Kepler’s streamlined astrology

“Kepler’s approach to astrology was the same as his approach to his beloved science of harmonic astronomy: he urged that “One must separate the precious stones from the dung, one must glorify the honor of God, by taking for one’s purpose the contemplation of Nature.” Thanks to Max Caspar and the writings of Arthur Koestler, we can determine precisely what Kepler considered the dung and which he thought to be the precious stones. The “dung” he considered:

* acceptance of a qualitative distinction for the twelve signs of the zodiac
* relationship of these signs calculated along the ecliptic to circumstances, ties and fortune
* differentiation between good and bad aspects
* division of lands, human limbs and the four elements among the zodiac signs
The “precious stones” were the planets themselves and the angles or aspects they formed with each other. …

Kepler believed in an “effectus generalis,” a general influence of the planets on nature and man, which had nothing to do with the rules by which the Arabic art of prophecy pledges to predict the individual fates, the “eventus individui.” His description of the degree of control of the planets over human nature firmly establishes a person’s character but has no power to predict individual events; on the one hand determining the fixed nature, but leaving the destiny of the individual as a natural outcome of the behavior of their “type.” The stars do not compel or override free will, nor decide the fate of the individual, but they impress upon the soul a special character…” Planetary Types: the Science of Celestial Influence p.49

 

Finding one’s true note

“It seems that the system of planetary types has been a tool in esoteric schools since at least the beginning of the Christian era to provide the student with a compass of impartiality with which to discover his essential character and eventually transcend it. We have lost the mentality of ancient wisdom and, with the rise of democratic thinking, that “all men are created equal,” the door has closed on the study of types.

Michel Gauquelin recognized that the planetary archetypes were very old and believed his work would rehabilitate the planetary types. This is perhaps the main purpose of this book, to raise what has been known only to a few to a science that can be studied and refined; at the very least, to stimulate people to take the idea of types as seriously as the ancients did. They understood the true meaning of harmony; to find one’s planetary ‘note’, to sing it loud and clear, and find one’s true place in the chorus of humanity.” Planetary Types: the Science of Celestial Influence p.44

 

Why astrology ‘works’

“Given all this (lack of) evidence, why then, do people still consider that astrology “works”? …

Eysenck believes people feel their descriptions are accurate because of the sheer number of variables in interpretation of the various components. The astrologer has to consider: “… ten planets, twelve signs, twelve houses, and five main aspects for the planets taken two at a time, giving a total of hundreds of variables, each of which can have an influence on the personality and fate of the newborn baby! As each of these factors may add, subtract, cancel out, or interact in many other ways with any other factor, the possibilities for prediction are almost infinite … In other words it is almost impossible not to find some congruence between astrological factors, on the one hand, and the known facts, on the other.”

But it is not exclusively the influence of the astrologer; it is a two-way street. People in general have a tendency to see “universal” characteristics like tolerance, self-doubt, confidence, sense of humor, ‘individuality’, etc., applying to themselves. They also tend to read into their own personalities the traits the natal chart says they have. As Eysenck puts it: “Astrology can be made to explain anything after the fact.” As a result, astrologers can feel confident because of enthusiastic testimonials, and a cycle of reinforcement is established.

There is no doubt that the majority of astrologers are sincere and compassionate people who take seriously the symbolism of their art. But, like John Anthony West, we must raise the question, “are it’s acknowledged therapeutic benefits simply the result of sound advice that would be just as sound if astrology weren’t involved?”

So, the answer to the question “Are astrological assertions true?” seems to be yes and no, but mostly no. The assertions about the signs have no basis in fact and that of the houses seems equally invalid. The significance of the planets, however, and their positions with respect to the horizon, has been firmly established. For this reason, the planetary types will be the sole focus of our study.”

Excerpt from “Planetary TYpes: the Science of Celestial Influence p.34

 

Review for The Gnostic (update)

The review for Planetary Types by Bill Darlison will be appearing in the next, Spring issue of The Gnostic, not the current one. My apologies for any confusion.

 

‘Gnostic’ review for Planetary Types

Bill Darlison, author of ‘The Gospel and the Zodiac’ has written a brilliant review for ‘Planetary Types: the Science of Celestial Influence’ in the latest issue of the Gnostic magazine – http://www.bardic-press.com Bill really got to the core of the book and I could not have written a better summary of the major points myself. A small excerpt:

“This book is no coffee table astrological primer. It is a serious attempt to establish the foundations of SCI, the Science of Celestial Influence, free from the restrictions imposed by what the author sees as the debilitating weight of unscientific astrological tradition, and from the prejudices of the scientific community … The author is scrupulously fair. He acknowledges the inadequacies of his own attempts at putting his ideas to statistical tests, and even anticipates the objections that members of the scientific community might bring against his theories. He’s not trying to pull the wool over anyone’s eyes, or to sidestep criticism; he’s simply trying to find what is worth salvaging from what he considers the confused jumble of unscientific ideas which comprise contemporary astrology.”

 

Astrology from both sides of the brain

“Speaking in the language of left and right brain function, the concept of celestial influence is a legitimate right-brain or design-mind concept that operates without the observed facts and logical framework of the left brain. Only with an equal contribution from both halves can we hope to eliminate the chauvinism of scientism, which hardly even deems astrology a worthy subject to investigate, and the symbolic double-talk of some of its practitioners, and have a true and objective science of celestial influence.
Astrology can only be of real value when it satisfies the two domains of brain function. It must:
A) appeal to our higher emotions of harmony and order
B) make sense logically, and as a result
C) be able to be explained using known laws of physics, celestial mechanics and biology.

Few would argue that, as it stands, it scores high on point A, less so on point B and virtually zero on point C: scientifically and logically it’s a skeleton waiting for flesh. Whether or not traditional astrologers are ready for a paradigm shift in their approach is another story. But if there is ever to be a rational or objective astrology, many tools now in use may need to be abandoned.”

Planetary Types: the Science of Celestial Influence P.25

 

Respected astrology researcher Geoffrey Dean lends a hand

Respected veteran researcher Geoffrey Dean has shown a keen interest in assisting with testing for the Planetary Types. Mr Dean is a rigorous research into astrology and believes he is considered by many as a ‘turncoat’ for being a critic of astrology. I have quoted Mr Dean several times in my book:

“Likewise, Geoffrey Dean and others in “Recent Advances in Natal Astrology fount that astrologers make claims which lack substance and that the research done was “amateur in its conception, faulty in its execution and less than rigorous in its statistical analysis of the data.” “Astrology: Science of Superstition p. ix  (p.22)

“The current chaos in astrology is largely the result of a chronic infatuation with symbolism at the expense of reason. This is because the majority of astrologers reject a scientific approach in favour of symbolism, intuition and holistic understanding.” Geoffrey Dean — “Recent Advances in Natal Astrology.” (p.5)

There is a brief bio here: http://www.rudolfhsmit.nl/u-biog2.htm And a few words on astrology research and its conclusions here: http://www.rickross.com/reference/general/general574.html

Mr Dean has agreed to send me some material that may assist in establishing a bona fide test for the validity of the planetary types. It is very encouraging to have someone of Mr Dean’s stature in the field showing an interest. I will keep you posted on the progress.

In the meantime I am still requesting assistance from as many quarters as possible. Go to the Facebook fan page for details on how to get involved. http://bit.ly/19XE0Q

 

Testing for the Science of Celestial Influence

If my mind posits a tantalising possibility or theory, I have to follow it through, so when I  found out about the connection between the endocrine types and planetary archetypes, I had to devise my own tests to see if it was a true connection. I was emboldened by the success of Michel Gauquelin on planetary types.

My approach was to be slightly different from Gauquelin’s. Whereas his studies were based on psychological profiles, mine were based on the easily identifiable physical characteristics of each type, which seemed much more solid criteria.

I proceeded to collect nearly 400 horoscopes of well-known individuals along with photographs of each. My aim was to determine their planetary types to see where the planets fell. If a subject was, for instance, a Mars/Jovial, according to my judgment, I would look for either of these planets in key positions, which, in this particular Science of Celestial Influence means aspects or angles to the ASC or MC.

For chance predictions alone, one would expect a 16% success rate. My results for this first test ranged from 27% to 75%.

The second sample comprised a total of 33 friends and acquaintances of which 31, or 94% contained the appropriate planet.

For my third test I enlisted the aid of the National Council of Geocosmic Research in the USA. Two members agreed to send me photographs of 43 subjects, whose type I would identify and send them the planets I expected to find in the charts. They then sent the results by email. Of a total of 44 subjects I was able to identify 42 as types, from which I predicted 29, or 69.5% correctly.

My files have all been lost after several home moves, with the exception of the celebrity tests which are included as an appendix in the book. All I can offer is my word that the results are accurate. The other important point is, that I am not a scientist and an expert statistician could probably pick my test protocols apart and lay waste to my results, which is why further tests are necessary.

In about a week I will be calling for research partners who have an interest in establishing the reality of this connection between the planets and man.

 

Your free endocrine type profile

Would you like a free endocrine type profile? Send me a photograph, or links to an image of yourself and I will send you a free endocrine/planetary type profile. I will try to determine your type by physical characteristics alone and send you the appropriate profile, so that you may get a head start in understanding your type.

It is not always possible to determine type by an image alone, but I can usually do it in around 80% of cases. If I am not confident about a guess from the initial image, I may ask for more, or ask a few pointed questions to try and narrow the field. Sometimes if someone has had cosmetic surgery or has changed their hair color it makes guessing type from images a little harder.

To make my job easier, I would prefer unstaged photos as much as possible. In other words, no promotional or studio shots. The more candid the better, and two different photos would be great. Best of all would be a link to a video so I could see mannerisms and physical stature, etc.

Send your images or links to tony.cartledge@gmail.com and I will send back a pdf with your free profile (approx 1.5mb) with images of examples of your type and information on my research into the Science of Celestial Influence.

 

Mail order for Planetary Types

If you are an Aussie and would like to purchase Planetary Types: the Science of Celestial Influence and have it arrive a little faster than Amazon shipping, I have a limited number of copies for sale. Contact me through tony.cartledge@gmail.com with your details and I will supply you with a mailing address for your cheque or money order. The cost will be $25 AUS + postage. (Non-Aussies are also invited to mail order, but I cannot guarantee it will arrive before an Amazon copy would.)