Heh. Of course the alternative to astrology is not astronomy but Meyers-Briggs...
But Myers-Briggs IS directly based on astrology (via Jung)...
This is a bit tough on Intelligent Design. I'm in full agreement that ID is not an appropriate topic for Science classrooms, even at university level. There just isn't enough content in what the ID community has produced so far to accord it any level of credibility. But placing ID on the level of astrology is unfair. If I understand them correctly, the ID community is exploring the idea that acknowledging purpose or design in the Universe may actually entail empirical expectations. Opponents of ID want to rule out this possibility a priori. I suggest there are only three ways one could justify such an a priori judgement:1) We are quite certain there is no God,2) If there is a God, we are quite certain that he does not interact with the world, or3) If there is a God, and if he interacts with the world, we are quite certain such interaction could leave no detectable trace.I contend that none of these are consistent with the Christian story. In Jesus, we see God not only existing, not only interacting with the world, but doing so in a way that has left it profoundly altered.
Why the prejudice against astrology. It has been used throughout history in many cultures--and still is. It has much more real esoteric intelligence to it than the entirely exoteric reductionism of the ID crowd. ID being in effect the mind of scientism dressed up in "religious" (or pseudo-religious) drag.E=MC2 has much more affinity to astrology than left brained ID reductionism.After all what is manifest existence altogether? It is an indivisible web of patterns of energetic relationships---of all kinds including astral and psychic patterns---and it is the subtle invisible ones that have the strongest causative effect on all human activities and relationships---including collective happenings such as wars and revolutions. Human beings are totally enmeshed in that vast multi-dimensional pattern, patterning.The opening paragraph in chapter one of my Spiritual Master's auto-biography contains a very strong astrological statement re the time of His Birth. His daughters did a very rigorous study of astrology as part of their early education.He has also stated that astrology can be a very useful tool for understanding the various patterns of energy and their conjunctions.He also takes note of important planetary conjunctions and works with these energetic patterns in His invisible World Blessing Work.Many esoteric healers use astological charts as a very accurate diagnostic tool---I have a friend who does so. I remember reading a book on astrology and healing years ago, and was very impressed with its rigorous arguments and case studies.ID is primarily and exercise in politics and political control---an attempt to re-"christianise" America. The "wedge of truth" and so called "total truth". As if an entirely exoteric religionist could even begin to begin so see or "know" what the Totality or the Indivisible Oneness of Reality really looks like. The very concept of possessing "total truth" is inherently totalitarian in its political and cultural implications---here come the re-"education" camps.ID people like to talk about the subtle cellular energies as "proof" of a "designer". Never mind that all cells and biological forms disintegrate and die or rot.Where is the "proof" of god in that exercise. Death rules to here.Also to pretend to try to prove the existence of "god" by referring to patterns in nature is in effect to affirm the negative proposition that Real God does not exist. It is a confession of godlessness. The existence of Real God is Self evident to the converted heart and needs no proof---just ecstatic joyful celebration.
"The opening paragraph in chapter one of my Spiritual Master's auto-biography contains a very strong astrological statement re the time of His own Birth" - thanks, John, that clears everything up for me!
Anonymous. Perhaps you would like to read the said paragraph and check out the extraordinary auto-biography altogether. It can be found here:1. www.kneeoflistening.com/c1-bright.html And what about the rest of my rant.
I'm in not in favor of the 'teach both theories' group but not for the usual reasons totted out by creationists.The united states is a religiously pluralistic society with a general commitment to offering a religiously neutral public education system. Hence the idea is that educators ought to offer the students the facts and not religious interpretations of those facts. Now there's not going to be any such thing as a religiously neutral public education system just because some religions make statements that are factually incorrect--mormons claiming that the indians are the lost 10 tribes of israel, or whatever-- the case studies don't matter. The problem which I think the ID advocates are right to push against is that advocates of the new atheism occasionally push conclusions which are not themselves scientific under the guise of these religiously neutral facts. An example, one might read in a biology textbook that evolution is a purely natural unguided force which is responsible for the creation of all life on earth. This isn't a scientific statement--what experiment would prove it?--but really a rather dogmatic a/religious one. Alvin Plantinga has fought this battle before and won. So here's baby which ought not to be thrown out with the bath water resides: teach the kids the facts: evolution is an observable phenomenon which provides a mostly adequate explanation of the variety and adaptation of life on earth. That fact however underdetermines the choice between atheism and theism. So teach the kids the science, but let's teach them just the science and nothing but the science and let them come to their own conclusions about the religious interpretations of the science.
Engineering = Science + Intelligent Design.
Rev Sam: I thought Jung based his science on alchemy not astrology...
Faith and Theology © 2008. Template by Dicas Blogger.