Is there an 'astrological community'? If so, what is it?

1
Good evening,

One occasionally sees references to a purported 'astrological community'.

Is there one? Are there several? If it or they exist, of what do they consist?

Even in the ancient Hellenistic and Mediaeval worlds there were distinct differences of opinion amongst astrological authors (who may or may not have been 'representative' of astrological practice) on certain items. Antiochus, Ptolemy, Al-Biruni and others reported such differences more or less frequently.

In modern astrology, it seems that since WW2 the linguistic gaps amongst countries have been growing as English language academia apparently have become less inclined to learn foreign languages. How many have for example heard of the contemporary Spanish astrologer Miguel Garcia, notable for his work on harmonics and for the development of the Armon astrology software?

How many are aware of the significant work of 20th century German astrologers like Herr Erich Carl K?hr who did not require hypothetical planets in his 'system'? Here is a modern astrological natal chart from AstroWiki:
Image
Is 'astrological community' perhaps a way of referring to 'us (in) and them (out)'?

Best regards,

lihin
Non esse nihil non est.

2
I would propose there are a number.

There is the umbrella one where folks meet up at conferences and share the belief abstract sky maps are a useful resource for them and the world, even if they reveal contradictory narratives. They smile at each other, listen earnestly whilst wondering if they had their chart could they date the frontal lobe lobotomy.

Then there are those who share similar concepts and values and as such tend to be linked together into schools.

Then there are those who share the above but don't speak the same language and hang out with those who do whether this is Germany or wherever. (Not sharing the same language can mean a few ideas get lost in translation).

But I think really there are 2.

The first one is composed of those who can recite verbatim the Timaues, read Culture and Cosmos when it is erraticaly printed, can guess their new neighbour's sun sign within 48 hrs of moving in, have devoured the works of Melanie Klein and call themselves Platonist Darwinists. i.e Me (''ideal monkey wise'' :P )

Then the rest, who are time wasters.......

Have you affiliated yourself to any of the reputable 1,234 schools Lihin or are you a maverick. We was wondering......?

3
To say that there are an infinite number of astrological communities would imply an infinite universe. We know that the universe is finite, so I will propose that there are astrological communities 'without number'.

What is a community? A community is a particular set of individuals who share something in common. So, the astrological community could be as loose as that group of people who have ever shown any interest in 'astrology', whatever they take that word to mean. Within that all encompassing set is a continuous spectrum of sub-sets - Western psychological astrologers, Indian 'Vedic' astrologers, traditional astrologers, amateur astrologers, professional astrologers, German astrologers, people who read the astrology columns in the popular papers...... the list is (almost) endless.

I am reminded of Humpty Dumpy's remark to Alice in Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass, "'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."

That being the case, the phrase "astrological community" is probably meaningless as it stands, unqualified.

English being modern Latin, I suspect that English speaking academics in all fields are valid in their view that if a work published in another language is important enough, then sooner rather than later it will be translated into English.

Geoffrey

Re: Is there an 'astrological community'? If so, what is it?

4
lihin wrote: One occasionally sees references to a purported 'astrological community'.

Is there one? Are there several? If it or they exist, of what do they consist?

Even in the ancient Hellenistic and Mediaeval worlds there were distinct differences of opinion amongst astrological authors (who may or may not have been 'representative' of astrological practice) on certain items. Antiochus, Ptolemy, Al-Biruni and others reported such differences more or less frequently.

...

Is 'astrological community' perhaps a way of referring to 'us (in) and them (out)'?
Of course, but then this is hardly news-worthy or unique to astrologers.

How many have heard of 'the black community', 'the jewish community', 'the gay community' etc.

It is simply a way of referencing, in a general and therefore vague sense, a group of people who have something in common which is different from what is considered 'the average'.

When I was younger I remember once asking where the 'black community' actually was? One would be forgiven for thinking it a real actual place when actually it is everywhere - just like the astrological community is everwhere and nowhere at the same time.
No doubt if you were a part of any of these groups, be that jewish/black/gay/astrological you would recognise that there are sub-groups to which you affiliate more than others and a lot of people would prefer not to even be grouped in these simplistic and sometimes meaningless ways.

We don't have a "green eyed community" or a "ginger haired community" after all.

5
For me there is an astrological communitiy consisting of people, who concern themseves with astrology. This community is divided no so much in those whose basic concept is the tropical or siderial Zodiack. The divison is rather in "Western" Astrologers and in those practicing in India or those who try to practice like the Indian astrolgogers. This is probably because of the fact that what - if at all something - I know of the Indian astrology is so strange to me.

But of course all astrologers who see a, or better: the - defined by Astrology - connection between the stars and the earth belong to the astrological community in my opinion whatever the level of the individual astrologers might be.

Without the astrological community the inspiration to concern oneself with astrology would want the base.

Johannes

6
Erich Carl K?hr is more than half a century dead (February 18, 7:30 am MET, 1951) and how should someone in the world know this extraordinary astrologer, who was as to my knowledge the first to postulate and to practice the combination of 'Psychology' and traditional Astrology but whose works were never translated into English? Traditional means in the context of Erich Carl K?hr grounding on the doctrines of Jean Baptiste Morin de Villefranche, which he analysed and teached - especially in his 'Psychologische Horoskopdeutung' - in an all-time way.

As to his chart, there is a mistake: Astrowiki gives the, by K?hr himself corrected, time as 14:15 but the chart is erected for the time of 14:18.
The correct AC is 25?15?; the MC is 23?45?.

Johannes

Astrological communties

7
Good morning,

Perhaps a relevant and useful technical sub-division of the 'astrological community' might be by astrologers, past and present, who use(d) the techniques of primary directions and those who did (do) not. This would be another dimension than the usual historical classifications.

Best regards,

lihin
Non esse nihil non est.

8
And there are many Astrologers even within those who apply primary directions at all, who apply these in a special way forming real sects within this group.

Thus the possibilities of divisions and subdivisions of the astrological community are innumerable yet for the orientation within the multitude of members and schools and teachings and techniques of great help.

But all these would not concern the 'astrological community' or community of astrologers in its entirety.

Johannes

9
Paul has it exactly right:
It is simply a way of referencing, in a general and therefore vague sense, a group of people who have something in common which is different from what is considered 'the average'.
Dividing and categorizing this group with ever increasing specificity doesn't seem to be terribly useful, but nevertheless raises an interesting point. Astrology is not very well organized and as such said "community" has a set of beliefs that are all over the lot. Using the term "astrological community" should not be synonymous with "all astrologers agree that ..." Still at times we seem to be separated by what we have in common. I recall a written exchange where I stated the importance of the ASC in the way a traditionalist understood it significance and was immediately attacked on grounds that I considered only slightly above the understanding of Sun sign astrology. Regardless of who was right in that disagreement, the point is that we couldn't agree on the significance of what we both agreed was the most important point in the chart. That's troubling.

I'm not advocating rigid orthodoxy. The whole world is not going to see things the way I do nor should they. Yet we need more common ground if we are to get our act together.

Ignoring the obvious?

10
Good evening,

Mr Tom has written:
"... I stated the importance of the ASC in the way a traditionalist understood it significance and was immediately attacked on grounds that I considered only slightly above the understanding of Sun sign astrology."
Indeed, there is widespread disagreement amongst astrologers on nearly every basic symbol. Since astrology lost its recognition as an academic science in Europe mostly in the 18th century CE, there is no protection for it. Anyone can claim to be an astrologer, publish 'authoritative' books about it, etc. Wide segments of the general public perceive astrology as a pseudo-scientific form of infotainment.

Some - but by no means all - astrological streams say that astrological delineations refer to astronomical phenomena and are based thereon. It should be apparent to even casual observers that the faster a point is, the more individualised. From this perspective we have both Horoscopos (Ascendant) and Medium Coeli, one of which is almost always changing more quickly that the other, a fact seldom delineated, then S?l?n?, Herm?s and Aphrodit? before arriving at Helios. However, if nearly stationary both Herm?s and Aphrodit? may be slower than Helios in a specific event, different from the stationary state.

In mundane astrology it is occasionally argued that quickly moving planets and points are less indicative. Nevertheless, the mundane places determined by the pivots are deemed important and the quick movers considered 'timing devices' for events indicated by configurations of relatively slow movers.

Best regards,

lihin
Non esse nihil non est.

Re: Ignoring the obvious?

11
lihin wrote:Indeed, there is widespread disagreement amongst astrologers on nearly every basic symbol. Since astrology lost its recognition as an academic science in Europe mostly in the 18th century CE, there is no protection for it. Anyone can claim to be an astrologer, publish 'authoritative' books about it, etc. Wide segments of the general public perceive astrology as a pseudo-scientific form of infotainment.
This may have been the prevalent situation way before the 18th or 17th century, critics always abounded and not everybody was a believer, and there were different schools of thought, methods, and beliefs among astrologers.

Consider the following comment of Al-Biruni in the Masudic Canon (Qanun'l-Mas'udi) in the XI Century:
Some of the basic principles of the art of judicial astrology are presented in the form of mathematical calculations. In consequence, astrologers have a sufficiency of trouble with the principles they regard as being recognized by all of them, and with respect to which there is no controversy. As astrology is not based on intellectual necessity, differences of opinion are possible, and the methods used in it have multiplied in various ways.[ref. p.346 "The Semantic Distinction between the terms 'Astronomy' and 'Astrology' according to Al-Biruni", Shlomo Pines, Isis 55: 343-349, 1964]
note: this is only the last part of a long passage quoted (and translated) by Pines, found according to him "at the beginning of the section dealing with astrology" in Biruni's book.

Juan

Widespread disagreement also in ancient times

12
Good morning,

I concur, Mr Juan, that widespread disagreements amongst astrologers have been prevalent at all known periods, not only since the Renaissance.

This is the reason why in my humble opinion there are in reality no such things as 'traditional', 'classical' or 'Vedic' astrologies. These labels are convenient for marketing and provide feelings of stability, security and identification.

Instead there are numerous astrologies of many astrological authors during various historical periods in various languages and countries, some of whom share, however, many similar notions. We might also bear in mind that many astrological reference books considered central by later authors have not survived.

Best regards,

lihin
Non esse nihil non est.