, they feel utterly responsible for what happens at the end of their attempts.

It was, after all, the course that they charted.

More Reference

2004-09-30T09:45:00.000-05:00

Every sign has a description commonly known as a "Mode." The three Modes are called Cardinal, Fixed, and Mutable. While a sign's Element acts a description for that sign's association with our continued existence, its Mode refers to the way the sign functions within that association.

Ahem...right. Here's the plain English version of that: Modes are the different ways the signs operate.

If you look at the three branches of the U.S. Government, you'll find the executive branch, the legislative branch, and the judicial branch. Each one of those branches represents the government in a uniquely different way, does a different job, and has a different basic setup and authority. Nevertheless, they all work together to govern the country. This is very similar to how the three Modes work to represent any one Element.

Anyway, I am planning on giving each Mode its own post, but I thought a bit of indentification might be helpful first:

For the Fire signs: Aries is Cardinal, Leo is Fixed, and Sagittarius is Mutable.
For the Earth signs: Capricorn is Cardinal, Taurus is Fixed, and Virgo is Mutable.
For the Air signs: Libra is Cardinal, Aquarius is Fixed, and Gemini is Mutable.
For the Water signs: Cancer is Cardinal, Scorpio is Fixed, and Pisces is Mutable.

By the way...if you're the kind of person who likes rhythm, you might try the following: Find a list of signs in sequential order (the list should start with Aries). Go through the signs one by one and write down the Element it represents. Then go through and do the same thing with the Modes. You'll find there is a method to the madness.

Oh, and P.S.: Astrologers didn't set it up that way or anything. It worked like that to begin with.

And so...

2004-09-29T13:58:00.000-05:00

I am not feeling very concise today. Which sucks, because I wanted to post, but I really don't feel like blathering on. I already dumped not one, but two posts today because of it.

Oh well. Maybe tomorrow.

Water From The Rock

2004-09-23T07:03:00.000-05:00

There is a fable I always remember, though I don't recall where it came from:

A group of scientists once found themselves at the foot of a Mountain, and they decided to climb it, to see what was at the peak. They did a few experiments to figure out the best way to go about it, threw their energy into developing innovative ways to scale the rocky surface, and at long last began to climb. It was not easy...sometimes they had to fix their equipment, or come up with new answers to unexpected problems. It was also often quite dangerous, and not all of the scientists made it. But along the way and through those hardships they all learned much about the Mountain, and found reason in the way it worked, and discovered the logic of what it really was and what it meant.

Finally, at long last and with triumph in their hearts, the group of scientists climbed over that final ledge. And to their surprise they found a group of holy men sitting there, furiously debating the true nature of the Mountain, as they had been all along.

Earth and Water are the polar elements that represent the body of existence, just as Fire and Air represent the continuity of it. On the one hand (Earth's) there is the sensual reality we know. On the other hand (Water's) there is the existence of the spirit.

In contrast, they might be easier seen, for in being polar they can sometimes come into conflict. Like the eternal struggle between science and faith. Or physical needs versus emotional ones, morality versus pragmatism, imagination versus actuality...the defined versus That Which Cannot Be Defined.

Earth is tangible, and so it tends to be more easily recognized. I often lean towards physical descriptions to illustrate things, like writing about pencils and planets when what I'm really discussing is energy and interaction. Earth qualities are basically sensual...you can feel, touch, taste, hear, and see them. They are also quantifiable and knowable reality, defined reality, whether you are quantifying sound in decibels, or using visible symbols in MS Sans Serif font to communicate, or calculating a person's psychology through the pattern of degrees in a natal chart.

Or feeling pain when you accidentally cut yourself.

A broken heart feels pain too. But that is Water's side, not Earth's. Quantify your sorrow or your happiness for me, would you? Where's the insta-scale for measuring your faith in yourself, or in a higher power? And even though those that are scientifically minded often scoff at what they see as the fantasies of religion and beliefs, they should not. Those "fantasies" have impacted our existence through countless passions, held up millions with its strength, and illustrated the actual meaning and point to being alive, rather than merely rendering us biological organisms just a few steps up from plankton. If Earth is everything starkly defined in reality, Water is everything that is not.

There is no greater proof of the balance between these two than our own existence. We feel, and yet we are flesh. We must obey the needs of both, or we are off balance, crumbling. While you can notice the biological changes of emotion, can witness them in the flashes of the brain's synapses, these physical things simply are. There is no depth of meaning. They are only physical representations of a greater emotional reality.

So is art. And countless other things. Physical manifestations compelled by the spirit, to represent that spirit.

And the same goes for spiritual manifestations compelled by the physical. The satisfaction of a good meal, the sensation of your lover's kiss or caress, the thrill in the rush of adrenaline when a song you love reaches that perfect tempo. Like a rock thrown into a pond, the physical resonates through our emotions. Our emotions and our faiths, in turn, push us to mark reality with beauty and comfort and all the possiblities of living, and to defend and uplift our human spirit through the use of very physical means.

Both elements make up reality, and together they represent existence.

Fire In The Sky

2004-09-22T13:11:00.000-05:00

Next to me is a broken pencil. I just snapped it in half.

There was a momentary resistance, followed by a small explosion. I'm sure in slow motion it would have looked fascinating. Force expelled in all directions as the sound whizzed through the air, tiny pieces of wood scattering off into the breeze. For a fraction of a second all was chaos, and energy, and change. Obviously no great achievement, but by my will this was done.

And then, swiftly, silence. And I had no power to stop that.

The pencil no longer exists. At least, not as it was. Though all is calm again, everything has changed, and there is a new reality bound by new laws, where the pencil is not one whole thing, but two. What happens to those shards from here on out is anyone's guess.

This is the world of Fire and Air.

Energy, change, and chaos are the hallmarks of the Fire element. Law, relationship, and order are likewise under the element of Air. Between the two, things eternally transform, but then are returned to a stable state in which everything relates...as well as it can, at least. They are not ignorant of each other. Far from it, in fact. But they work in counterbalance. They are polar. And a sign in either element bears alliance to that element, and works for it.

That can make for conflict: Individual ego versus social law. Fate versus free will. Chaos versus stagnation. Inspiration versus the status quo. Revolution versus governance.

But they can also be in balance. That is the more natural state, as evidenced by the fact that where there is too much of one element, the other eventually emerges to tip the scales. But balance is where the greatest strength lies.

The earth is in a constant state of change, propelled along its course by a seemingly limitless energy as it hurtles through space. Stop the world from turning, from moving? Any world? I don't think so.

But the Earth is also bound by its relationship to the Sun, through gravity it obeys the steadying hand of physics. It never flies off into space because of this relationship. We do not freeze in the black depths of the galaxy.

Nor does it "fall" into the sun, into its own fiery destruction, as it would if it had no energy to propel it. In fact, it is the balance between physical forces and physical laws that keeps the Earth moving around the Sun year after year. Controlling energy without stopping it. Through this, the Earth maintains its environment perpetually.

And we continue to exist.

Stained Glass Windows

2004-09-21T08:00:00.000-05:00

I'm feeling a bit scattered today, but I'm going to blog anyways, about one of my preferred analogies. But first, a tiny bit of planetary awareness...

Starting with Mercury and heading out towards Pluto, one finds the planets drift from very conscious to very unconscious. Mercury, for example, has more to do with the active voice of thoughts inside one's head than any other planet. Venus and Mars are also well involved mentally. Jupiter and Saturn are both midway influences that we usually only think about through self-analysis or in retrospect. Uranus and Neptune have far more subconscious and universal effects on our personalities, while Pluto tends to be the deep and uber-subconscious of the self.

I find the transition from conscious to subconscious intriguing, especially the way it runs parallel to the inner-to-outer order of planets. That is why I mention it. But there are more powerful internal forces in the Sun, the First House, and the Moon. Those three aspects represent an omnipresent sort of Triumvirate of The Self, like a supra-conscious ego which you are always aware of and engaged with, but so intimately that you need not consider it at all.

I think (Mercurially), therefore I am. But what, exactly, is "I"?

To explain how the Sun, the First House, and the Moon work together, it is helpful to know what they each represent in a natal chart.

Here's one way to describe them:

The Sun is our core energy, the source of our strength and talents, powering everything we do. It is like an engine...but like an engine it does not precisely do anything except empower (a car engine without the rest of the car is useless no matter how much energy it can create). The First House is our self-identity, the way we create a picture of ourselves, giving us a way to say "this is what I am." The Moon is a reflection of ourselves on an emotional scale. It is partially our active feelings, but it is also the result of having those feelings, the way they manifest through us as "bright personalities" or "cheery folk" or whatever else.

That is a rather shallow description of each. But, rather than describe them in dull terms of function, I usually prefer this visual analogy:

Imagine the soul or spirit or inner self (or whatever you want to call it) as a stained glass window. The Sun within a chart would be like the light shining through the window from beyond. Without that light, the entire thing would be pointless, but with that light the purpose of the stained glass window is fulfilled. Different Sun Signs, then, are essentially different sources of light.

There is also a picture there, the event or person or depiction that is being expressed and defined by the artist. It answers the question: "what is that a picture of?" This is like the First House (the Rising sign, or Ascendant), and ranges from abstract to specific images of ourselves, but which basically is a way for us be identified and self-represented.

And if that stained glass window has an image of a woman (for example)...was it done with rough glass in dark blues and reds and flecks of fiery orange? Or is that same woman shown in sterling whites and greens, beneath a halo of gold? Does it seem like her smile is one of dark temptation, or blissful satisfaction? Our Moon sign is like the very mood being expressed by that window, the intangible aura of emotion we give off and experience.

In my personal opinion, if you are looking at someone else's chart and not your own, it is easier to see this...their light, their depiction, their aura of emotion, the very essence of their "I".

People are often quite beautiful.

The Skinner Box

2004-09-17T06:49:00.000-05:00

No, that is not a taxidermist's toolbox.

B.F. Skinner was a behavioral psychologist, and his Box is an abstraction, not an actual item. A so-called Skinner Box is a environment designed to direct the development of a person's behavior. For example, letting your child play with children of many ethnic groups will theoretically result in more racial acceptance, therefore one aspect of a Skinner Box could be having your child play only in groups where there is an multi-racial presence.

The morality of purposefully doing that is definitely debatable, because I think an error in judgment could have drastic effects. Rumors that Skinner raised his daughter in such a Box, and that she later went crazy, sued him, and then committed suicide are unfounded (mostly because she refutes it, being quite alive and living reasonably well as an artist). But the potential for screwing up severely while playing God is there.

But astrology adds its own dimension to the Skinner Box concept. If the idea behind the Skinner Box is that a designed environment will impress itself upon the psychology of a human being in a foreseeable way, astrology holds that the viewpoint of a specific person in any environment is also determinable. In astrology, the natural viewpoints you have had from Day One are as much a part of your psychology as the sum of your experiences, and can determine what you take away from experience after experience after experience.

Why can two people experience the same event yet walk away with two different attitudes towards it? Given a set of circumstances and a person's natal chart, an astrologer is capable of predicting reaction, focus, feeling, importance...all sorts of variables that the individual themselves would look at logically and say:

"I am that way because..." and follow up with what they've learned from the past. To which I answer, but why did you learn that from your experience? Why do you remember that the dog that bit you as a child had brown fur, how much it hurt? It bit Jimmy, too, but all he remembers is the way he ran home crying, and even that memory is rather fuzzy.

The natal chart helps note where the mind naturally focuses in a given situation. In fact, it is so natural and so automatic that there's usually no need to even think about it. You'd have to slow your mental process down to a crawl to get an idea of what was happening, and people usually see no reason to do that, with the exception of some pretty deep introspective work. This is the main reason many astrologers - myself included - advise against trying to read into one's own chart too hard. We're just so close to ourselves that we cannot completely avoid our own subjectivity, which means fewer true and clear answers.

So if you are viewing the world through a sort of psychological lens that can be shown with a natal chart, and have always viewed the world through that lens, does that mean experience means nothing because we all have a natural psychology adopted at birth? Does it mean we have no way of viewing from another perspective?

Actually, I'll hit that second question first. Yes, everyone has a way of viewing from another perspective. It is kind of built in to our psychology, that ability. The way we do it differs from person to person, and why we do it, and how, and when. But it is a part of us.

As for whether experience matters, it may seem from what I am saying that we would develop in a certain way no matter what we experienced. And that is basically true. It is the central process that helps natal astrology work...that an astrologer who analyzes your chart understands how you have developed and how you would see things because it has always been so, and because it is natural to you.

Ahh, but here's the rub: experience happens whether it is natural to you or not. And that is where the concepts behind the Skinner Box come back into play, because a person's perspective only has very limited control over environment. Events force us to do things that we feel are not natural, or "right." They go against the grain of our personalities, make us alter our behavior in ways that leave lasting impacts. When that happens we experience trauma and stress. But we are forced to learn and grow based on those very conflicts, and that makes experience anything but pointless.

In fact, not having enough experience can be a problem. Sheltered lives lead to stunted growth. People whose lives are relatively easy have trouble dealing with serious conflicts. Or, a continual flood of events that directly conflict with a persona can cause severe psychological damage, as is the case with abuse. And these are just a few extreme examples of events affecting personality irregardless of what the natal chart says, even though the natal chart would still give clues as to how that damage is likely to manifest.

The inner self and the outer world both act independently of one another, yet they are constantly interacting at the same time. We just don't often think about it that way. We don't usually feel any need to. Because we are fully half of that interaction already, we concentrate on the other half...the world around us.

Reference

2004-09-16T19:52:00.000-05:00

Astrology uses symbols as abbreviations like the periodic table uses double letters, and looking at a chart may seem confusing when you see various symbols instead of straightforward descriptions.

The following is a quick cut-and-paste of what celestial body goes with what symbol on a chart (though symbols come in different styles, the gist should be there). After Pluto (PLUT), you have various asteroids/moons/polar arrangements that are sometimes examined as well.

Ignore the colors.

The Rabbit Hole Has Basement Levels

2004-09-16T08:14:00.000-05:00

Taurus is steady and constant. So is Virgo, but it is a different kind of steady, without as much constant. Gemini and Sagittarius both tend to be social. Leo is willful, and Scorpio has willpower. I could go on and on and on (and on), but I won't.

Merely describing the signs only provides a cursory understanding of them. This was a great annoyance to me when I first looked into astrology. What was going on? Okay, Aries is a vibrant sign and Aquarius an odd one, I can get that much, but why and why? It just is not enough for me to be told that something is so.

Curiosity killed the cat, but satisfaction brought him back.

The twelve signs are more than a bunch of observed traits all mashed together. I always suspected it had to be so, because nothing simply exists out of nowhere and for no reason. There is always a structure and development, however malleable or inconstant it may be. That's true for rocks, flames, faiths, ideas, inventions...all of it. Getting to know the sign traits was easy enough, but understanding them took a lot more time. And it wasn't until I could "see" the underlying structure that I truly was able to accept astrology as something more than an inviting possibility.

The signs themselves are metaphors for psychological traits, but each sign is made up of at least three pieces that can be considered universal metaphors. Those three ingredients mix together like a primordial soup, giving each of the twelve signs its own unique essence. Understanding these allows a person to understand the internal workings of a sign from a more basic level.

While remaining fantastically unspecific, they are:

Elements - Probably the best known aspect of the signs, Fire, Earth, Air, and Water have always been well-used metaphors. In astrology, they represent our core alliance to continued existence, with Fire and Air focusing on the "continued" part, and Earth and Water focusing on the "existence."

Modes - Sometimes known by other names (astrology could really use more universal nomenclature instead of having a handful of terms that all mean the same thing). Cardinal, Fixed, and Mutable are the common names for the three modes, and these represent three approaches of direction, structure, and comprehension...loosely defined.

Now, with the Elements and Modes alone you already have 12 signs, as each of the 4 elements has one of the three modes, and four times three is twelve. The possible combinations of mode and element ensures that no sign is going to be a replica of another. But there is a third part:

Cycle Stages - This is the Ouroboros of astrology, the snake swallowing its own tail as the image of infinity, the circle of existence (so cue the musical chanting and monkeys lifting lion cubs above the Sahara).

Thinking in time frames, one does not get to the last day of a sign and suddenly leap a fence into the next sign, adopting a radically different persona in the process. There is a gradual transformation, as one sign becomes the next. Astrology divides the cycle of signs into 12 parts for the same reason people divide any cycle into stages: it's easier that way.

For example, in biological development you don't suddenly leap from being an infant and then BAM! you're a toddler and then POOF! an adolescent. While it is easier to understand and see physical change when you divide it into "Stages of Physical Development," the process itself works gradually. And so it is with the signs. Each sign is part of a universal cycle of beginning, growth, interaction, entropy, ending, and eventually the influence that endings have on new beginnings...rinse, repeat. Each sign takes place on this cycle, and all of them together are one snake swallowing its own tail, even if we choose to view it in segments.

The comprehension of those three qualities working together within a sign gives one more than mere traits or the regurgitation of adverbs. It allows an astrologer to know the reason those traits exist in the first place. The benefit is the difference between knowing that something is, and knowing why it is.

Surreal Shots III

2004-09-14T07:02:00.000-05:00

"He hurt me," she told him.

A dog was growling, somewhere out of sight.

"Want to go to the diner?" he asked her. "Maybe have some coffee, if you aren't hungry."

"And?"

"Talk. Vent."

She shook her head. Her hair flickered in the dying of the light, but no tears were falling. She was in the eye of her storm, and it was anything but calm.

"I want to know what would really hurt him," she murmured. "I can give you...I know when he was born. Where."

He leaned back against the wall. Someone had carved Hell Hath No Fury upon its surface. Black etchings on blood-red brick.

"No," he told her.

"Why?" Her tone was simmering in its dismay. She waved her hand through the air, trying to push away the metallic perfume of her frustration.

"You're supposed to be my conscience," he replied.

"So you won't help me," she fumed.

"I will help you," he told her. "Just not in that way."

"Because of your stupid principles," she accused him, walking away in a huff.

He intercepted her by the cliffside.

"No, that isn't it," he told her as the sun sank into the sea. "Not because of principle. I am not some grandly moral person, and I doubt principle would be enough to stop me."

"Then why?" she implored, pulling her sleeve higher up on her shoulder. She had drawn her heart there in soft pink lipstick, though now the image was streaked and smeared.

"I am afraid," he said simply.

"Why?"

"Because I doubt principle would be enough to stop me."

He leaned forward and kissed her forehead. Then he gently turned her towards the diner, and away from the slippery slope they both stood upon.

Time And Space

2004-09-12T12:43:00.000-05:00

I had written a post before this to explain why time and space is so important to natal astrology. Then, after a good page or so of talking about the wobble of the Earth and ecliptic paths around the sun and so on...well, I started getting really technical. And boring. And complicated.

The "why" of it all is complicated, but maybe the explanation is not helpful for a blog. So let's head for Concise Junction, a place I rarely visit because I spend way too much time at the corner of Obsessive Detail and Accuracy Street.

For the time and place of birth, a few minutes or miles variance means very little in the grand scheme of things. Often, you don't know if the doctor took his sweet time filling out paperwork, or if a hospital is truly centered in a city or town. So being slightly off target is not only perfectly normal, but it also falls within what one might think of as "an acceptable margin of error."

(I just happen to have trouble accepting error.)

Anyhow, it is when you only know the date of birth that things become fuzzy. If the natal chart is a galactic snapshot of a birth, then time and space is the camera's shutter speed. With just the date of birth, an astrologer can generalize, but the outcome is sort of like using a disposable camera to take a picture of sign you're passing at 60 miles per hour. The personality can be seen...in all its fuzzy glory.

Of course, some important details might be lost for those planets that are close to the cusp, which is the transitional area between two signs. For example, this year Libra will begin in the early evening (GMT) of September 22nd. Last year it began in the late morning of September 23rd.

(Enter the convoluted explanation of a wobbling earth and ecliptic path here).

But by and large, what is really crucial about having the time and space of birth is not the planets, but the Houses. The planets of a chart are based on where they are in relationship to the Earth and so are easy to spot (seeing as they are pretty huge and relatively slow moving), but the Houses are centered on a point in space and time looking outwards, and the Earth's daily spin means any given point will be facing different places at different times of day. It's like this: if you were to sit down and stare at the Eastern horizon for one full day, by the end of the day you will have faced every one of the signs at least once. If I came to you at dawn, noon, and dusk and noted which sign you were facing, I'd get three different answers.

Side Note: The Eastern horizon is the start of the First House, more commonly known as either the Ascendant or the Rising Sign. It's all the same thing.

Anyhow, even being off by an hour means a marked change in the Houses (thus saying you were born "somewhere around noon" is simply not helpful). As Houses represent a good half of a chart, a lot can be lost without them. Roughly speaking, the planets are one's inner personality, but the way we relate to everything which is not "oneself" is shown by the Houses. In a way, the Houses are lenses through which your inner light is refracted. Though you are not your social circle, or your possessions, or your job, you retain a very personal viewpoint on how to treat all of them.

To generalize as an example: two people born on the same day might both be extremely serious about personal growth, but for one that could mean intellectual enlightenment, while for the other it is the numbers in their checkbook. Or, they may both burn bridges as a way of solving problems, but for one a "problem" may consist of the rise and fall of their social standing, while for the other social appearance means next to nothing...but "cross my family and we're through, buddy." You'd have to look close to see that they were doing the exact same thing, but concentrating it on two different areas of life.

So, regarding time and space:

Exact time, latitude, and longitude = amazing clarity and accuracy.
Day and Year of Birth = Rough generalizations.
Day of Birth = It's probably not even worth asking.

Another Generation

2004-09-10T06:37:00.000-05:00

I once went to a meeting of astrologers in my area. I felt entirely out of place; very much the sore thumb. It was a gathering of approximately two dozen people, and as I scanned the room I could not help noticing that it was a veritable sea of gray heads. There was no one even close to my age. And although I have been studying astrology for nearly a decade, most of those present dwarfed my experience by three to five times.

It was intimidating.

I am young compared to many astrologers. I can't really help it; it sort of works that way biologically. But I sort of like it, in spite of the automatic presumptions that come with being less aged in a field that is dominated by the two or three generations before me. Perhaps if had some greater need for validation, I would feel differently. But I don't. What I feel is a sense of cosmic timing, like I have a place on the forefront of the modern age.

It is a fantastic time to be an astrologer, especially considering humanity's technical advancements. Astrology itself may not have changed much, but our technology is so much more powerful that I think people can approach astrology in a way that simply was not viable before. Here are just four of those ways:

#1. Mass communication and computers make it easy to move, store, and process data. Email and cell phones cut down on the time it takes to send information, time and date are recorded on so many things that it is far easier to locate that information these days than it ever was before.

#2. Astrological software takes what used to require mathematics and an ephemeris (an astronomical reference book that notes where a planet was at at a specific time and date) and does automatic calculations and presentations. With the astrological software I have, a chart is available to me in a matter of the seconds it takes to type in information (www.astro.com has prefab chart creation that uses such software). Proper and full analysis of that chart, of course, still takes hours or longer, but to create a basic chart previous astrologers had to do the math, refer to books, and painstakingly draw out the chart. And corrections...well, they were a pain.

But now we have software. And we have PDAs.

#3. Atomic clocks. You can have one on your computer, on your wall, wear one on your wrist. And by the very nature of an atomic clock, you're not going to get any better precision of time.

#4. Global Positioning System satellite tracking. This does for space what atomic clocks do for time. With a handheld GPS you can be in the depths of the Amazon and know your exact latitude and longitude.

Just over a decade ago, most of these technologies were not available to the public, or at least were not as accessible. How times change.

Anyhow, yes, I am young. Perhaps that means I lack wisdom or maturity, and that I do not have the depth of experience that my predecessors do. As for those who came before me, I am thankful to them for doing so much work for me, because they tried to share what they knew so that it would go on down the line, and survive into future generations.

For what it's worth...that's me.

Affairs of the Heart

2004-09-08T07:46:00.000-05:00

Horary astrology may get more time onstage because it is meant to predict the future, but natal astrology deals in one area of human interest which often trumps even the chance to know the future. That is, love.

Of course, natal astrology is just as good with other kinds of relationships - anything from employers and employees, to parents and children, to friendships - and I personally get just as much of a kick out of the self-empowerment through self-awareness potential of personality astrology. But by and large, when people turn to natal astrology it's with relationship compatibility on the mind.

A number of books have been written on that subject, many of them talking about how one sign interacts with another. While generally informative, most use vague overviews to dodge the complexities that are inherent to using natal astrology to examine a relationship. For example, writers usually concentrate on the sign people are likely to know: the Sun Sign. So plenty of info is available about how Aries gets along with Scorpio, how Gemini and Sagittarius fight, the sex lives of Leos and Capricorns, and so on. But as I have noted before, the Sun Sign is but one of many parts of a individual's psychology.

Unfortunate as it may be for those seeking astrological insight, affairs of the heart are better determined by planets other than the commonly known Sun Sign. And even if you knew where to look, relationships as a whole are often complicated and messy. Of course, anyone who's been in one can tell you that.

Don't get me wrong, the Sun Sign can indeed be a factor. But then again, each planetary or House aspect in natal astrology is technically a factor. Emotional love, however, tends to be more easily seen through the Moon sign primarily, and Venus secondarily (more or less). This is often whitewashed in relationship books, probably to avoid a confusing explanation of How It All Works and also because most people don't know what their Moon and/or Venus signs are to begin with.

This means that two people with "traditionally incompatible" Sun Signs that also share compatible traits in areas like the Moon and Venus could very well find their way along quite nicely. I mean, lovers who are seen as "like night and day, yet so in love" are everywhere. And the reverse is true as well; for any two signs that are supposedly Super-Great-Totally-Awesome together, having a few planets or Houses out of sync can quickly result in zero chemistry. The Sun Sign cannot stand alone, and cannot account for the totality of one's personality.

In the same way, though, the Moon and Venus cannot account for love entirely either. As an example, take Mars, which has a great deal to do with our methods of problem-solving (via change). If two mostly compatible people have a pair of Mars aspects that just don't get along, then the first time there is a serious conflict in the relationship the love that two people previously enjoyed in serenity may suddenly find itself inside a battle zone, as both sides try to solve the issue in ways that just aren't acceptable to the other party.

If, in retrospect, those two people realize that they don't resolve conflicts together very well, that is also a problem which both sides may try to address in the name of love. And naturally, Mars will again come into play because they are problem solving again. Such a cycle can easily degenerate into all kinds of unhappiness, which isn't going to be a healthy relationship factor even if the compatibility of the Moon and Venus is solid.

That kind of problem may not be a "deal breaker" for the relationship either, but this is just an example of how using natal astrology for relationship issues is anything but cut-and-dry. Most people don't think in terms of planets, but they would recognize how it appears on the surface:

You love them with all your heart but...

Or perhaps something more familiar:

You once loved them with all your heart, but...

You might check out relationship books if you are a person inclined to do so. I suppose they can be insightful, for what they are worth. But in relationships, there are precious few simple answers.

Surreal Shots II

2004-08-31T08:10:00.000-05:00

"So did you look?" she asked him.

He did not want to nod, but he did. Once. His hesitation was not lost on her.

"Bad?" she asked worriedly, and he sighed.

"There's a reason I choose to look at people, rather than ahead," he told her after a moment. "Everytime I do, I wish I had not. It is usually so much better to take things as they come."

"But you can be prepared," she countered.

"Or you can be stuck, watching and knowing the outcome," he replied. "There are few things as difficult as the loss of hope."

Her brow furrowed.

"So there's no hope?" she prodded him.

He chuckled, and the sound drifted away upon dancing shadows.

"I don't usually look ahead, so I'm not very good at it. No practice, you see. You can hardly count me an expert in this part of the field."

"I believe in you," she asserted.

"Even when you should not?" he asked her curtly.

The birds had gone on ahead. The world was wind, and a touch of red lined the distant clouds.

"What, then?" she asked him finally.

"The storm is coming," he murmured. "A meteorologist could have told you that."

To that she said nothing, and he walked away.

I Do Know I Don't Know

2004-08-30T08:45:00.000-05:00

I have a couple questions to ponder: how could gravity have existed before Newton made scientific laws to explain it? And how could people have ever worked with it, lacking a good physics lesson?

Astrology seems farfetched to many people, and many of the cautiously curious find the idea of planets affecting personality or events Way Out There. It just does not seem to make much sense, and so the natural response is typically to ask the self-proclaimed professionals (astrologers) how it is possible that huge chunks of rock and gas billions of miles away could affect the personal character of a biological lifeform on Earth.

It's a good question. A fair one, and worth answering. But I don't know the answer. Theories abound, and given the varied degrees of ego out there, those theories range from serious and possible (or even probable) all the way down to the pit of fantasies which serve mostly as self-aggrandizement. However, a truly concrete answer that can be widely understood in scientific terms has yet to surface. Such an answer would do a lot to validate astrology, but unanswered questions do not automatically invalidate a study.

After all, astrology can be used even without knowing why it works. A lot of things are like that.

Perhaps, if you are a master computer design expert, you know how each part of your computer interacts with the rest to enable the entire machine to work. And maybe you think in binary code, understanding the software even as you use it. For the rest of us simpletons, lacking all that information has not stopped us from being able to operate a computer. Sure, we may not know everything about it and may make mistakes or do something wrong from time to time, but we more or less know how to run it once we've had some practice.

The same thing goes for using astrology without having the answers many of us would like to have. The difference is that humans did not create whatever forces lay behind astrology; they created the mathematical tools and mental translations by which to operate it. It's hardly the first time that has happened in human history, where observation has led to use long before we knew what the heck was going on.

Personally, I remember a card trick I learned when I was in my mid-teens. It involved no sleight of hand, just a specific method, and it worked every time, no matter who did it, as long as it was done according to instruction. I was very curious about how the trick worked, because it involved random card placements but achieved a rather difficult outcome, and - unlike the other tricks I knew - it did not require me to deceive perception. When I showed it to a science teacher it surprised him, and out of the same curiosity he helped me examine it step by step. Finally figuring it out required a mathematical algorithm, but there was an actual mathematical reason it kept coming to the correct outcome. But the process made so many hidden mathematical moves that it confounded logic when simply seen.

And that was the trick of it. It did not fool the eyes, and it didn't even fool the mind. Visual logic simply could not follow the complicated process that was going on mathematically.

It happens.

Precession of the Equinoxes

2004-08-25T08:18:00.000-05:00

Fancy name, huh? I think so, anyway.

It is what they call the fact that the constellations move slowly around in relation to Earth. For example, the constellation of Pisces is where Aries was 2,000 years ago. Astronomers refer to this movement as sidereal time. Skeptics refer to it as proof that astrologers don't know anything about actual science, because that means if you were born in what astrologers call Pisces now, the Sun would actually be in front of Aquarius.

"So which is it? Huh? Huh? Pisces or Aquarius? 'Cause you can't refute this, this is scientific fact!" (so sayeth my Platonic ideal of an immature, ignorant skeptic who is eager to prove just how little he knows about astrology by laying his mind at the altar of scientific arrogance).

It's Pisces. Yes, the sun was in front of the constellation of Aquarius. Too bad for the entire precession argument that the constellations have absolutely zero bearing on astrology. Want to know why it's Pisces and not Aquarius? Because a few millenia ago it was an obvious way to name the segments of the circle.

Maybe you're wondering what circle that is. Maybe not, but I'm going to tell you anyways. It's the circle that once was thought to be the sun moving around the earth, but which is now known to be the earth moving around the sun. Geometrically, either one is 360 degrees. Each of the 12 signs takes up a 30 degree segment. Twelve 30-degree segments make up a full circle, or one complete revolution of the earth around the sun. Known in the vernacular as a year.

The sun, the earth, degrees in a circle and yearly revolutions...well, how about that? No constellations in sight.

Ever wonder why the signs started on some weird day in the middle of the month rather than starting nice and neat on the first of each month? Well, there is another phenomenon that is timed in the exact same way, although it divides the year into 4 segments instead of 12.

(Here's a not-much-fun fact: Western astrology is also called Tropical astrology, and also called seasonal astrology.)

Aries is the first sign (not January 1st's Capricorn). Aries starts right along with spring, and so far the "first day of spring" has defiantly refused to get with the program and conveniently start on the 1st of April instead of a week and half earlier in late March.

Astrology uses those same natural cycles. Back in the day, if you woke up on the first day of spring and looked at the sun...well, you could go blind. But before you went blind you'd be sure the sun was in front of the constellation of Aries. Now it's in Pisces on the first day of spring, but astrologers never changed the names to keep up with constellations that didn't have much to do with the study in the first place. Is that rude or what?

Don't get me wrong. I like the stars. They just don't tell me anything.

Surreal Shots I

2004-08-19T07:41:00.000-05:00

"Guess what I am," she said playfully.

"A woman," he said.

"No..." she objected, "That isn't what I mean."

"A verbal artist," he offered. He pronounced it arteest.

"I mean..." she began.

"Always faithful." And he smiled.

"Oh, forget it," she said, and the world kept turning.

Then, for no apparent reason, he said:

"Somewhere around March 19th."

A moment of silence followed.

"Do you know how often people want me to guess their sign?" he asked. "And I hate the game. What it demands is outrageous and yet it seems to matter so much if I am wrong."

She stayed quiet.

"May I ask you something?" he inquired of her.

"Yes," she permitted.

"Would it really matter if I were right?" he asked.

To that she said nothing, and walked away.

I Hear Things...

2004-08-18T12:01:00.000-05:00

Well, perhaps it is not hearing, exactly.

More like empathy on steroids, but strangely emotionless at the same time. Unless there is good cause for emotion, of course. But for those who have allowed me to peruse their charts in full, it is difficult to forget what I learn. And so when those people speak I realize what they are saying instead of the countless ways it could be (mis)taken. Even - or especially - when they say it wrong, what they are trying to express slips through, and Why as well. Even without words, the moving body can be like a perfectly defined phrase, for all that it is trying to tell.

Many people have this gift, I think. It is a form of astute observation, and little more. But fewer, though, have the chance to know with conviction when they are correct.

Of course, I typically limit the amount of charts I actually do to those few people that are close to me. Not always, but I am not interested in plying this trade, as such. I suspect that if I did charts more frequently, the pure quantity of it all would muddle things in my brain. And regarding those individuals I have not seen for some time: I have forgotten much of their charts, except for vague and ghostlike memories.

But this is an important truth about astrology: you have to look in order to see. People tend to imagine that astrologers should instantly know things. I am not always looking, or listening, and so there is no absolute prescience or instant comprehension. I must focus, and remember what I know.

I have noticed the way my friends and loved ones respond to my reactions, or my actions, when I am thinking about who they are. Most often, I get an odd look...not quite furtive because they trust me, but something similar...like they are wondering if I am doing "that astrology thing" again. But then a creeping doubt follows swiftly through their eyes. As though they think they are mistaken. Perhaps it is merely coincidence, or maybe I made a lucky guess. After all, no matter what I may have deduced from their charts I cannot truly understand them with the dead-on intimacy I seem to show.

Right?

Understanding

2004-08-12T12:33:00.000-05:00

I can't claim any honorable intentions when it comes to why I got into astrology. I was too skeptical to give it a fair evaluation. When I began looking into it, I was hoping to could be used as a kind of practical marketing ploy. Or to put it more bluntly: I was hoping to manipulate people who wanted to believe in it.

Skepticism and practicality have often worked well for my personal concerns, but at times those same traits bring out a detached attitude that is not concerned with morality as much as ruthless actuality. Dog-eat-dog and all that.

But I did secretly hope astrology could do more (not that I would admit that, even to myself). I have always found myself placing little emphasis on superficial human interaction...while I don't devalue casual relationships, I tend to consider them expendable. But the desire to actually know another human being has always been a focus of mine. I have long wanted to break past misunderstanding and confusion and truly understand what it was like to see through someone else's eyes.

You could also charge me with being an idealist and a egoist, and you'd probably be right on both counts. I have not lived a sheltered life, nor one bereft of terrible displays of tragedy, loss, and anguish. But I can't shake the feeling that a people do desire love and grace and goodness in life, and that the majority of individuals would not define themselves as evil for evil's sake, although they may do bad things, and willfully, and even often. But so much of that seems to come from responding to negatives: desperation, loneliness, fear, and the like. Those same people, I believe, would just as likely show the greatest evidence of human brilliance if they felt they had the real freedom to shine.

Or maybe that's just me.

Either way, I would not have gotten into astrology for idealism. Such a pursuit had to serve a pragmatic purpose, first and foremost, and hence my initial interest in using astrology as a psychological ploy. It was safer and wiser, too, to deny astrology outright on the grounds of sensibility and science. That is, until it I realized it did make sense.

I remember the turning point clearly. That may be a story for another time, but for now I'll just say that, after four years of calculating how it could be used to make money off the ego and convictions of others, every thought I had of using astrology for selfish and financial gain vanished in a few moments. The change came hand-in-hand with the realization that I actually did hold some knowledge...and not just any knowledge, but a profound tool capable of giving me a wealth of insight into another person's character, with or without their blessing. Though more capable of manipulation than I had ever imagined, it was something to be handled with care, responsibility, respect, and honor.

How ironic.

Numbers

2004-08-10T07:42:00.000-05:00

I doubt that anybody in their right mind is going to believe that there are only twelve personality types, one for each sign of the Zodiac. It is ridiculous, given the huge variety of people out there. But the concept of a personality being governed by one of 12 signs is a bare fragment of natal astrology. I mean, it's not even the tip of the iceberg...it's an ice shaving.

This seems to be one of the more damaging misconceptions about astrology. Simplifying a person's nature by throwing them into a broad category is not very helpful (and it's kind of insulting besides). But the main Sun Sign people think of when they think of their sign is only one of over 20 major aspects that an astrologer will look at.

Despite the common reference to "star signs," the only star typically used in Western (aka Tropical) astrology is the sun itself. Besides the sun, every planet out to Pluto except for Earth is taken into account, as well as the Earth's moon. As for Earth itself, it is divided into 12 Houses based on the eastern horizon and adjusted for latitude and longitude, and each of those act as additional insights into different character aspects. Many astrologers use other planetary factors as well, but these are the ones that are used most of the time. So, total them up and you've got 22 places to put any one of the 12 signs.

But that's only going from "ice shaving" to "ice cube."

(Side Note: Because each sign is actually a 30 degree segment of a 360 degree circle, astrologers with a true taste for refinement - also known as "an obsession with detail" - can go as far as looking at individual degrees. So , that would mean 22 parts of the personality with up to 360 distinctions that can be made in any one of them. To keep it simple, though, I'll stick to the twelve signs rather than the degrees.)

Each of those 22 places may or may not have a different sign, but they are all working together in a constant rhythm. Looking at any of those 22 signs without looking at how it relates to each of the others means you are perceiving human nature in isolated chunks: like noting that something is "gray" or "rough" or "hard" but not recognizing it as a rock. Although not all of those personality aspects are actively in use at any given moment (and fewer still are conscious thought processes), each works with the others, and all of them together act as one mind reacting to whatever is happening in the unique environment around an individual.

Every possible combination creates a different psychology. That means the 1-in-12 chance grows exponentially, because the each of the other 22 aspects also have the same chance of being in any given sign or at a specific degree. And each of those combinations interact with one another in a unique manner.

So how many potential kinds of personalities might be found with astrology? Here's a hint: it's not twelve.

The first time I ran the math on this, it seemed like the number was actually too large. I thought I had done something wrong (math was never my strong suit). But it was verified for me recently. The possible number of combinations is 12 to 22nd power, or 12 times 12 times 12 times 12 (and keep on multiplying, 18 more times).

So the next time you see a horoscope column, you might consider that this is the conservative estimate of how many entries there could be: 552,061,438,912,436,417,593,344.

Fate Versus Free Will

2004-08-06T14:10:00.000-05:00

Astrology often brings up this subject, and I have found that there are many people who are passionate about their belief in fate or free will, as passionate as they might be about their political party, or their faith in God (or lack thereof). So, because this tends to be a touchy subject, I was tempted to approach it cautiously.

Then I decided: 'nah, forget that.'

Our universe is one of balances and polarities, positives and negatives. Any given force in existence has an anti-version of itself. I would submit that fate and free will both exist, and that they are polarized aspects of the same temporal flow.

Or, in Plain English: fate is what happens when you're not using your free will.

Consider how often every day you make a willful choice. Not just any choice, but one that specifically allows you to purposefully influence the course of future events. If you have an apple, let's say, you may make a choice to eat it or not eat it. Even if you are hungry, you may override your biological impulses and deny yourself that food. This can be considered an act of free will; maybe not an impressive act, but one that uses free will nevertheless.

Now consider how often in the day you are not purposefully using free will. If your car stops at a red light - and you have your foot near the pedals as well as a working car - then you also have the choice to hit the gas and burn right through the light, laws be damned, because you have the free will to make it happen. You have the free will to choose not to do it as well, but let's face it: the fact that you have that choice may not even occur to you. You hit a red light, so you stop for a moment, and that's just the way it is. How can you be using your free will if you're not even thinking about the fact that you have a choice?

Well, you aren't using your free will. Fate is what is in control there, in this case because you have trained yourself to allow destiny to take control of your life under certain learned conditions (red lights). Your free will isn't absent, just dormant, and a constant series of events are occurring around you without you choosing to influence them in any way. If those things affect you, it is fate. This also includes events you would not be able to influence even if you had known of a choice...for example, if your computer suddenly died because someone wired it poorly at a factory. No real choice for you there, just an event you had no control over. Horary astrology (that is, prediction astrology) presents the idea that fate follows predictable patterns, similar to the ebb and flow of tides, and by recognizing what these patterns represent they can see how fate is operating at a given place and time.

But if I told you that you were fated to get in a horrible accident while driving tomorrow (and be 100% right in that prediction), and because of that you chose not to get into any car the following day, you have essentially overpowered fate with free will.

But that does not mean fate cannot be stronger than free will. Fate has inertia, especially when it is built off of powerful, collective events, such as war. It is difficult for a single man or woman to use their will to overcome a massive amount of events leaning all in the same direction. Sometimes a person can even end up representing a course of destiny, caught in an undertow of fate from which there is no easy escape. Simply choosing action out of a sense of your own free will, while potentially very powerful, has its limits as well.

But I still don't think that means one person can't change the world.

Astrology And Psychology

2004-07-26T06:54:00.000-05:00

Psychology is an excellent subject...one of my favorites, in fact. Both natal astrology and psychology are interested in the workings of the human mind, so the tendency to view astrology as a rival to psychology is strong.

But there's no reason it should be.

The thing is, although both do well at looking at the mind, they are like two people looking at the same thing from opposite sides. Astrology sees and does things easily which psychology has a harder time accomplishing, but then falters where psychology excels.

To really zero in on the differences it helps to look at what each study can come into a conversation knowing, versus what they must actively try to find out. Astrology can come in knowing the root personality, the core identity with all its habits and desires and logics (or lack thereof). But as people do not grow up in a vacuum, natal astrology cannot say much about how life and environment has affected this core identity - at least, not without an astrologer knowing something of psychology.

For example: Astrology may tell you that a specific person has a fascination with raw power, but it cannot say what life has taught that person about power. A politician's child and an alcoholic's child would each learn something different about what power actually is. Although astro can tell you with certainty that the personality exists and perceives the world in part through this interest in power, it cannot take into account the person's specific environmental history or what affect that history had on the outcome.

Psychology, in the other hand, does this extremely well. The study has a secure handle on how events affect mental processes, how people - in a general sense - react to environments ranging from abusive households to stressful work environments to boring love relationships. Psychologists can come into a conversation knowing all these things about the interaction between people and environments, and then make valid determinations about how a person's history is likely to have impacted their life. To confront problems, they usually suggest changes in the way a person interacts with the world around them (ie. the "fix" is usually oriented by environment).

What they cannot do right away is know what the individual's core motivations and tendencies are...the study comprehends human nature in general. Psychologists use psychoanalytical techniques such as word association and inkblot tests to learn more about uniquely personal factors - but the results of these are actually rather vague when compared to the exacting personality analysis astrology is capable of performing.

In short, the combination of astrology and psychology is a major powerhouse for understanding an individual, because both studies do well where the other one doesn't.

Psychic Like A Rock

2004-07-19T07:20:00.000-05:00

I don't know if psychic phenomenon exists, but I do know it isn't necessary for astrology. I've never claimed to be psychic in any way, even if I can figure some things out about a person that common knowledge says I shouldn't be able to know. But if that were the case for psychic ability, then a good psychologist is a psychic too.

Not to belittle anyone, but the trappings of psychic powers or fortune telling annoy me when they are placed on astrology. It is hard to treat a subject seriously when its proponents are sitting in tents at fairs doing twenty dollar readings for twenty minutes, with every indication that this is "for entertainment purposes only." Charlatans will be charlatans, but a lot of these individuals are likely to be valid astrologers. I can't for the life of me understand why they are reinforcing the kind of crystal ball stereotype that makes astrology look like a joke. And neon signs are just a step up from the tents.

But, while I am lambasting I might as well turn on horoscope columns, which I consider to be the most utterly useless conventions of modern astrology. First of all, if the astrologer is even close to serious they know that their singular paragraph is only going to work well for a terribly small portion of the population. They can't take into account the complexity of individual charts. There are plenty of cases where the Sun Sign (that's the sign you usually mean when you say "I'm a Aries/Taurus/Gemini/Whatever") is not the dominant influence for a person. When such an individual goes over those columns and sees that it doesn't really hold true for them, all the column has done is put another black mark on astrology.

In other words, there are plenty of brilliant astrologers, but the way astrology gets displayed is counter-intuitive. I know it is difficult to overcome a culture of intellectual prejudice, but that's no excuse for encouraging it to be worse.

Perceptions Askew

2004-07-15T09:28:00.000-05:00

Astrology has never really been satisfactorily proven or disproven. Most of those who attempt to disprove it don't know enough about it to understand what it is they are dealing with.

It is kind of like saying nuclear energy doesn't exist because I can't create it in my bathroom using a hammer to smash atoms. Pre- and misconceptions about how astrology works only add to the clumsiness of refuting the study, leaving most serious astrologers who view such attempts thinking "But that's not being done right..." while opponents chortle with glee and consider themselves victorious.

Likewise, it is nearly impossible for astrology to prove itself using the scientific method, the Number One Standard of intellectual advancement in any field of study. The most immediate problem is that you cannot duplicate an exact point in space and time: the source of astrological data. A person may never repeat the same test exactly as before because no two things can occupy the same space at the same time.

Another trouble spot is astrology's reliance on metaphors to get the point across. The mathematics of latitude and longitude and time (defined by planetary locations, with each planet acting as the hand of a vast clock) are easy enough to come by. This information gives an astrologer numerical info: degrees and angles and the like. But "X degree relating to Y degree at an angle of Z" is not a personality trait or event. Those numbers must be translated into recognizable human concepts, so a metaphor is created to do that.

One of the major powers of the human mind is the ability to think metaphorically. But the mind is bound by it's own perceptions and therefore subject to error, especially when translating metaphors. Even good astrologers must constantly guard against being subjective rather than objective. Astrology's basic susceptibility to this leaves its credibility consantly open to attack. And it is not unwarranted criticism.

I was driving in my car yesterday and saw on the back of a Toyota what looked like a stylized Capricorn symbol (if you want to know what it looks like, check out the lower-case "g" in Wingdings font). My first thought was that it was pretty cool, another subtle sign of astrology. Like the Ford Taurus, for example. Then I realized what I was looking at was a capital "V" flowing into a smaller number six.

The car had a V6 engine.

Who Am I?

2004-07-13T08:06:00.000-05:00

Allow me to avoid introducing myself. I think I have good reason.

The question of who we are is a powerful one. We have all sorts of ways that we try to define ourselves, to show that we possess a consistent identity. Yet we are always changing. Most of us are not the same people we were ten years ago. Some of us are evolving as human beings. Others are...skipping down a different path. So who am I?

Well, anyone I want to be.

It might sound like self-help babble, but it's true. And, like so many things about being human, it is not true 100% of the time. I possess certain instincts and natural tendencies that could be considered my self-identity, that core that doesn't seem to change in any of us even when our lives are dramatically transformed. But everyone knows that my natural tendencies will not necessarily be the same as yours.

Here is a statement of fact: Natal astrology can be used to identify that core personality. Just to be clear, natal astrology is personality astrology, not the more popular kind of astrology used for predicting the future (called horary).

But wait a second...fact? I think some people may decide I am pushing it a little far, a little fast. After all, this is my first post, so where is my credibility? Who am I to make such a reckless claim?

I think it's a good question (even though I posed it myself). So, here's my answer:

I once mentioned that I studied natal astrology on a message board. I meant very little by it, but it evoked responses that ranged from curious to hateful. One person wrote that no matter what I might say, I would never be able to convince him that astrology was anything more than a kind of psychological appeasement for people with weak minds.

Fine, except that I was not trying to convince anyone of anything. It had been a casual statement, no more than part of a single line of text. But I realized at that moment that I actually felt no real need to convince other people of what astrology can do. The judgments of others do not alter what I know I am capable of doing. I am familiar with what is a far more intricate and complicated subject than most people know. I am aware of both what I can do with it and where its limits lie. Those things do not survive or fail based on anyone's belief systems.

That makes my attitude a little different from more selfless astrologers who are keen on sharing whatever wonders they have found. This blog is not going to be designed as a learning experience. If you leave and never come back, I will still know what I know. If you do want to come back...well, I do have my ego; I'd be happy to know you did. But more than that, there's always something to discuss, or a new perspective to see (and I mean that for me as well).

That's the point of this blog, above and beyond any discussion of astrology. I think it could help me learn something. Perhaps it will help me be better than who I am now. Whoever that may be.

After all, right now I am just some guy typing on a keyboard.