different ways of seeing

[Guest guest]

Risto sent:

 

Maybe there just aren't so many fixed facts in astrology, just

different ways of seeing, or nodes of conceptual convergence, each of

which do their job of reinforcing a particular school of thought to

work in certain way by repeatedly assigning certain meanings to

astrological configurations. This can indeed be the mechanism that

empowers them to act effectively. Thus, repeating application keeps

reinforcing the observed astrological mechanism that seem to give

meaning to events. (Could we also introduce a bit of Rupert Sheldrake

here?)

 

Human mind, collective and individual, (both linked with even greater

'minds' of greater systems / wholes) must have a lot to do with ways

astrology seems to work. 12 interdependent, consecutive principles

_can_ be mapped on more circles and from more starting points than

just one. Different circles and different starting points do determine

what we might be looking at and in what manner, but none of them can

be elevated to an absolute position. Thus, the big question is not

which zodiac is the correct one or whether one or the other exists at

all. These are thinking modes of the past. Astrology is no Newtonian

science, where such suppositions are applicable. Instead, there is

Mind everywhere mysteriously partaking in creating apparent

astrological phenomena. In this sphere of astrological perception 'we'

are not other than 'the planets'. Outside this sort of inclusive

perception, many things astrological probably cannot be 'explained' at

all. What we need, as a collective, is a leap of consciousness to

catch and include (maybe once more) the dimensions, where astrologer's

mind is more consciously united with his various 'tools', even though

at present this approach may lie pretty much outside of the box of

many astrologers' way of thinking.

-----------------------------

Thank you for this, Risto! Fascinating...

 

Love, Diana

 

 

Website: http://ye-stars.com <http://ye-stars.com/>