3 ms·

> it seems like a meaningless statement To elaborate, I was using it to qualify my description of astrological truth vs concrete truth; without understanding t

> it seems like a meaningless statement To elaborate, I was using it to qualify my description of astrological truth vs concrete truth; without understanding the houses, and thus the archetypes at ones disposal for a given frame of reference, one can't understand how an incorrect prediction could simultaneously be true. To give the simplest of examples: Astrologer predicts in 2033 that so and so is going to have a child, based upon Jupiter transiting the 5th house. So and so doesn't have a child, but rather publishes a book that they have been passionately working on. The prediction is concretely false, but if you understand the houses, it is actually true, since the 5th governs children and creative endeavors. One has "given birth" to a book. Roughly speaking, this is the primary mode of astrological prediction. It takes a certain fluidity of mind and some learning to grasp this sort of thing -- that is, archetypal thinking -- and one can't expect skeptics to equip themselves for such a task unless they are already so inclined.

DoreenMichele 4y ago
I fully understand why the house system is a big deal to astrologers. For one thing, it's like half the chart. It dramatically enriches the amount of information you have to work with. I've spent a lot of years toying with the idea of writing a blog that critiques astrology in a serious way. I've even made a few stabs at it. But it seems like a pointless waste of time. People who believe in astrology wouldn't want to hear "You're wrong!" and people who think it's hoccum wouldn't bother to read it. Understanding the house system can explain to other people who believe in astrology why astrologers sometimes make predictions that are so off the mark. It cannot explain to skeptics why astrologers think the stars empower them to predict anything. And skeptics are not wrong to wonder that. Astrology has a poor track for prediction. I don't personally think predicting extremely specific future events (like the birth of a child) is even a good use for astrology. And I'm someone who studied it in earnest and still thinks it has some merit, yet I spend less and less time on the topic.

DoreenMichele 4y ago

I fully understand why the house system is a big deal to astrologers. For one thing, it's like half the chart. It dramatically enriches the amount of information you have to work with. I've spent a lot of years toying with the idea of writing a blog that critiques astrology in a serious way. I've even made a few stabs at it. But it seems like a pointless waste of time. People who believe in astrology wouldn't want to hear "You're wrong!" and people who think it's hoccum wouldn't bother to read it. Understanding the house system can explain to other people who believe in astrology why astrologers sometimes make predictions that are so off the mark. It cannot explain to skeptics why astrologers think the stars empower them to predict anything. And skeptics are not wrong to wonder that. Astrology has a poor track for prediction. I don't personally think predicting extremely specific future events (like the birth of a child) is even a good use for astrology. And I'm someone who studied it in earnest and still thinks it has some merit, yet I spend less and less time on the topic.