A new twist on Modern Psychological Astrology

david starling

Well-known member
David, these would be psychiatrists, who are MDs. Generally the therapy or counseling part is done by clinical psychologists. Doctors can prescribe medication, but psychologists cannot. At least in the U. S.

If an MD will sign-off on it, a psychologist can prescribe psychiatric drugs.
 

david starling

Well-known member
[Attempt at humor alert!!!]:

Astrologer to doctor--"just take a look at this Chart, and YOU tell ME medication isn't called for!". :lol:
 
Last edited:

gemNi

Member
@Waybread
GemNi, certainly there are really good astrologers with our without counseling credentials, and with and without astrology credentials. You are probably aware of the professional astrology associations like the AFA and NCGR that offer courses board exams.

Now I am aware of it, cause you mentioned it here.

The movement to offer astrology certification programs was an effort to distinguish between astrologers who actually have an astrology education and have signed on to the association's code of ethics, vs. Just Anybody who can set up shop with only limited and even erroneous astrological knowledge.

Yeah, on that, I just found a great deal of astrology podcast I have yet to rumage through and already, it's hard to know and track which ones are educated.
The podcast I was really looking forward to was Medical Astrology and I seemed to already have lost my way trying to understand biogeneology to bio energetic devices that doesn't quite sound right to me yet 😒 but I understand parts of the Hollistic approach to medical astrology, The Midwifery for Astrology was excellent, easy to grasp even through it's in mideveal times.

I have read a lot of charts for people, but never taken money for doing this. Which is why I call myself an amateur.

Wow that's incredible! How many hours in service have you given in your time, free of charge?

I'll be a lifelong amateur too, because I have no want to be a professional astrologer nor to collect or cash in on my studies, it's purely for personal interest.

Thank-you for the heads-up on the course board exam including the different astrology associations.
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
Some of the professional astrology organizations offer certificates or diplomas, that professional astrologers can indicate on their websites, business cards, &c.

Gosh. I don't know how many hours of chart reading I've done. I'm on-line most days if I'm not travelling, here and on the Astrodienst forum. Once in a while at Skyscript. I don't always read charts, as sometimes I participate in discussions or engage in teaching moments. But I've been at this for a decade.

But you know the saying: you get what you pay for.
 

greybeard

Well-known member
In about 1950 my mother sent off to some guy named Gus for our family's horoscopes. At $25 a crack...real money back then.

He sent them and I read mine several times. Never saw it again.

In 1972 I became skeptically interested in astrology. One of the first books I found was Lewi's "Heaven Knows What".

And there, under "Sun square Uranus" I read: "You have sown your wild oats. And how!"

Straight out of Gus's report. The guy sat down at his typewriter,, copied Lewi's comments on the aspects and collected $25. Nice.

But not such good astrology. Mom did not get what she paid for. Caveat emptor.
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
In about 1950 my mother sent off to some guy named Gus for our family's horoscopes. At $25 a crack...real money back then.

He sent them and I read mine several times. Never saw it again.

In 1972 I became skeptically interested in astrology. One of the first books I found was Lewi's "Heaven Knows What".

And there, under "Sun square Uranus" I read: "You have sown your wild oats. And how!"

Straight out of Gus's report. The guy sat down at his typewriter,, copied Lewi's comments on the aspects and collected $25. Nice.

But not such good astrology. Mom did not get what she paid for. Caveat emptor.

Lewi copied Gus, because HKW was published in 1968.
 

waybread

Well-known member
David, this must have been a reprint or later edition. HKW was first published in 1935. Grant Lewi lived from 1902 to 1951.
 

david starling

Well-known member
Jung lived a long time ago. (1875-1961.) The world and knowledge of human behaviour have changed a lot since then.

I don't see why people in the "helping professions" would be classified as socialists, which is a particular political persuasion. "A political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole." (Google search definition)

Isn't Psychology considered a "Social Science"? I really doubt that Jung was referring specifically to economic Socialism, which is included in the general field of Economics, which is also considered a Social Science. Sounds like just a poor choice of suffix, meant generally rather than specifically.
 

greybeard

Well-known member
Lewi copied Gus???
Great sense of humor D.

And when I said the nodes are empty space...
You come along and explain how the planet's places are empty too.
Either you do not understand the difference between an abstract point and a massive body or you just like to be contrary.
Gee whiz.
 

david starling

Well-known member
Lewi copied Gus???
Great sense of humor D.

And when I said the nodes are empty space...
You come along and explain how the planet's places are empty too.
Either you do not understand the difference between an abstract point and a massive body or you just like to be contrary.
Gee whiz.

I thought it was funny. Gus the ghost! :lol:
Are you really convinced that the physical bodies themselves are transmitting the astrological effects? One problem with that theory is, that the Earth has a mass of its own that would block them out when below the horizon.
The synchronicity theory places lines of Celestial Longitude in the same category as orbital paths. In two dimensions, it's the intersection of two measured lines in both cases. Obviously, since I'm using the Ascendant as a Sign-ruler, I'm going with Synchronicity.
 

david starling

Well-known member
Jung used actual Charts in his practice. That's why the "soft science" of Psychology wants to distance itself from him--it wants more respect from the hard sciences, and embracing astrology would have the opposite effect.
 

greybeard

Well-known member
I don't think any planet has any influence on me. "Influence" and "effects" are terms of convenience, nothing more.

I can say "Mars causes fevers". But Mars causes nothing; it's a convenience of speech.

I have my own view of things, but don't care to argue or even discuss them.
 
Last edited:

david starling

Well-known member
Here's a mouthful!--I would say that astrology is an astronomically-based configuration with correlative, synchronistic significance. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:

waybread

Well-known member
David, "social" in the context of "social science" just means the study of society and how it is organized, with no necessary connection to socialism as a form of government.

Here's the Google search definition of socialism: "a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole."

These days, I think most psychologists think of themselves as behavioural scientists. This isn't to ignore their specialty of social psychology, which looks at interactions between groups of people, or the location of a university psychology department in a college (faculty) of social science; but psychology has a strong clinical practice component that you wouldn't find in, say, economics, anthropology, or political science.

Carl Jung trained as a medical doctor.
 

waybread

Well-known member
Jung used actual Charts in his practice. That's why the "soft science" of Psychology wants to distance itself from him--it wants more respect from the hard sciences, and embracing astrology would have the opposite effect.

David, it's far more than this. Basically Jung based his many theories on his interactions with patients in a one-to-one basis, his study of some of the humanities (literature, mythology,) and his own introspection. In today's terms, his methodology lacked rigor.

His astrology seemed to be limited to matching up sun and moon combinations with married couples. We wouldn't even do synastry this way today.

Today academic psychologists do really serious experimental work with larger samples of human subjects, that more or less follows the scientific method. There are all kinds of controls today on research with human subjects, to minimize some of the abuses and fake science of the past. Psychology seems increasingly headed towards the medical science field of neuroscience. For one thing, that's where the grant money is.

Clinical psychologists in North America today have to undergo a really rigorous education requiring a Master's or Ph. D. degree, and many hours of supervision in a clinical setting. Then they have to pass a state or provincial board exam in order to practice.

Of course, an astrologer can hang out a shingle with no qualifications whatsoever.

The trouble with astrology is that, to date, it has performed really poorly in the kinds of statistical tests routinely applied to other theories about human behaviour.
 
Last edited:

gemNi

Member
In my view only, you strip Jung's words and works down and there is symbolism that people seem to connect with, I can only atest this outcome is a direct result by those he studied on, who Jung viewed as gifted, which is where he oriented his lengthly theories from, accurately or inaccurately is for one to determine for themselves.

Make no mistake Jung is not the only words and works of symbolism. There are others more widely accurate then just his research that under a microscope view is questionable how much is of it is faulty projection of his indescretion made so public through his disaster love life. Life is forever forwarded to our tomorrows with new symbolic discoveries. Stop limiting oneself into thinking Jung is the be all - he isn't and never will be.
 

david starling

Well-known member
In my view only, you strip Jung's words and works down and there is symbolism that people seem to connect with, I can only atest this outcome is a direct result by those he studied on, who Jung viewed as gifted, which is where he oriented his lengthly theories from, accurately or inaccurately is for one to determine for themselves.

Make no mistake Jung is not the only words and works of symbolism. There are others more widely accurate then just his research that under a microscope view is questionable how much is of it is faulty projection of his indescretion made so public through his disaster love life. Life is forever forwarded to our tomorrows with new symbolic discoveries. Stop limiting oneself into thinking Jung is the be all - he isn't and never will be.

To most modern behavioral psychologists, Jung is more like a never was.
 
Top