Astrologers' Community

Astrologers' Community (https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/index.php)
-   Research and Development (https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=91)
-   -   Origins of psychological astrology? (https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=78478)

AstroNous 09-14-2014 04:34 PM

Origins of psychological astrology?
 
I would like some light about the origins of psychological astrology. How did it come to be? What cultures saw its birth first? Etc.

It would be interesting and useful to see how the ancients approached the psychological aspect of the natal chart in contrast with how modern astrologers approach it.

The more intellectually impacting the reply, the better. By intellectually impacting, I mean having strong logical implications. So to rephrase, the stronger the logical implications, the better. To define even further, there is a good chance that the "plebeian" word that defines something intellectually impacting is "mind-blowing".

Well, I hope I can get high quality knowledge out of this thread!

Kaiousei no Senshi 09-14-2014 05:02 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
There's a long history in the astrological literature about the quality of the soul, and this is going to be what you are looking for. We find it first (maybe) in Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, where he spends a bit talking about how to tell about someone's soul using the position of Mercury and the Moon. I'm sure there is probably something about this in Valens's Anthology as well, I am just less familiar with this work.

As we move into the medieval period, the focus becomes a bit less on Mercury and the Moon and the more common indicator of an individual's soul or personality/psychology is the temperament theory where every individual is some mix of choler/melancholer/phlegm/sanguine and this unique mixture has implications for our physical health and psychological characteristics.

The biggest difference between classical and modern psychological astrology is that modern psychological astrology sees the entire birth charts as representative of the native's psyche, so that everything in a chart has some implications on someone's character. Classically this wasn't the case, and there were only a few select parts of the chart that had any direct correlation with the person that it belonged to.

waybread 09-14-2014 06:03 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
In English language astrology, I'd look to the writings of Dane Rudhyar, who was active throughout the mid-20th century. This wasn't psychology as a behavioural scientist would understand it today, but more akin to a mix of philosophy and the human potential movement. Psychological astrology got another boost ca. 1970 from Liz Greene and her associates, and Stephen Arroyo. However, even Greene did not have strong educational credentials in psychology. The psychology in her books tends to derive largely from the work of Carl Jung; and some even harkens back to Freud. So it is hard to say how much of psychological astrology an actual psychologist would recognize today. I note that a practising clinical psychologist usually needs at least a Master's degree in psychology or an allied field, and then s/he has to pass a board certification exam. I doubt that many astrologers have done this.

However, many of us are informed by psychology in the popular press.

JUPITERASC 09-14-2014 10:08 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AstroNous (Post 574646)

I would like some light about the origins of psychological astrology. How did it come to be? What cultures saw its birth first? Etc.

It would be interesting and useful to see how the ancients approached the psychological aspect of the natal chart in contrast with how modern astrologers approach it.

The more intellectually impacting the reply, the better. By intellectually impacting, I mean having strong logical implications. So to rephrase, the stronger the logical implications, the better. To define even further, there is a good chance that the "plebeian" word that defines something intellectually impacting is "mind-blowing".

Well, I hope I can get high quality knowledge out of this thread!


'....The recent revival of the older, pre-20th century forms of astrology in the past few decades
has led to some major differences in how “modern” and “traditional” astrologers practice and conceptualize the subject,
and the purpose was to explore some of the specific points of divergence between the approaches.
The end result was a sweeping two-hour debate that covered several important topics
related to the conceptualization, practice, and philosophy of astrology in the 21st century.....'
http://theastrologypodcast.com/2014/...rology-debate/

Also discusses the role of consciousness in astrological interpretation :smile:

Zarathu 09-14-2014 10:37 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
You're going to have to define what you mean by psychological astrology....

In my opinion, most people who think they are doing psychological astrology are not, because to do psychological astrology, you must have training in both counseling or clinical psychology and training in astrology. Its very rare to have both of those in one person.

waybread 09-15-2014 03:11 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
It is also worth mentioning that traditional astrology dealt with the "soul" in a way that we today would define as personality; and the 4 elements translated into "temperaments" that were also close to personality types. But psychology? This is a modern discipline and university subject which has gone through big changes over the course of its history, but today seems closer to "behavioural science" or even neuroscience. So it isn't anything we really find astrologers engaging in at a professional level, so far as I know. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology

Alan Leo had no education in psychology (and little formal education,) but like the other theosophists, he had a "modern" interest in how the mind worked-- as they understood it at the turn of the 20th century. Theirs was a blend of books on personality, philosophy, and esotericism. It may be a misnomer to call much of what we do "psychology."

waybread 09-15-2014 03:37 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Thanks, Zarathu-- yes, there are a few of you legitimate psychologists with degrees, in the astrological fold-- perhaps .66% is about the right percentage.

Zarathu 09-16-2014 03:36 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
I was kind of hoping that the OP would return and share more about what they were asking about psychological astrology.....

JUPITERASC 09-16-2014 07:24 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
THE CENTRE FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL ASTROLOGY :smile:

The CPA provides a unique workshop, seminar and professional training programme,
designed to foster the cross-fertilisation of the fields of astrology
and depth, humanistic, and transpersonal psychology
http://www.cpalondon.com/



Centre for Psychological Astrology was founded by Liz Greene and Howard Sasportas in 1983.
In 2011 the CPA changed
to a new Plato’s Academy style of learning. http://www.cpalondon.com/new%20cpa.html Here you can learn psychological astrology,
attend public seminars, study online,
receive mailings and browse the CPA Press astrology books. This is learning for the sheer love and joy of learning

waybread 09-16-2014 11:44 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Yeah, well. We can imagine how much current academic psychology is in that program.

JUPITERASC 09-17-2014 07:24 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
You are an individual born on a specific day,time, month, year and in a specific place.
That's what sets you apart and gives you a particular life journey
http://www.psychologicalastrology.com


What is Psychological Astrology? :smile:

opinions include the following:

QUOTE

'.... psychological astrology looks at the birth chart as a map of who we are,
our life journey, our complexes
and can help us get a clearer picture of who we really are.
It can help us work out our problems and clarify our goals.
A psychological astrologer, such as John Green,
will help you understand where you are going in life,
why problems recur in your life
and
teach you how to develop yourself better.
This can lead to helping you have a greater understanding of yourself,
your relationships with others and the direction of your life.....'


'...Psychological astrology developed from an understanding of the works of Freud and Jung.
Jung was fascinated with astrology,
and cast horoscopes himself
to "find a clue to the core of psychological truth.
"
Probably the best known exponent of psychological astrology
is Dr Liz Greene, a Jungian analyst,
she set up the Centre for Psychological Astrology in London 1983
with the late Howard Sasportas, a psychosynthesis psychotherapist
to foster the cross-fertilization of astrology
with the fields of depth, humanistic, and transpersonal psychology....'

Kaiousei no Senshi 09-17-2014 03:30 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
The problem with Liz Greene's psychological astrology is that we aren't sure she really has a degree in psychology. Last I heard she still wasn't saying where it was from. Make of that what you may.

JUPITERASC 09-17-2014 06:40 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiousei no Senshi (Post 575094)

The problem with Liz Greene's psychological astrology is that we aren't sure she really has a degree in psychology. Last I heard she still wasn't saying where it was from. Make of that what you may.

Curiouser and curiouser :smile:

waybread 09-20-2014 03:40 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
No, it wasn't from UCLA, but from an unaccredited and now-defunct diploma mill in Los Angles. http://www.astroamerica.com/greenebio2.html

In 2010 Liz Greene received a Ph. D. from an accredited English university, the University of Bristol, but it is in history, not psychology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liz_Greene

JUPITERASC 09-20-2014 12:13 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
NOEL TYL offers Lessons that cover every detail of psychologically rich, deep analytical astrology :smile: apparently
following the text Synthesis & Counseling in Astrology
- The Professional Manual
(by Noel Tyl, Llewellyn Publications), a 1,000-page manual
. http://www.noeltyl.com/masters.html



waybread 09-21-2014 02:22 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
According to Wikipedia, Noel Tyl graduated from Harvard U. in 1958, with a B. A. degree in Social Relations, which was a mix of psych, soc, and anthro. His pre-astrology career was as an opera singer. There's not a lot of actual psychology here-- just some undergraduate courses. This isn't to say that Tyl wouldn't read widely in psychology, but it's a little different than a rigorous degree program in psychology.

Becoming a clinical (practicing) psychologist today in most western countries requires at minimum a Master's degree, a lot of pre-certification clinical hours under senior supervision, plus passing a licensing exam. Does anyone know of any "modern psychological astrologers" who have done this?

waybread 09-21-2014 02:34 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Way to go, Zarathu! I take my virtual hat off to you. But how many astrologers who publish "psychological astrology" books or articles have your credentials?

spock 11-27-2014 11:11 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Zarathu wrote:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 574730)
In my opinion, most people who think they are doing psychological astrology are not, because to do psychological astrology, you must have training in both counseling or clinical psychology and training in astrology.

and waybread added:
Quote:

Originally Posted by waybread (Post 574752)
Psychology "is a modern discipline and university subject which has gone through big changes over the course of its history, but today seems closer to "behavioural science" or even neuroscience. So it isn't anything we really find astrologers engaging in at a professional level, so far as I know. . . . It may be a misnomer to call much of what we do "psychology."

If astrology were a developed research discipline the relevant psychological categories and functions would be an integral part of the astrological curriculum, and a degree in it would be an intro into that research community, a route to effectively contribute to it, and an indication that the holder exceeds a minimum level of knowledge and competence. But it isn't, and present-day astrologers, much less our distant predecessors, can't even say unequivocally what those categories and functions are. At astrology's current level of development what makes an astrologer a psychological astrologer isn't a degree but an orientation, one in which what is sought is psychological information rather than information about events and circumstances. I doubt that the information provided by astrologers, psychological or otherwise, is accurate, but a degree in one or more psychological disciplines, which individually might or might not be relevant to astrology, will not in itself enable such astrologers to provide better information. The problem with looking for astrological correlates of modern psychological categories and functions is that we don't know, absent appropriate and sufficiently rigorous astrological research, what kinds of information astrology actually provides. In my opinion it provides information about psychodynamic states, and about events only to the extent that they're probable outcomes of such states. The ideas of depth psychologists Freud, Jung, Abraham Maslow and Erik Erikson, of lifespan development theorists Daniel Levinson and Gail Sheehy, and of cognitive development theorists Jean Piaget and L.S. Vygotsky are strikingly relevant to astrology. The contents of their theories, appropriately recast and contexted, are the stuff of astrological effects. These effects are time based, and their timing corresponds to planetary periods. For instance Freud's ego, Jung's persona, Levinson's and Sheehy's Age 30 Transition, Maslow's esteem needs, Erikson's Industry vs. Inferiority stage, Piaget's Concrete Operational stage, Vygotsky's Crisis at Age 7 and Grant Lewi's Saturn Return all refer to the same phenomenon, a psychological drive that exists continuously but which intensifies and comes to the forefront at 7⅓-year intervals before receding again into the background. Other drives correspond to other planetary periods.

From this perspective the evolution of psychological astrology is the evolution of astrologers' understanding of the effects astrology actually encompasses, and of how those effects are indicated. That's how I read Kaiousei no Senshi's useful comments in his initial response to the OP, and waybread's inclusion of English-language astrologers Arroyo, Greene and Rudhyar as more recent contributors, to which I would add Grant Lewi and some of his transitist predecessors. However, the lack of academic degrees worried about by waybread, Zarathu and Kaiousei no Senshi would be relevant only if astrology were much more advanced than it actually is (in which case the degrees would be in astrology and would include relevant psychological knowledge).

waybread 11-28-2014 02:56 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Will the real psychology please stand up? Astrologers don't get to define what it is. Credentialed psychologists do. And we kid ourselves if we think that references to some old humanistic psychologists of the 19th and 20th centuries is going to cut it.

Psychology, like any discipline, moves forward. It builds upon the work of its Great Ones, but it also sometimes critiques and disavows earlier work that proved to be unsustainable. Freud's fabricated research "results" would be a major example. But surely you know this? I'd like to see "psychological astrologers" cite current work in psychology. Journals such as the following may be of interest: http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=...umes&jcode=rel
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=...umes&jcode=aca
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=...umes&jcode=amp

But I don't hold my breath.

For the record, Gail Sheehy's degrees are in English, home economics, and journalism.

I take your point that astrology is theoretically weakly developed. But this doesn't mean it is sensible or wise for non-credentialed people to identify their branch of the field as psychological astrology. It just shows our ignorance.

Liz Greene's credentials are a case in point. She did finally get a Ph. D. late in life from an accredited university, but it isn't in psychology.

Kaiousei no Senshi 11-28-2014 03:30 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by spock
However, the lack of academic degrees worried about by waybread, Zarathu and Kaiousei no Senshi would be relevant only if astrology were much more advanced than it actually is (in which case the degrees would be in astrology and would include relevant psychological knowledge).

Hello, I can't speak for waybread or Zarathu, but I don't see the plights of psychological astrology as really any different from, say medical astrology in the modern age (aside from the inherent differences in the ability to verify). I, personally, am more likely to consider the opinion and practices of someone who has formal education in medicine or a sub-discipline of it over someone who does not. In the past, most university trained doctors were astrologers, so their texts on the subject were basically their polished up case files. Similarly, I am more likely to trust the opinions and practices of someone with a degree in psychology if I were to study psychological astrology.

If I'm reading your post correctly, it seems like you are putting most of the focus on the astrological part (that if astrology were more academically accepted, they would be astrologers who do psychology, not psychologists who do astrology). However, my main focus is on the part of the astrologer who is able to take their education and profession and apply that to their astrological work.

Making the best of what we have. :)

Therese 11-28-2014 09:27 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
I think we should avoid using words like "psychological" unless we mean "belonging to the academic field of psychology". we can invent our own terms to specify our orientation...

When I was at university, we had frequent debate seminars with psychology students on the clinical "track", and sometimes we also exchanged courses. I even spent a semester visiting the daytime hospital with them (treating schizophrenic patients). Their coursework was about the patients, and mine was about how psychology informed and influenced the way they perceived and interacted with them. How using a professional, symptom-oriented vocabulary and adopting a pre-defined professional attitude changes the way we perceive another person. There was a debate at the end of the semester and it was very interesting for all of us to exchange our impressions and viewpoints.

Before psychology laid claim to the psyche, it was in everything, it participated in and manifested through the whole world. Today, we would convey the same idea by saying that "the world of experience is produced by the man who experiences it" (Neisser). It is possible to know ourselves through various ways, through art, philosophy, etc. Psychology is not the one and only "legitimate" discourse on the human psyche.

and I don't think that astrology should adopt the "glasses" through which psychology views the human being, the field does its job pretty well without the help of astrology. I think that astrology should go on developing its own, unique view of the psyche, and in the meantime interact with psychology, philosophy, art, religion, etc.

It can bring so much more if psychologists/artists/etc combine these disciplines in their own, unique way (that's what Zarathu is doing, for example), rather than study some pre-set "psychological/artistic/etc astrology". When philosophy, art, astrology and psychology (and other fields) challenge and/or complete each other, it helps us develop the flexibility of perspective that is a must if we want to grow in understanding...

Inline 11-28-2014 10:14 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 575709)

Other than me? Glen Perry, PhD. But then, I'M NOT A CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST, I'm a counseling psychologist....I have a Masters in Counseling Psychology....

Unfortunatey,....in clinical practice a conflict of perspective exists between ones 'religious beliefs and commitments' and the 'scientific and professional objectives of contemporary psychology'......it even goes so far, as to undermine the credibility of a practicing clinical psychologist.

I know from personal, first hand experience that qualified practioners in the field of psychology have huge difficulties surviving in practice, if they are vocal about their beliefs.....religious or otherwise.

This might explain the lack of practicing psychologists / astrologers.

waybread 11-28-2014 04:23 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Great post, Therese.

I think that either modern psychological astrology needs to drop its pretenses to being psychological, or else astrologers should get the academic qualifications to come by the term honestly and credibly. For sure-- we could use more people with a B. S. (B. Sc.) in psychology and a Master's degree in psychology, counseling, or a closely allied field.

It didn't help that Liz Greene got her first "Ph. D." from a now-defunct diploma mill in LA (not UCLA or USC) with a "dissertation" topic only loosely affiliated with psychology. Apparently that was sufficient for her to hang out her shingle as a practising psychologist in the UK in 1971. http://www.astroamerica.com/greenebio2.html

It's OK to bash the academics or to praise the early psychological astrologers like Greene for their contributions to astrology. It's good for us to keep apprised of recent developments in psychology in lay-person's terms. But these are different issues than borrowing a term to which few of us can legitimately lay claim. It just makes us look like a bunch of dummies to claim something without evidence to support us.

Zarathu is one with rights to the term. Therese? How many others?

Astrology can legitimately lay claim to a much older delineation of personality: temperament.

Therese 11-28-2014 05:12 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
*No, I am not a psychologist, we shared courses within the framework of an interdisciplinary doctoral program in the human sciences. And no, I don't have my phd yet, either. absolutorium done, thesis overdue, lol.

spock 11-29-2014 10:55 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by waybread (Post 587841)
Will the real psychology please stand up? Astrologers don't get to define what it is. Credentialed psychologists do.

Really? The Online Etymology Dictionary offers this: "psychology (n.): 1650s, "study of the soul," from Modern Latin psychologia, probably coined mid-16c. in Germany by Melanchthon from Latinized form of Greek psykhe- "breath, spirit, soul" (see psyche) + logia "study of" (see -logy). Meaning "study of the mind" first recorded 1748, from Christian Wolff's "Psychologia empirica" (1732); main modern behavioral sense is from early 1890s." As for the current sense of the word, putting "psychology: definition" in the google search field yields: "the scientific study of the human mind and its functions, especially those affecting behavior in a given context; the mental characteristics or attitude of a person or group; the mental and emotional factors governing a situation or activity."

Academic psychologists didn't create the word psychology, nor has it been patented so as to forbid all usages not certified by them. Rather, they use it in the title of their disciplines as a descriptive indicator of what they do. People who use the word in that context understand that the word is being used in a more specialized manner than its general sense, one which includes "the study of" as an antecedent and the means of study as a further specification. Psychology doesn't even mean the same thing, in terms of its fully specified meaning and context, in every academic discipline that includes it in its title. The subject matter (and means of study) of developmental psychology, cognitive psychology, evolutionary psychology, educational psychology, personality psychology, etc. are not coextensive. Each studies certain aspects of the mind from a particular perspective. Developmental psychology, for instance, is interested in those mental processes that develop over time. Cognitive psychology studies the mind from an information-processing perspective. Psychological astrology is the study of time-based mental processes, with "time-based" referring more specifically to planetary periods. It's obviously not as advanced in the understanding of its subject matter as any of the established academic psychology disciplines are of theirs, but that doesn't mean psychological astrologers shouldn't be allowed to use a word with a generally understood referent (i.e., the mind) to suggest what they do. Psychology in all of the contexts just mentioned is being used as a tag, like the title of a book, one that hints at or implies what's inside. The fully detailed specification of the contents can only be gotten at by reading the book, on the one hand, or mastering the discipline on the other.

Quote:

Psychology, like any discipline, moves forward. It builds upon the work of its Great Ones, but it also sometimes critiques and disavows earlier work that proved to be unsustainable. Freud's fabricated research "results" would be a major example. But surely you know this? I'd like to see "psychological astrologers" cite current work in psychology.
Astrology, too, moves forward and builds upon the work of its Great Ones, albeit at a glacial pace due to not having yet crossed what might be termed the empirical threshold. A major impediment to crossing that threshold is astrologers' characteristic (mis)use of words. Virtually all treat a given word as if it belonged to a particular planet. (Your treating the word psychology as if it belonged to a particular discipline is a comparably erroneous usage.) It would be a major advance if a sufficient number of astrologers realized that a particular word, like ambition, doesn't go with Saturn regardless of meaning. Rather, it's an observed meaning or effect that recurs at Saturn intervals, of which one of the senses of ambition, something along the lines of a desire to succeed at a profession, is an example, that goes with Saturn. In the short run this would give astrologers less to say, because they would no longer be able to make a given chart (even an erroneous one) fit a given event (even an erroneous one). But in the long run it would give us far more to say, because over time we'd be able to say more, and with more accuracy, about what predictably coincides with a given configuration, as well as which configurations and kinds of configurations (not all!) even have terrestrial correspondents. And what we'd be able to say would be largely psychological, because I believe astrological effects are psychological (albeit not coextensive with the psychological effects any given academic discipline studies). That's why, although I have no problem with psychological astrologers using the word psychology to indicate that astrology as they practice it has to do with the mind rather than external events, I don't use that term to describe myself. To me it's redundant, the equivalent of saying wet water.

Quote:

I take your point that astrology is theoretically weakly developed. But this doesn't mean it is sensible or wise for non-credentialed people to identify their branch of the field as psychological astrology. It just shows our ignorance.
Actually, I think your argument demonstrates ignorance of the relationship between observations, words, meanings, and legitimate usage, an ignorance characteristic of astrologers.

waybread 11-30-2014 12:40 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Exactly, Spock. We don't live in the Days of Yore, the last I looked.

From Lewis Carroll:

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’

’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

’The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.”

Yeah, well. We know what happened to HD in the children's nursery rhyme.

Spock, howbeit you take your ideas to your nearest Department of Psychology (or Behavioural Science) and interact with those people about your ideas? Alternatively, phone up a respected clinical psychologist in your area. Declare a Take a Psychologist to Lunch Day.

My post indicates no ignorance on this point. Too bad you've resorted to personal insults. Of course I'm aware that the term "psychology" has non-academic common usages. Big Duh-Uh on that one, Spock. But if you read "modern psychological astrologers" like Liz Greene, Richard Idemon, or Howard Sasportas, this generic meaning isn't their usage. (Greene, for example, got deeply into archetypes, which seemingly owes more to literature scholar Joseph Campbell than to Carl Jung.) But is either yesterday's "humanistic psychology for lay people" or a loose popular definition truly the direction in which 21st astrology should be heading? You seem, moreover, to have a strong anti-academic streak, which is unhelpful.

As the discipline of psychology moves more into behavioural science and even neuroscience, I believe that it will have many insights to offer astrologers-- provided we're not too timid to move beyond our apparent early 20th century humanities comfort zone. (See, for example, Leonard Mlodinow, Subliminal: How your unconscious mind rules your behaviour.)

I really disagree with your stereotyping astrologers as equating single planets with specific concepts. Saturn=ambition is too simplistic by half. In a horoscope, quintiles are one indicator of ambition; placements of Mars, the sun, and the MC can be others. Are you familiar with Rex E. Bills, The Rulership Book; or the modern-trad debate re: whether modern planets are sufficiently distinguished from traditional ones? The moon and Neptune, for example, currently share significant areas of overlap.

I wonder what you make of traditional western astrology's work on temperament. (See Dorian Greenbaum, Temperament, Astrology's Forgotten Key.)

Therese 11-30-2014 07:25 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
The problem with "psychological" is that it can mean anything from articles in teen magazines through Jungian depth psychology, from mysticism to cognitive behaviour therapy and beyond.

It's like "philosophy". I rarely say anymore that I am in philosophy, I just say the current name of my program (Human Sciences) and rarely specify which department. Everyone has their own idea about what philosophy is, and it is actually something very different in Anglo-Saxon countries than in Europe etc... and then there are all those multinational companies who start their "who we are" sections with "the philosophy of our company is..." the what? I stopped using the word "philosophy" altogether except when I'm in an academic context.

I don't think psychologists can or want to claim ownership over the human psyche, the ones I met were quite happy to participate in interdisciplinary conferences with philosophers, artists, priests, teachers, etc.

What they have a problem with is when somebody puts their theories into practice without the necessary training and qualifications. Every human interaction carries responsibility for both parties, but in our contemporary society, certain labels like "psychologist", "doctor", "teacher", "priest" etc create an inequality where the "patient", "client", "student" etc gives up some of their power to the other person, they become vulnerable. The student trusts the teacher when they are told that the past tense of "swim" is "swam" and will use the word accordingly; the patient trusts that the doctor is correct when they are told to take some paracatemol and go home; the client trusts that the psychologist will help them through a crisis and they will be themselves again, and so on.

There's nothing wrong with discussing "psychology" with others and having our own theories as long as we are all equal. But it is something entirely different and very dangerous to try and apply our own version of "psychology" to another person's specific situation, especially if they are in a crisis, for example. by doing so, we assume some responsibility for the other person's actions.

Kaiousei no Senshi 11-30-2014 04:57 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
So then, what is the proposed solution for this problem we are experiencing? What should "psychological" astrology call itself? Do you (anyone) feel like individuals who practice "psychological" astrology without being certified or educated in psychology are basically scamming people by claiming or implying they have credentials they don't actually have?

Quote:

Originally Posted by waybread
Astrology can legitimately lay claim to a much older delineation of personality: temperament.

I disagree. Temperaments evolved through the theory of Hippocratic medicine and were later sort of codified by Galen. Because it was basically a medical condition it, like all medial conditions, had an expression in astrology that could be used to ascertain and treat it.

JUPITERASC 11-30-2014 05:05 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Therese (Post 588146)

The problem with "psychological" is that it can mean anything
from articles in teen magazines
through Jungian depth psychology,
from mysticism to cognitive behaviour therapy
and beyond.


Not to mention for example
that there are multiple areas in the broad general field of PSYCHOLOGY
and so
holding qualifications/degrees/diplomas as a CHILD PSYCHOLOGIST
does not automatically allow the holder of that qualification
to practice as an ADULT PSYCHOLOGIST
nor to practice
as a FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGIST
nor as an EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST
and so on ad infinitum.......

each area of PSYCHOLOGY has its specialists
and
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASTROLOGY is a somewhat grey area :smile:
because
any person qualified from ANY of the many areas of PSYCHOLOGY
may categorise themselves as a PSYCHOLOGICAL ASTROLOGER
but
that person is qualified in only ONE field of psychological study

Quote:

Originally Posted by Therese (Post 588146)

It's like "philosophy". I rarely say anymore that I am in philosophy, I just say the current name of my program (Human Sciences) and rarely specify which department. Everyone has their own idea about what philosophy is, and it is actually something very different in Anglo-Saxon countries than in Europe etc... and then there are all those multinational companies who start their "who we are" sections with "the philosophy of our company is..." the what? I stopped using the word "philosophy" altogether except when I'm in an academic context.

I don't think psychologists can or want to claim ownership over the human psyche, the ones I met were quite happy to participate in interdisciplinary conferences with philosophers, artists, priests, teachers, etc.

What they have a problem with is when somebody puts their theories into practice without the necessary training and qualifications. Every human interaction carries responsibility for both parties, but in our contemporary society, certain labels like "psychologist", "doctor", "teacher", "priest" etc create an inequality where the "patient", "client", "student" etc gives up some of their power to the other person, they become vulnerable. The student trusts the teacher when they are told that the past tense of "swim" is "swam" and will use the word accordingly; the patient trusts that the doctor is correct when they are told to take some paracatemol and go home; the client trusts that the psychologist will help them through a crisis and they will be themselves again, and so on.

There's nothing wrong with discussing "psychology" with others
and having our own theories as long as we are all equal.
But it is something entirely different and very dangerous to try and apply our own version of "psychology"
to another person's specific situation,
especially if they are in a crisis, for example.
by doing so, we assume some responsibility for the other person's actions.



waybread 12-01-2014 01:49 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Therese wrote:

Quote:

I don't think psychologists can or want to claim ownership over the human psyche, the ones I met were quite happy to participate in interdisciplinary conferences with philosophers, artists, priests, teachers, etc.
This is correct, and shame on us if we define psychology so extensively as to mean anything and everything to do with the mind. Psychology focuses on human behaviour, and is often called a behavioural science. Obviously the humanities and fine arts have something to say about the mind, as well, but I wouldn't confuse great works of art or literature with psychology.

I feel much more comfortable in calling a lot of what passes for "modern psychological astrology" as simply "modern astrology." Some of the older more explicitly psychological material by Greene et al. seems to stem from the "blame Mom" tropes that were popular in the mid-20th century. Some of their work on archetypes comes from Joseph Campbell, who was a professor of literature.

KnS, are you familiar with Dorian Greenbaum's book on temperament? Also it is clear that many mental health problems have "medical" or physical/biochemical causes. A huge example today is PTSD.

Kaiousei no Senshi 12-01-2014 01:56 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by waybread
KnS, are you familiar with Dorian Greenbaum's book on temperament? Also it is clear that many mental health problems have "medical" or physical/biochemical causes. A huge example today is PTSD.

Yes, I am familiar with that text.

Inline 12-01-2014 08:36 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588231)

Yeah.... we definitely don't tell people that we are also practicing astrologers. I never told a soul.

I know, but you are in the minority.

Here is a recently published paper on the religious beliefs of US academics professors in American universities. The results show that amoung all the different disciplines at a university, it is psychologists that are the least likely to believe in god. And I would rephrase that, saying that it is psychologists that are the least likely to admit in a belief...god, or otherwise....

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/epiphen...igious-of.html

An article by the American Psychological Assoc. in 2010 states: "that some psychologists have characterized religious beliefs as pathological, seeing religion as a malignant social force that encourages irrational thoughts and ritualistic behaviors."
The APA discusses religious beliefs here, but astrology comes under a similar heading for them...

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/12/believe.aspx

Therese 12-01-2014 09:01 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by waybread (Post 588300)
Also it is clear that many mental health problems have "medical" or physical/biochemical causes. A huge example today is PTSD.

I don't think that it is proven that mental health problems have physical/biochemical causes, what we know is that mental health issues and physical problems and/or biochemical imbalances go hand in hand. It's a very intricate topic, and the "anatomy" of "research" itself is just as complex.

PTSD is particularly interesting because

"Specifically, PTSD differs from other neuropsychiatric disorders in that it is the only chronic mental disorder in which the experience of an environmentally induced event (i.e., the trauma) is critical to its diagnosis and development. That the development of PTSD is not genetically or biologically inevitable allows examination of the biological consequences of a psychological phenomenon." /In: J. Vasterling and C. Brewin (2005) Neuropsychology of PTSD: Biological, Cognitive, and Clinical Perspectives , pp.x/

JUPITERASC 12-01-2014 10:26 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588233)

This is not necessarily true.
Many of these titles are not separate titles
but specialties within a broad range of skills,
and depend on the work environment that that the professional is asked to perform in,
as well as the licensing and certification requirements of agencies
and the governmental bodies where they work.
Just like astrology, its not this simple.


Clearly all are agreed that Psychologists study behaviour, motivations, thoughts and feelings
for the purpose of helping people overcome or control their problems.


Obviously excellent communication and listening skills are a necessary part of the work :smile:


Different countries have different qualification requirements

ASPPB is the association of psychology licensing boards in the United States and Canada
formed in 1961 to serve the psychology boards in the two countries.
ASPPB created and maintains a standardized written exam, the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP),
which is used by licensing boards to assess candidates for licensure and certification
http://www.asppb.net/

'.....ASPPB advocates for the advancement of mobility
by offering several mobility programs to assist in licensure of psychologists.
Committed to serving as a voice for those responsible for the regulation of the practice of psychology
ASPPB has drafted a Model Act, Model Regulations, a Code of Conduct and guidelines
for the use and/or adoption by state, territorial and provincial psychology boards.....'




AUSTRALIAN PSYCHOLOGICAL SOCIETY
http://www.psychology.org.au/studentHQ/studying/

'.....It's important when choosing a psychology degree
to ensure that the course is accredited by the Australian Psychology Accreditation Council (APAC),
as only graduates of APAC-accredited and Psychology Board of Australia-approved courses
are eligible to register to practise as a psychologist
.....' Read more about choosing a degree here.




In the UK

Psychologists need to complete a three-year degree in psychology,
followed by a three-year postgraduate qualification which relates to their chosen specialism
and only then is one qualified to specialise in ONE of the following areas:

EDUCATIONAL psychology - helping children and young people to overcome difficulties and further their educational and psychological development
OCCUPATIONAL psychology– helping businesses improve their performance and increase employee job satisfaction
HEALTH psychology – promoting healthy attitudes and behaviour, and helping patients and their families to cope with illness
COUNSELLING psychology – helping people resolve their problems and make decisions, particularly at stressful times in their lives
NEUROPSYCHOLOGY – helping patients with brain injuries and diseases to recover or improve their quality of life
FORENSIC OR CRIMINAL psychology – using psychological theory to help investigate crimes, rehabilitate offenders and support prison staff
CLINICAL psychology – working with people to help them deal with conditions ranging from anxiety and stress to depression and mental illness
SPORTS AND EXERCISE psychology – working with individuals, teams and organisations to improve motivation and performance in coaching, training and competition.


ALL of those afore-mentioned areas are potentially encountered by astrologers
for example in Horary astrology questions
as well as when studying basic natal chart questions


and so

the question arises

as to when astrology was ever NOT somehow connected to 'psychology'


Regarding BEHAVIORAL INFLUENCES there's interesting info for example
on the effects that a certain well-known beverage has on the human body
during the first hour of imbibing it
http://lookbetternakedblog.com/2014/...inking-a-coke/

Kaiousei no Senshi 12-01-2014 01:21 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

and so

the question arises

as to when astrology was ever NOT somehow connected to 'psychology'


Regarding BEHAVIORAL INFLUENCES

There was an article I read recently that discussed astrology's status as a pseudo-science. This was one of the paper's major points. Astrology is pseudo-scientific because the different branches of psychology have replaced it as the most likely cause or influence on human behavior. The advent and invention of a pure psychological astrology really just makes it seem like astrologers are trying to get in bed with the enemy, wouldn't you say? ;)

JUPITERASC 12-01-2014 04:52 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588370)

The problem with me is that I have always considered studying astrology to be studying the LANGUAGE OF GOD.

Everyone is entitled to their own individual opinion :smile:


ASTROLOGY's dictionary definition is:

A. the study of the motions and relative positions of the planets, sun, and moon,
interpreted in terms of human characteristics and activities

B. the study that assumes and attempts to interpret the influence of the heavenly bodies on human affairs.



the primitive study of celestial bodies, which formed the basis of astronomy

from Old French astrologie,
from Latin astrologia,
from Greek, from astrologos (originally: astronomer)


Greek = astḗr star

Greek = lógos a word, speech, discourse, proportion, ratio, n.
derivative of légein to choose, gather, speak;

Therese 12-02-2014 07:36 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
but "logos" is such a fascinating word, it is not just any kind of "word", "speech", etc.

for example, Heidegger writes in Being and Time, under the paragraph on the concept of Logos (§32):

"Logos is "translated,", and that always means intepreted, as reason, judgement, concept, definition, ground, relation. [...] Logos does not mean judgement [...] Rather, logos as speech really means deloun, to make manifest "what is being talked about" in speech." (in Joan Stambaugh's translation)

And he goes on to say that in logos, "the entities of which one is talking must be taken out of their hiddenness and must let them be seen as something unhidden", (as opposed to 'covering up"). (in Macquarrie's and Robinson's translation)

so, what is it about/within the stars that astrology uncovers?

JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 07:41 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Therese (Post 588628)

but "logos" is such a fascinating word, it is not just any kind of "word", "speech", etc.

for example, Heidegger writes in Being and Time, under the paragraph on the concept of Logos (§32):

"Logos is "translated,", and that always means intepreted, as reason, judgement, concept, definition, ground, relation. [...] Logos does not mean judgement [...] Rather, logos as speech really means deloun, to make manifest "what is being talked about" in speech." (in Joan Stambaugh's translation)

And he goes on to say that in logos, "the entities of which one is talking must be taken out of their hiddenness and must let them be seen as something unhidden", (as opposed to 'covering up"). (in Macquarrie's and Robinson's translation)

so, what is it about/within the stars that astrology uncovers?


BEING AND TIME is Heidegger's opinion :smile:

meaning is frequently 'lost in translation'

Certainly 'logos' is an interesting word

Therese 12-02-2014 07:47 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
sorry about the off-topic

JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 07:48 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Given that the OP is seeking to discover the origins
of specifically PSYCHOLOGICAL astrology
then
a definition of the word 'psychological'
forms an essential part of this thread
:smile:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Therese (Post 588632)

sorry about the off-topic


JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 07:53 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JUPITERASC (Post 588348)
Clearly all are agreed that Psychologists study behaviour, motivations, thoughts and feelings
for the purpose of helping people overcome or control their problems.


Obviously excellent communication and listening skills are a necessary part of the work :smile:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588631)

Once again this is incorrect.

Many professional psychologists don't work in any way to assist people in overcoming their problems.

The answers to every problem posed are not in endless quotes from endless places on the internet.
The internet is a hodge-podge of stuff.
You have to know what much of it actually means to be able to understnad what they are talking aobut.


On the contrary

Psychologists do assist people with overcoming their problems
:smile:

JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 07:59 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588634)

The OP never came back.
We have no idea wht the OP wants or wanted anymore, unless we are no longer the astrologer's forum
but have now become the psychic hotline.

The OP may well be reading the thread at this very moment
but is not inclined to comment :smile:

nevertheless members continue to discuss the question
this is not unusual
If anyone chooses to no longer participate with commenting on the thread
then that is their prerogative
however
others may continue with the discussion
as is normal practice on our forum

the OP asks an interesting question:

Quote:

Originally Posted by AstroNous (Post 574646)

I would like some light about the origins of psychological astrology. How did it come to be? What cultures saw its birth first? Etc.

It would be interesting and useful to see how the ancients approached the psychological aspect of the natal chart in contrast with how modern astrologers approach it.

The more intellectually impacting the reply, the better. By intellectually impacting, I mean having strong logical implications. So to rephrase, the stronger the logical implications, the better. To define even further, there is a good chance that the "plebeian" word that defines something intellectually impacting is "mind-blowing".

Well, I hope I can get high quality knowledge out of this thread!



JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 08:12 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588640)

Unfortunately for you....I know many who do not. How many do you know personally?

Everything is black or white for you. Some psychologists do this; some psychologists do not. Gee Whiz!


That's a hilarious comment given that many of my relatives are psychologists :smile:

JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 08:15 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Therese (Post 588628)

but "logos" is such a fascinating word, it is not just any kind of "word", "speech", etc.

To continue our researches regarding the origins of specifically 'psychological' astrology then
More on 'logos' :smile:

'…..Logos Greek: λόγος, from λέγω lego "I say"
is an important term in philosophy, psychology, rhetoric, and religion.
Originally a word meaning "a ground", "a plea", "an opinion", "an expectation", "word", "speech", "account", "to reason"
it became a technical term in philosophy, beginning with Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC), who used the term for a principle of order and knowledge.


Ancient philosophers used the term in different ways. The sophists used the term to mean discourse,
and Aristotle applied the term to refer to "reasoned discourse" or "the argument" in the field of rhetoric.
The Stoic philosophers identified the term with the divine animating principle pervading the Universe......'


Despite the conventional translation as "word",
it is not used for a word in the grammatical sense; instead, the term lexis (λέξις) was used.
However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb legō (λέγω),
meaning "to count, tell, say, speak"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 08:27 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588644)

What is ridiculous is your comment since no one knows who you are or where you are from or anything at all about you.
You have no website. You have nothing at all except your word.
You have anonymity to the extreme and then you make statements that are just plain wrong,
and back it up with more fluff that can't be proved. I have bridge to sell you too.

Why am I even bothering to comment, that's the question? Note to self: stop reading J's posts.

Good question :smile:
members simply would like to continue exploring
the origins of psychological astrology


by the way
anonymity online is advisable in order to avoid obvious risks
furthermore
not everyone is self-promoting


as to the accusation of
making 'statements that are just plain wrong'

no irrefuatble evidence has been provided to back up that particular opinion

quite simply
no one is infallible, including myself
however that does not mean my statements then 'are just plain wrong'

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588641)

Is it possible to have a conversation with you without having to listen to an endless circular lecture?
Aliens may be listening too. That doesn't prove that there are aliens here on AC.

Aliens on AC? Interesting theory.... obviously unproven :smile:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zarathu (Post 588641)

Do you have to argue endless little points ad infinitum?

keep in mind
that
'to argue' involves the participation of
at the very least
two people


JUPITERASC 12-02-2014 09:25 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AstroNous (Post 574646)

I would like some light about the origins of psychological astrology.

How did it come to be? What cultures saw its birth first? Etc.


'.....In many ways, astrology was the first psychology :smile:
in that it constituted an early means for understanding the nature of the human being.
Rooted in the premise that cosmos mirrors psyche,
the ancients systematically observed how the nature and cycles of the planets
corresponded to the nature and experiences of human beings......' Glen Perry, modern psychological astrologer

spock 12-02-2014 09:31 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiousei no Senshi (Post 587848)
Hello, I can't speak for waybread or Zarathu, but I don't see the plights of psychological astrology as really any different from, say medical astrology in the modern age (aside from the inherent differences in the ability to verify). I, personally, am more likely to consider the opinion and practices of someone who has formal education in medicine or a sub-discipline of it over someone who does not. In the past, most university trained doctors were astrologers, so their texts on the subject were basically their polished up case files. Similarly, I am more likely to trust the opinions and practices of someone with a degree in psychology if I were to study psychological astrology.

If I have health issues serious enough to require medical intervention I'm going to a doctor, period, not an astrologer, whether he or she is self-described as a medical astrologer or just an astrologer. And if I have psychological issues serious enough to warrant intervention I'm going to a counseling psychologist or psychiatrist, not an astrologer, whether he or she is self-described as a modern astrologer, a psychological astrologer, a traditional astrologer, or just an astrologer. Astrology is simply not advanced enough, its facts not factual enough, to be of much practical use. The idea that a person with mental health issues, who would otherwise trust a degreed counseling psychologist over an astrologer, might nonetheless trust and turn to a psychological astrologer rather than the psychologist for help solely because of the inclusion of "psychological" in the title, is simply not credible. If a client trusts counseling psychologists applying the knowledge of academic psychology as helping professionals over astrologers applying astrological knowledge as helping professionals, do you really think he or she will be fooled into thinking a person calling himself a psychological astrologer is a member of the former rather than the latter group? At any rate my orientation is to astrology as a knowledge enterprise, not a helping profession. My own self-identification is that of astrological theorist. But I see no problem with astrologers wishing to emphasize the psychological dimension of their enterprise appending that term to astrology as part of a descriptive tag. As long as astrology is also part of that verbal tag no one is likely to be fooled into thinking they're something other than astrologers. Only if they refer to themselves as psychologists or counseling psychologists, period, are they misrepresenting themselves and possibly committing fraud.

Quote:

If I'm reading your post correctly, it seems like you are putting most of the focus on the astrological part (that if astrology were more academically accepted, they would be astrologers who do psychology, not psychologists who do astrology). However, my main focus is on the part of the astrologer who is able to take their education and profession and apply that to their astrological work.
Yes, I am focussing on the astrological part, but I think the phrase "astrologers who do psychology" is misleading, as is the phrase leading into it. I think astrology is intrinsically psychological, that as it becomes more highly developed that fact will be more evident as astrologers do a better job of empirically determining which (psychological) effects consistently and thus predictably coincide with which configurations, and that as a result astrology will then be more academically accepted. Notice the reversal of emphasis, with academic acceptance being the result, not the cause, of a demonstrated psychological dimension in astrology.

As for "the astrologer who is able to take their education and profession and apply it to their astrological work," I contend that at astrology's current developmental level, in which verbal games and other means of multiplying ways of being "right" substitute for empirically demonstrated correspondences, any event or knowledge or kind of effect can be made to seem relevant and valid. Psychological astrologers, degreed or otherwise, tend to impose modern psychological categories, relevant or not, on astrology, and astrology's current epistemological structure enables them to do that. But even if it's conceded that only relevant categories will be applied, an inability to transcend existing modes of astrological reasoning, which I think is true of the overwhelming majority of astrologers, including those with university degrees, virtually guarantees that they will not be associated with those configurations, and only those configurations, that consistently coincide with them. Psychological knowledge, with or without a degree, is helpful only to the extent that 1) the astrologer is, qua astrological researcher, capable of empirically ascertaining which effects correspond to which configurations, and 2) his or her disciplinary knowledge is relevant to those effects (e.g., cognitive developmental psychology, life span developmental psychology, personality psychology, and chronobiology, for instance).

The thrust of this discussion has been that those who describe themselves as psychological astrologers are misleading others. Who knows, a person suffering from some psychological difficulty might engage a psychological astrologer thinking she's thereby gaining the help of a therapist trained in academic psychology, and if that's not the case is being misled. The implication is that if the psychological astrologer does have a degree in one or more psychological disciplines the prospective client is not being misled. In the first place the person who chooses to consult with a psychological astrologer does so because of the word astrology in the title, because he believes in it and its efficacy. That belief might be mistaken but he's not being misled. On the other hand, a person who does not believe in astrology or its efficacy, who believes instead in academic psychology and in helping professionals trained to apply it in therapeutic contexts, will avoid astrologers and engage a degreed counseling psychologist. But Zarathu, who raised the nomenclature issue in the first place, in response to Inline's "This might explain the lack of practicing psychologists/astrologers," admits, "Yeah.... we definitely don't tell people that we are also practicing astrologers. I never told a soul." In that case who is misleading whom?

Kaiousei no Senshi 12-02-2014 10:22 PM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Spock, and therein lies our disagreement. If I am interpreting you correctly, it seems like you believe that astrology has no inherent power to assist people. An astrological theorist does not seem the same or even vaguely similar to an astrologer or astrological practitioner. Please don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to dismiss you or your claims, I think many of them are valid, I just don't agree with them and that disagreement will make it difficult for the discussion to continue.

That being said, I'm curious as to what purpose you think there is in astrology if it doesn't have practical application? Feel free to ignore this question, you certaily don't have to share this information with me if you don't want to.

Quote:

As for "the astrologer who is able to take their education and profession and apply it to their astrological work," I contend that at astrology's current developmental level, in which verbal games and other means of multiplying ways of being "right" substitute for empirically demonstrated correspondences, any event or knowledge or kind of effect can be made to seem relevant and valid.
Yes, I agree with this to an extent and especially agree with a point you made later about psychological astrologers essentially imposing psychology on astrology. My only concern is that you mention the ability to discuss or prove astrology empirically and repeatably. You mention it, but sort of just shrug your shoulders and wish silently "one day...". Do you honestly think there will ever be a day wherein astrological correspondences will be able to be demonstrated empirically like that?

It seems impossible to separate one astrological influence from the next, and it's clear (in my interpretation of history, undoubtedly everyone has their own. :D) that the reason why the modern world has seen so many different techniques to supposedly "explain" what is going on within any context is a complete ignorance of existing technique. I just have a hard time believing that astrology is going to be able to be at all scientifically recognized since each part is so interconnected with the next.

So, there's our divide. You strive for astrology to be academically recognized. I honestly couldn't care less. Anecdotal evidence is good enough for me. :)

Woot woot! 2500th post!

Zarathu 12-03-2014 01:36 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by spock (Post 588670)
......The thrust of this discussion has been that those who describe themselves as psychological astrologers are misleading others. Who knows, a person suffering from some psychological difficulty might engage a psychological astrologer thinking she's thereby gaining the help of a therapist trained in academic psychology, and if that's not the case is being misled. The implication is that if the psychological astrologer does have a degree in one or more psychological disciplines the prospective client is not being misled. In the first place the person who chooses to consult with a psychological astrologer does so because of the word astrology in the title, because he believes in it and its efficacy. That belief might be mistaken but he's not being misled. On the other hand, a person who does not believe in astrology or its efficacy, who believes instead in academic psychology and in helping professionals trained to apply it in therapeutic contexts, will avoid astrologers and engage a degreed counseling psychologist. But Zarathu, who raised the nomenclature issue in the first place, in response to Inline's "This might explain the lack of practicing psychologists/astrologers," admits, "Yeah.... we definitely don't tell people that we are also practicing astrologers. I never told a soul." In that case who is misleading whom?

I agree that the extreme vast majority of psychological astrologers might be misleading people who think that they are getting something that they are not. Certainly those who have Noel Tyl's psychological program are completely unprepared for dealing with issues of a real psychological nature, thought the bearers of his course certificate often think the are. This view on my part was one of the major precipitants in the falling out between Noel and me.

However in my case, I didn't mix my astrological practice with my psychological practice. I never ever used astrology(not even once) with clients who came to me for psychological services. And as a counseling astrologer, I was quite aware of when the individual's needs were beyond an astrologer. In this case my title was(and still is) Existential Counseling Astrologer, which from a purely psychological point of view is more commonly called a "Life Coach". The purpose here is to help break through blocks in life process, not deal with various other emotional and mental problems associated with the psychological practice. Although, even in this case I refuse to do charts, and do long term analyses, as I have done and continue to do here with various OP's.

And when I was in my Existential Counseling Astrologer role, and needed to refer to a psychological counselor, I never ever ever self referred. That would have been extremely unethical.

Zarathu 12-03-2014 01:38 AM

Re: Origins of psychological astrology?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaiousei no Senshi (Post 588680)

Woot woot! 2500th post!

Congratulations! I'll stop posting for about 8 months so you can catch up:w00t::w00t:


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:52 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2018, AstrologyWeekly.com. Boards' structure and all posts are property of AstrologyWeekly.com and their respective creators. No part of the messages sent on these boards may be copied without their owners' explicit consent.