So, a good astrologer == a psychologist, with props.

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #194,306 by Meerkat 2/11/05 11:02:37 PM Reply	So, a good astrologer == a psychologist, with props. Two out of three people wonder where the other one is.
Post #194,307 by Andrew Grygus 2/11/05 11:22:47 PM Reply	Not so much props . . . . . as guides off the beaten path. Both astrological symbology and tarot cards provide a vast selection of complex associations that won't ever be in the same order as before. The mind has to try to reconcile these associations and will be open to ideas and may come up with surprising things as it does so. Particularly the tarot, while each card carries complex meanings and they all fit into a systematic structure, the sturcture can't actually be systemized completely. Aleister Crowley tried damned hard and admited failure. This guarantees fresh new and different associations among complex ideas every time. The bad card reader and the bad astrologer are both convinced the tools constitute a rigid structure that must be analyzed precicely in accordance with a set of rules. They completely miss the point. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #194,308 by admin 2/11/05 11:26:06 PM Reply	Sounds like the I Ching, too. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #194,315 by Andrew Grygus 2/12/05 12:35:20 AM Reply	No doubt. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]
Post #194,311 by daemon 2/12/05 12:03:01 AM Reply	so rosarche tests are "props?" they are simply indicators and the "interpretation" can vary from good to bad shrinks and other aiders and abettors. Take a person who has a set of lips that look like a mepps number 7 treble hook and lure would not be out of place and say " I bet you are a pisces" 8 out of ten times you would be right. Its not science, its observation of comparisons over the centuries. Some are better at it than others. I do not claim to know astrology but fish lips are fish lips. regards, daemon I love her dearly, far beyond any creature I've ever known, and I can prove it, for never once in almost seventy years of married life have I taken her by the throat. Mind you, it's been a near thing once or twice. George Macdonald Frasier Clearwater highschool marching band [link\|http://www.chstornadoband.org/\|http://www.chstornadoband.org/]

Spot the flaw in the research - (ben_tilly) - (27) - Feb. 10, 2005, 12:08:10 AM EST

Not what I was thinking - (drewk) - (1) - Feb. 10, 2005, 01:30:26 AM EST

That flaw is secondary - (ben_tilly) - Feb. 10, 2005, 07:30:38 AM EST

Ummm , why . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (14) - Feb. 10, 2005, 04:16:00 AM EST

"good astrologer" - (pwhysall) - (10) - Feb. 10, 2005, 04:58:35 AM EST

Don't laugh. They exist. I've met some. - (ben_tilly) - (9) - Feb. 10, 2005, 07:29:15 AM EST

I'll reserve judgement, then... - (pwhysall) - (1) - Feb. 10, 2005, 07:38:04 AM EST

Interesting "reserve" - (ben_tilly) - Feb. 10, 2005, 08:42:22 AM EST

A fun one with a card reader. - (Andrew Grygus) - Feb. 10, 2005, 01:27:16 PM EST

Seconded. Again. - (Ashton) - Feb. 10, 2005, 11:06:16 PM EST

So, a good astrologer == a psychologist, with props. -NT - (Meerkat) - (4) - Feb. 11, 2005, 11:02:37 PM EST

Not so much props . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (2) - Feb. 11, 2005, 11:22:47 PM EST

Sounds like the I Ching, too. -NT - (admin) - (1) - Feb. 11, 2005, 11:26:06 PM EST

No doubt. -NT - (Andrew Grygus) - Feb. 12, 2005, 12:35:20 AM EST

so rosarche tests are "props?" - (daemon) - Feb. 12, 2005, 12:03:01 AM EST

Because it was on /.? - (ben_tilly) - (2) - Feb. 10, 2005, 08:41:11 AM EST

I once had a professor - (bionerd) - (1) - Feb. 10, 2005, 09:40:32 AM EST

Indeed - (Ashton) - Feb. 10, 2005, 11:17:07 PM EST

first off they didnt describe how they came to - (daemon) - (9) - Feb. 10, 2005, 08:16:54 PM EST

I'd consider that fairly obvious - (ben_tilly) - (8) - Feb. 10, 2005, 08:37:47 PM EST

thanks, it is obvious and I missed it :-) -NT - (daemon) - (7) - Feb. 10, 2005, 08:39:08 PM EST

Items daemon can hold in memory < 1 -NT - (drewk) - (6) - Feb. 11, 2005, 12:09:30 PM EST

Not true - (ben_tilly) - (5) - Feb. 11, 2005, 03:56:14 PM EST

Apparently not enough, though. -NT - (inthane-chan) - (4) - Feb. 11, 2005, 03:59:34 PM EST

never enough, however I have met Reuben Pecarve - (daemon) - (3) - Feb. 11, 2005, 10:43:57 PM EST

That isn't short-term memory - (ben_tilly) - Feb. 12, 2005, 02:14:47 AM EST

I'm referring to the recent TMI violation... :D -NT - (inthane-chan) - (1) - Feb. 12, 2005, 09:28:12 AM EST

what? A perfect line about cuddling - (daemon) - Feb. 12, 2005, 06:21:32 PM EST

iwethey.org

Better than a VBF, any day of the week.
65 ms