This morning, I read Petros Eleftheriadis’s blog entry about the hard time an astrologer had on Penn & Teller’s show. I saw a clip of it myself and it hurt to see the astrologer trying to figure out a career for this woman whose chart he was reading. I think the planet, or rather, the luminary he was looking at was the moon. As we all know, the moon rules a variety of careers and he listed them all out. The lady said later on that he mentioned almost everything under the sun and was bound to get something right.
But that’s just the thing, a planet can have various fields of activity under its domain. Take Jupiter: If it is connected with your tenth house you could be involved with anything from organized religion to publishing (books, not newspapers or magazines), to work connected with foreign travel or the law. To the astrologically uninitiated, it looks like a long list and since they can’t see the connection to Jupiter, it looks like the astrologer is wildly throwing these options around.
What Mr. Eleftheriadis says on his blog is that astrologers shouldn’t force themselves to find answers to all questions when they look at a chart nor try and find astrological evidence in the chart for everything they see. Donning the mantle of omniscience does more harm than good. This was brought home to me a while back when I was looking at an event chart and could find no obvious astrological markers for it in its chart. While this is more indicative of the gaps in my astrological knowledge than anything else, I still felt intensely frustrated when I didn’t see what I expected to see. I’ve saved the data for another look and will return to it with an open mind after a few days.
On a related note, I’ve been assigning myself astrological homework. I have the option of looking at friends’ charts or the charts of merest acquaintances. I’ve been wondering whether it is best to do a stranger’s chart while you’re learning. Because with people you know really well, you already know the issues that plague their lives. Like my friend whose financial situation is always unstable because of her spouse’s rather erratic career history. She has Saturn in the second house, squaring Uranus exactly, to the minute! Aquarius is intercepted in the eight: I’m taking Aquarius as her husband’s income. The Saturn indicates her money worries and the square tells us that the husband will sometimes be a source of added income and sometimes not bring in anything to their joint finances.
I only saw the above aspect because this theme was playing out very big in her life recently. But you see what I mean? If you had just plunked her chart before me, would I have seen it? But that square is kind of hard to miss. Anyway, I worry about stuff like this especially since I’ve put my homework on hold: to be or not to be. To read a stranger’s chart or read a friend’s? Paralysis. Haven’t looked at any chart at all as a result.
April Elliott Kent says something very useful about this in her post Constructing an Astrology Reading. She advises that you learn about your client’s “non-astrological reality” before doing a reading. It helps you organize your work better and adds value to the consultation. What I got from this was that one does not have to work blind and figure out everything just by looking at the chart. Have you read her post? You should, I’ve linked it, check it out.
One of the things that astrology needs quite badly right now is credibility. I think astrologers educating the general public about astrology and its limitations will help. If you are an astrologer who’s reading this, how many times have people asked you to guess their sun sign, even if you’ve just met them? Yeah, I know. Someone needs to educate the masses: Why can’t that someone be you? And why not start with the next person who wants you to guess their “star” (sun, SUN sign, O ignorant wretch! Star Signs is another book that Linda Goodman wrote!) sign?
Oh, and about that event chart I mentioned, I suspect that Aquarius on the eleventh house explains quite a lot!
P.S. Here’s a great post along similar lines: http://nononsenseastrology.com/?p=2395
[…] Link: Astrology and its Limitations […]
Well, Neeti, the statistical probability of “just getting something right eventually” is between 20% and 30% depending on what researcher you listen to. That is, if you get something right more than 30% of the time than you are doing better than chance.
Unfortunately, most studies of these types show psychics and astrologers don’t do any better than chance. Then again, most of the time these studies are conducted by skeptics.
We are operating in a time of unprecedented personal freedom. The old axioms of most people acting within the parameters of “Lowest Common Denominator” or within social mores no longer holds true. So within what social context do we read our clients charts?
How do we know if the person with Moon conjunct Pluto is a rapist, has been raped or just incredibly anal about their housekeeping? Well, we don’t. And we can’t.
I believe that within any collection of planetary energies is a range of expression, much like a the hues of a color, that can manifest in ways from the most benign to the most violent.
The challenge of astrological counseling and forecasting is not so much showing off how much you know about astrology, but how much you can divine about the human heart that sits before you. Now that’s predictive work!
(I’ll get off my soapbox now.)
Nicely put, Beth: thanks. And you do the soapbox proud :)
Great post!
Personally though, I think working blind is absolutely essential. I would encourage all astrologers to base their interpretations on only the chart, not the person sitting in front of them.
Best wishes,
Drew
Then, I’ll do a blind reading for my first homework assignment: thanks, Drew!
This reminds me of an article by Elizabeth Spring, ‘You can make astrology prove anything':
http://northnodeastrology.blogspot.com/search/label/You%20Can%20Make%20Astrology%20Prove%20Anything
Thanks for the link, Hitch!
Hi Neeti…It’s me again (I sent you a note last week about your Lunch at the Zodiac Grill and Sun Signs and Break-ups.
I appreciate your comments and agree. I’ve been doing my part to educate people about the whole Sun sign thing. As I am an archetypal astrologer, I often will pick up on certain archetypes that are not related to a person’s Sun sign. My astrology teacher (Daniel Giamario) says that prior to the popularization of a Sun sign focus (beginning in 1930), people focused on their Moon sign. He says that only about 1/3 of the people relate to their Sun sign, and in my experience, I’ve seen that when they are more strongly identified with it, there are usually one or two other personal planets in the same sign as their Sun. The Moon is far more individualizing, and using the Shamanic Astrology perspective, represents our lineage, what we’ve already mastered, came into the life with, have a PhD in…I do find people are very connected to their Moon sign.
Re: talking with people before readings, again, I agree. I’m not into prediction and therefore, it’s important for me to know what’s up for people, so I can see how they’ve been using the energy and talk with them about choices they can make to consciously participate with their energy. We are continuously evolving and have a choice. I see us as co-creators.
BTW, can I print your two aforementioned pieces in an on-line article? I will say they’re written by you and put a link to your site. They’re so clever – I really want to share them!
Thanks,
Holly
Replied to you via email :)