Re: Dichotomisations (e.g. vertical/horizontal, Astrology et al)

t (
Fri, 30 Apr 1999 12:46:50 EDT

From: <>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 12:46:50 EDT
Subject: Re: Dichotomisations (e.g. vertical/horizontal, Astrology et al)

In a message dated 4/30/99 4:36:00 AM Central Daylight Time, writes:

>> In general, it is not the Astrology/whatever that causes 'problems' it is
the object/relationship patterns and so you can 'give up' on Astrology and
find something else and get the SAME problems since that 'somethingelse'
causes the SAME resonance in the pool of emotions.<<

That may be, and for the sake of this point I will accept it (though it
remains otherwise an interesting tentative). But are all "somethingelses"
equally the same problem as the person who has "given up" on astrology would
see Astrology to be? I can't imagine that all somethingelses are equal for
whatever function that astrology was employed to fulfill (assumably mating
decisions) before it was given up.

For example - imagine "fads" of personality quizzes, or a routinized
pop-psyche evaluations - that could equally revolve around patterns of
dichotomizations like you describe. Part of the belief includes comparative
evaluations - very similar in form to comparing individual astrology charts -
though based on quiz or evaluation responses rather than, trine, sextile,
square, opposition, conjuntion etc. aspects between planets and their
placement within houses and constellations (yes I have had first hand
experience in the "art"). Would you think that some of these are going to be
more functional than others?

Obviously if, as you say, mathematics was established as "meaningful" by the
same resonant type of dichotomizations which established astrology as
"meaningful", not all such meaningful things are equal in function.


This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)