Rebel Uranian
Well-known member
(If you don't know the title reference, ignore the title.)
I've observed that on one hand, things do have identities independently and not relative to everything else, but also that a unified whole is more than the sum of its parts. Both are concepts that are impossible to explain through metaphors and probably disagree with both New Age thinking and mathematical thinking, which tend to be the mindsets of astrologers.
On one hand everything seems to have a goal that does not depend on how it is achieved, and the goal might be controlled by God or nobody, but on the other hand people seem to control their actions within a set of infinitesimal choices. That's a tautology if you can't define the self though.
So I came here wondering if planets etc. represent internal things or external things, and processes or ends. I also thought what would happen if we took the chart as a gestalt instead if just looking at planets etc. individually. But I don't have any idea how they would be taken as a gestalt. Perhaps by looking at the planets' motions rather than positions? Of course that reminds me of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
If anyone has any ideas, discuss. I can't argue with even an outright attack on my ideas because there's a bit of truth in them, after all all ideas are more related to all other ideas than people or machines or words, otherwise they wouldn't all be labeled as ideas.
I've observed that on one hand, things do have identities independently and not relative to everything else, but also that a unified whole is more than the sum of its parts. Both are concepts that are impossible to explain through metaphors and probably disagree with both New Age thinking and mathematical thinking, which tend to be the mindsets of astrologers.
On one hand everything seems to have a goal that does not depend on how it is achieved, and the goal might be controlled by God or nobody, but on the other hand people seem to control their actions within a set of infinitesimal choices. That's a tautology if you can't define the self though.
So I came here wondering if planets etc. represent internal things or external things, and processes or ends. I also thought what would happen if we took the chart as a gestalt instead if just looking at planets etc. individually. But I don't have any idea how they would be taken as a gestalt. Perhaps by looking at the planets' motions rather than positions? Of course that reminds me of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
If anyone has any ideas, discuss. I can't argue with even an outright attack on my ideas because there's a bit of truth in them, after all all ideas are more related to all other ideas than people or machines or words, otherwise they wouldn't all be labeled as ideas.
