Astrology Predicts Meanings, Not Events

amzolt

Well-known member
to say that predicting events is impossible whilst not taking into account the way Astrology was intended to be applied, denies the really excellent forecasters the credit they deserve, in my opinion.
Lillyjgc

My dear lilly,

I actually didn't say that predicting events was impossible, I said astrology doesn't predict events. And, yes, when I mentioned astrologers I said they can sometimes make very good guesses...

As far as "the way Astrology was intended to be applied", I feel each astrologer has a say in how they intend to apply astrology, in spite of how others have done it...
 

amzolt

Well-known member
My dear lilly,
I said astrology doesn't predict events.

Commenting on my own previous post:

One other consideration:

Those two men I interviewed had exactly the same chart...

How does one account for very different events--father's death and first nude beach experience--coming from exactly the same chart?
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
My dearest Amzolt,
:biggrin:
You have (possibly inadvertently!) raised an interesting question. Are the aspects that *make*a person good at astrology ALSO the aspects that generate psychic ability?
It's true that there are some astrologers who ARE also psychic. (I guess that's just their good luck to be gifted in that way) BUT,there are also excellent (predictive) astrologers who are NOT psychic.

I don't think astrology has anything to do with *guessing*.If you scrutinise a chart in enough detail, taking into account signs, aspects to planets, aspects to house cusps, midpoints, transits, solar return, lunar return, age harmonic etc etc etc and have a mind sufficiently developed to integrate and interpret that information, theoretically you would have a very proficient predictive astrologer.

If you watch what happened *last time* you had a certain transit, its not that hard over time and with practice to *predict* what might happen *next time* you have that transit. In that way one can predict for oneself.The more often one practises something, the more proficient one becomes.
I take your point about an aspect having more than one possible application/manifestation.A mars sun square will not be the same for everyone, but if you analyse that transit in relation to its integral involvement in the chart the following things for example could well be *predictable*:-
birth of a child, meeting of a partner, purchase of property,overseas travel, gain of inheritance, new job, separation/death of parents, ill health, surgery,arrest,marriage, etc etc etc.
This kind of predictive astrology is practised successfully every day even by relatively inexperienced astrologers and has been for at least hundreds of years.
If I recall correctly it was Astrologers who predicted the birth of Christ.They might have been channelling I guess.:biggrin:
Lillyjgc
 

waybread

Well-known member
Lilly, I think we both agree that some astrologers are simply much more skillful than others. They may have a talent for astrology that is not psychic, any more than having perfect pitch in music or an ear for foreign languages is psychic. And as you point out, some of them have been practising professionals for decades. They may use more "advanced" techniques, too, that the average astrologer doesn't. So in the hands of a really experienced, excellent astrologer [as with a really experienced excellent brain surgeon] there is a much higher probability of successfully predicting a specific outcome.

I am very sorry about the heart-breaking loss of your son. I surely didn't mean to imply that choice-centered astrology means that you chose for such a tragedy to happen. Choice-centered astrology generally means that most people have many times in their lives when they do have choices to make. Their choices have something to do with the outcomes of even the most difficult transits and progressions. Just for example [and not to toot my own horn] when I felt the full and difficult force of transiting Pluto square sun some years ago, I got myself into therapy with a really good clinical psychologist. This was a choice, and a positive one as it turned out.

But beyond this point, we surely have to acknowledge that many skillful, well-known astrologers--both traditional and modern--have made huge mistakes. And some of these mistakes made by traditional astrologers influenced astrology's demise as a credible academic subject. A case in point was the great French astrologer Jean-Baptiste Morin (1583-1659.) He predicted the death date of one of astrology's leading critics--and was wrong by 5 years. When a leading Jesuit scholar criticized the astrology of their day on the grounds that its predictions were often wrong, Morin conceded the point. His rebuttal was basically that other predictive fields at that time were wrong oftentimes, as well, so there was no need to single out astrology. (J. Tester, 1987, A History of Western Astrology, pp. 232-7.) Unfortunately for astrology, since then, Morin's comparables, such as medicine and navigation, have greatly increased in accuracy.

I think it is best not to bring the birth of Jesus into this discussion. As you know, many well-disposed people of other religions or of no religion question whether an actual man named Jesus ever lived; or whether, if Jesus of Nazareth did live, he was involved in all of the miracles and sayings attributed to him; as many of them have antecedants from other faiths that long pre-dated Christianity. Devout Christians may well accept your point, but I think this might be a topic for another thread and board.

But I think Lilly raises a good point. If some of us dispute astrology's fine-tuned predictive capabilities, is it possible that we just don't know enough, more advanced astrology?
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
Way, I was being a bit facetious there, with my allusion to Jesus..definitely don't want to offend *anyone*. But the birth of Christ is a documented historic event. Whether he was *Christ* or not is a theological issue not an astrological one..
I take your point about Morin..Maybe he should have stuck to what he did best, designing house systems!
I'm pretty sure I understood Amzolt's assertion that astrology cant predict events. Sorry Am, I still disagree with you! Potentially it can be done with great accuracy, it's just that most of us are simply not knowledgeable enough yet.But of course, that's only my opinion. Interesting discussion though..
Cheers
Lilly
 

gaer

Well-known member
This may be really hard for some folks to believe, but here it is: Astrology does not, will not, and never has predicted events.

"What?!"

Yes. It's the absolute truth, even if some astrologer "predicted" something for you. If an astrologer tells you something is going to happen, don't you think that, if it does, there may just be a bit of self-fulfillment in that?
I read the rest of your post, but it left me scratching my head. Don't you realize that the same logic is used to discredit astrology, in all ways?

For instance, even if you rather accurately describe key elements of a client's personality, there is no end to the line of people who are waiting to say that you have made lucky guesses based on hunches or elements of cold readings.

You may find it easier to defend "meanings" more than events for the obvious reason that meanings are more nuanced, subtle, and therefore more open to interpretation. :)
 

amzolt

Well-known member
You may find it easier to defend "meanings" more than events for the obvious reason that meanings are more nuanced, subtle, and therefore more open to interpretation. :)

I defend the prediction of meanings over prediction of events because the prediction of events was disproven by the experience I related.

I'm facing the truth of astrology...
 

gaer

Well-known member
I defend the prediction of meanings over prediction of events because the prediction of events was disproven by the experience I related.
From my perspective I would say that the experience you related caused you to dismiss the validity of event prediction, based only on your own personal experience.

I have never attempted to use astrology to predict events. However, my mind remains open.

If you so choose, you can look at my birth chart and decide whether I am patholigically argumentative or extremely fair—or a bit of both. But I am adverse to making sweeping judgments based only on my own personal experience or my own success/lack of success. Curse of Libra Sun/Moon? ;)
 

amzolt

Well-known member
From my perspective I would say that the experience you related caused you to dismiss the validity of event prediction, based only on your own personal experience.

I have never attempted to use astrology to predict events. However, my mind remains open.

Perhaps you haven't seen this comment I posted further down the thread:

What's interesting to me, with all the debate of astrology's supposed ability to predict events, is the scientific principle that, with a ton of experiential agreements with any given theory, that theory is never proven, only more clearly validated in its potential usefulness.

Yet, all it takes is one experiential fact that disagrees with the theory to disprove it...

My experience with those two men happened well over 25 years ago and it's taken most of that time for me to train myself to perform as an astrologer who accepts the disproof of the theory of astrological prediction of events...

Strange how persistently the ego-mind can cling to falsehoods, eh?
 

gaer

Well-known member
Perhaps you haven't seen this comment I posted further down the thread:

What's interesting to me, with all the debate of astrology's supposed ability to predict events, is the scientific principle that, with a ton of experiential agreements with any given theory, that theory is never proven, only more clearly validated in its potential usefulness.

Yet, all it takes is one experiential fact that disagrees with the theory to disprove it...
I did read that. However, I do think we are on shaky ground the moment we use scientific principles or the "scientific method" to investigate astrology.

Astrology remains elusive, slippery, mysterious. Because of my own belief in the idea that "things should make sense if they are believed", I have to assume that many things that appear "non-scientific" or "superstitious" or "unsupported" do so because of limititations in what we know.

In other words, if astrology actually can predict events, I expect that eventually science will "grow" enough to find ways to prove it.

So far it has not done so.

But it has not proved astrology's ability to give insights into character either. This *IS* the hitch:
Yet, all it takes is one experiential fact that disagrees with the theory to disprove it...
In my view if there are many examples of events having been predicted correctly, one that misfires is not going to convince me that the whole idea is false. However, now we have the problem of investigating all predictions made by astrologer A or B in a controlled experiment, then evaluating the results based on some measuring stick. What percentage of hits would be considered significant? Or what hit rate would fall into the range of "chance hits"?

I would love to find a set of experiments validating EITHER prediction OR character analysis that would finally be accepted by scientists.

I have yet to see one.
Strange how persistently the ego-mind can cling to falsehoods, eh?
Yes, it is. We would be in a perpetual state of observing with few if any conclusions were we to reach a true level of open-mindedness. Or at least our conclusions would be very, very different. It's a rather Buddhist way of looking at "reality", isn't it? :)
 

amzolt

Well-known member
I did read that. However, I do think we are on shaky ground the moment we use scientific principles or the "scientific method" to investigate astrology.

Does it not make you wonder that two men with the exact same chart could have two very different events for the same transit indicator yet still use the same, uncommon word to describe those events' meanings?
 

gaer

Well-known member
Does it not make you wonder that two men with the exact same chart could have two very different events for the same transit indicator yet still use the same, uncommon word to describe those events' meanings?
Most definitely. It doesn't prove or disprove anything to me, but it certainly appeals to the part of me that continues to look at life with wonder. It also gives me just a bit more courage to either stand up to or be amused by people who think they have all the answers.

For me the things in life that are most important are not those that answer questions but that make me aware that I don't yet know what questions to ask.

It's a big universe, and we always make the mistake of thinking we know more than we do.
 

EJ53

Banned
Lilly said:
The process was designed to involve one on one interaction, in a context where there could be an exchange of information that helped the Astrologer to consider *likelihoods*.When done this way, there's no reason why a competent astrologer could not accurately predict certain events..............It's almost impossible to accurately forecast specific events for people who are not in any way known to you....

Yes.......this seems to be what everyone on the thread is saying, Lilly.

EJ:smile:
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
My question is: *How are the scientists going to distinguish which astrologers ARE A)psychic b) lucky guessers c)excellent astrologers... :smile:??

Lilly
 

waybread

Well-known member
My question is: *How are the scientists going to distinguish which astrologers ARE A)psychic b) lucky guessers c)excellent astrologers... :smile:??

Lilly

Lilly, it will be a distant date in the future before the scientists get around to this question! As you know, right now most of them dismiss astrology altogether.

My question is, if astrologers are able to make accurate predictions at some level above random chance; and if we could control for the Barnum Effect, then how does the astrologer make these predictions?

[For newbies: the Barnum Effect was named for the 19th century US circus owner and showman who duped gullible people into believing that fakes in his side-shows were real. Effectively, people believe what they are led to believe or want to believe.]

It has to be more than interpreting symbols on a piece of paper or computer screen, because each sign, planet, house, you-name-it has so many multiple meanings. My personal belief is that, for those of us who are not psychic, that interacting with a horoscope is a kind of divinatory key. This is different than being a true clairvoyant, who can see things more directly. I think we understand only a portion of what the human mind can do. However, I don't believe that all psychics are genuine, and even the ones who have become famous for their accuracy sometimes make mistakes, sometimes serious ones [cf. Sylvia Browne's mistaken death predictions.] But I think all of us had moments, premonitions, intuitions, prescient dreams--call them what you will--that enable us to understand things unavailable through ordinary means, and that astrology can be one way to access this part of our psyches.

But to get back to amzolt's point, I don't think most people would be comfortable with the notion that our future lives are so totally mapped out for us that a skillful astrologer can effectively take away our choices. The "meaning" of a really tough 7th house transit, for example, only becomes a divorce if the native chooses it or her spouse chooses it. People have to physically get themselves to a lawyer and deliberately fill out a lot of paperwork for it to happen. So this is why, most times, I support the idea of transits, &c. indicating meanings or energies vs. concrete events.
 

amzolt

Well-known member
But to get back to amzolt's point, I don't think most people would be comfortable with the notion that our future lives are so totally mapped out for us that a skillful astrologer can effectively take away our choices. The "meaning" of a really tough 7th house transit, for example, only becomes a divorce if the native chooses it or her spouse chooses it. People have to physically get themselves to a lawyer and deliberately fill out a lot of paperwork for it to happen. So this is why, most times, I support the idea of transits, &c. indicating meanings or energies vs. concrete events.

Bless you...

It's amazing how many people in this thread don't seem to realize that, when two men, with exactly the same chart, have different events for the same transiting aspect, it means that prediction of events is not anywhere in the chart itself.........
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
Here's an interesting, and relevant (to this discussion) article about William Lilly's Prediction of the Great Fire of London,(in the interests of everyone keeping an open mind.)

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/fire.html
(Amzolt: if you were to tell me you had a seen 2 identical *anythings*, I would still prefer to be open to the possibility whilst reserving my judgement until I personally experienced something that confirmed your assertions.This is nothing to do with your *credibility* as an astrologer, forum member or anything else-Its just that it is *my* nature to view new ideas with caution if they do in fact conflict with my own personal experience. As this one does. :smile:)

Cheers
Lillyjgc
 

EJ53

Banned
Lilly,

In the penultimate paragraph of the article you quote, it says :-

Dr. Bernard, the astrologer and physician to James II, had written to Lilly at one time declaring that he had discovered a method for forecasting fires of great cities..........Perhaps Lilly used Dr. Bernard's method or, indeed, had found a similar method that had helped him to confidently predict the 1666 fire.

If that is correct, William Lilly was searching for a specific event (a fire in London) and was using astrology only to determine it's timing.

To me, this article confirms Amzolt's assertion that accurate astrological predictions of events cannot be made without including non-astrological information in the interpretation............But, it also confirms (as Amzolt has consistently pointed out) that accurate event predictions/guesses can be made by astrologers using both astrological and non-astrological information.

And this also applies to the specific predictions made by your astrologer.....You asked when you would move.........He was looking for your stolen car/the return of your dog.......He knew you were undergoing surgery.........He (probably) knew you had a son.......So, each of these things enabled him to forecast a specific event from the meanings revealed by his astrological data.



EJ:smile:
 

lillyjgc

Senior Member, Educational board Editor
EJ:
As I understand it, Amzolt is asserting that Astrology cannot predict any event. Period. He says, to paraphrase, that should an astrologer manage to *predict* an actual event in a person's life, that Astrologer is probably just lucky-guessing.He is claiming that at best astrology can only be used to give a generalised interpretation of possible *meanings*.
He has provided no evidence to support his assertions, merely an anecdotal reference to something that happened to him once.Whilst I am not disputing his claims of having met these guys etc, I AM disputing that his having had that experience actually *proves* or *disproves* anything for me.
EJ: It is obvious that Amzolt and myself have totally opposed ideas on this, in that I DO believe astrology can be used to predict actual *Events*.

This is the part to which you refer:
Dr. Bernard, the astrologer and physician to James II, had written to Lilly at one time declaring that he had discovered a method for forecasting fires of great cities. Fortunately he had not published his thoughts and so avoided facing the Committee enquiring into the cause of the fire. He had collected all the data available to him at that time concerning fires of cities, and believed that if he examined the horoscope for each fire he would find correspondences that would enable him to predict future fires with a reasonable amount of accuracy. The one great difficulty, he said, was discovering the birth date and time of each town in order to draw the horoscope correctly. Perhaps Lilly used Dr. Bernard's method or, indeed, had found a similar method that had helped him to confidently predict the 1666 fire.

It doesn't matter what prompted William Lilly to make his prediction, or whose methods he used. My point is that he did indeed do this!
There are hundreds of examples where astrologers have accurately predicted Events. My point is, they are/were not all psychics!
Lillyjgc
 

waybread

Well-known member
In the case of my daughter's astro-twin, some similarities were striking, such as both of them wanting to study anthropology and film studies in university. Both were foundering a bit in terms of looking for an ideal career. But some other things were not so close.

I think with regard to the question of the accuracy of astrological predictions, it is a classic glass half-empty, glass half-full conundrum. If astrologers are wrong some of the time and right some of the time, one still has to decide what conclusions to draw about this disparity.
 
Top