As the regulars here know, I am the resident Classical astrology curmudgeon. My reasons for using Classical astrology is that there is a longer and more established tradition associated with it. I don't feel that the new planets have been known long enough, especially Pluto which has only been known since 1930, for astrologers to really know what they represent. Plus the depth that existed with Classical astrology just isn't there with modern. Modern astrology is glossing over several techniques that add detail PLUS there is some misunderstanding with a couple of aspects and some other concepts. In other words, there is a good deal of agreement with most astrologers for thousands of years, and then suddenly everything changed in the late 18th century. One of these is that traditionally astrology was seen as a predictive tool and today it is seen as a psychological tool. I've noticed a couple of things in my many conversations: 1. When I talk about classical astrology, it seems that most astrologers think they are practicing classical astrology but with things added to it. As one astrologer told me, nothing was taken away, but things are added. 2. When I actually discuss the differences I get a blank look, and then they tell me that classical astrology is no longer relavant. I have been told this many times in real life and even in this form. So why is classical astrology irrelevant today? What is so different about people today? Are we actually more enlightened? I don't believe that. Is it because we have newer technology? I don't think so either since we are basically doing exactly the same things we did 2000 years ago but in new ways. Isn't the internet basically a kind of book and communication tool? Isn't a car a motorized horse and carriage? Isn't a light bulb and electric candle? Do people have different desires than they did 2000 years ago? Don't most of us want a stable home, lots of money and stability, and good health? In my observation, and I have spoken to a few professional astrologers, and it seems that they tend to shy away from predictions. Of course psychological readings are safer since you can be mistaken and you have some wiggle room. So do you guys only see astrology as a psychological tool? Do you think predictions are a bad thing? And if indeed astrology is primary a psychological tool, then why do we even need it since we have psychologists today?
I just like the psychological approach best. I have nothing against classical astrology. I am actually curious about it, just a bit. Thanks for posting stuff about it. I wouldn't have sought it out on my own.
i think all of the various strings of astrology have their relevance ... i think that most astrology today practiced in the west is founded on the classical astrology, but classical astrology stands alone in its pure form as well. in my studies, i have taken it all in ... filtered according to me ... and i use which ever tool or idea that seems relevant at the time ... i like the direction of evolutionary astrology (sans the new dogma that seems to be coming from that 'school'), visual astrology and the direction that is going, but i'm also a stickler for history and context. everything has its relevance and context ... personally, i believe that the classical astrology is the most consistent one for prediction except for those that are in the flux of transition of consciousness. as classical astrology is great for dealing with the present structure of tropical astrology as it relates to life according to the energy structure of the gregorian calendar ... as that becomes less and less a hold on the reality of our energy as we continue shifting consciousness, i do believe classical astrology will be less and less relevant to more and more people ... even if it is a foundation for the "new" astrology schools that will become more relevant. if that makes sense ... i also think that the principles of classical astrology will soon be able to be imprinted on a new structure that emerges after the shift in consciousness happens and we begin to stabilize under the new structure based perhaps around the galactic center. i think that will be the function of the classical astrology, even if perhaps the symbols change. as we integrate the larger cycle of the galactic center and the other stars more and more into our astrological views, there will be a new classical astrology based on similar 'standards' like the present classical astrology is based and secured in ... that is what gives it its strength and accuracy. edit ... as for your question on predictions in particular ... i have found that many people are having problems 'seeing' or predicting beyond the 2012/2014 period ... there is like a big wall blocking the future for many people to see. while for others who are not even paying attention to the 2012 thing ... you can see and predict easily for them, its like life as usual. i have found this to be consistent with many other mediums, astrologers and the like.
vedic astrologer don't use uranus,saturn or pluto so are they more clasical than you enlil6.astrology is learned by see what the planets do to ones own chart.pluto has been around more than long enough to draw conclusions.i fully agree that "modern" astrologers shy away from prediction,but i see it as a lack of ability rather than a philosophical block.the psychological use of astrology is just as instructive as any psychological system.when one adds predictions to illustrate the time periods when the words of astrology are experienced,then individuals can better integrate their free will with the larger cycles of existance. all psychological theories have a cure rate about the same.1/3 get better,1/3 get worse,and 1/3 remain the same.this is the same rate will conrol group that don't seek counseling.so the big joke is that there is no statistical evidence that psychological therapy works.i have never had a case where astrological analysis did not closely mirror the actually character structure. rahu
I never said Vedic wasn't "more classical". In fact many of the old books I am reading flat out say they are using Indian techniques. They aren't even trying to cover it up. Interestingly enough I was talking to a Hindu Indian friend last night and he was comparing a Vedic chart he had done from India, and I saw the same things his Vedic chart had. But since I really don't know anything about Vedic, I was surprised how similar they really were even though I knew they were related. Basically the biggest difference was the fact that Vedic is sidereal and mine is tropical.
