In astrological practice, each professional has the legitimate right to defend a personal view of the world, based on experiences of both an objective and subjective nature, +
but to imput a judgment of accusatory value to a divinatory instrument is a big mistake and testifies against one's own professional suitability of those who use this instrument.
To use subjective experience as a defense of this idea is to reduce to an emotional discourse the transcendent aspects of a tradition that has more than 5,000 years of recoverable history and whose origins were not even imagined.
It also reveals a lack of knowledge of the History of Astrology itself, and of examples such as those of Karl Erns Krafft and Alexander Chizhenvsky, who each served Hitler and Stalin, demonstrate misuse of Astrology for shady political purposes.
In the conception of the Cosmos that surrounds us, we don't care about color, sex, creed and political ideology since, inexorably, Time is Eternal and remains indifferent to our individual postures. What sets us apart is often our attitudes to the free will that we are given.
My "two cents" of advice are these, in the end: if you perceive extremely emotional speeches that hide social and civic struggles that are legitimate behind criticism of Astrology itself, and not the people who use it or not, for good or bad purposes, be wary.
Because they are most likely arguing with the liver and not the brain.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
