Planetary Dynamics

[Bob Butler 54]

(06-09-2017, 04:43 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I tried to move this discussion, without luck so far.

Did you try creating somewhere to move it to?

Eric.

In planetary dynamics, you seem to have gathered a number of world views, a number of ways of looking at the world.  Each one is associated with a color and a planet.  So far, so good.  Then each has been valued for how advanced or evolved it is.  You get to judge.  From my perspective, the more a world view agrees with your own, the higher or more evolved it is purported to be.

People with different world views will select and evaluate world views differently.  With my leaning towards evidence and science, I’d evaluate world views from the angle of evidence, of what can be repeatedly and reliably observed.  Warren Dew is way into economics, or a certain personal angle on economics, and also might select and evaluate different world views from an entirely different perspective.  Cynic Hero is into a military and direct authoritarian politics.  He would consider certain old ways of thought as important and true, while dismissing some more modern values and perspectives as false paths.

Thus, the structure of planetary dynamics can be a tool to help an extreme partisan not listen.  If someone views the world differently than you, you can peg them with a color and a planet, say that this viewpoint is not evolved, and reach for the strawman.  You have seemingly closed notions of each worldview.  You will go for the strawman rather than the argument actually being presented.  All people from a given planet are alike, so why listen to them?

You don’t much listen to me, but you’re dead set certain of what color I am.  Guess what?  I’m not a color.  My world view doesn’t much match your personal way of looking at things.

And that’s typical.  An awful lot of us have very strong world views.  An awful lot of us have concocted personal schemes for defending their world views.  A lot of us have schemes to dismiss or disparage inconvenient stuff like facts that might be brought against our perspectives.  Most such schemes don’t precisely match the structure of planetary dynamics, aren’t so blatant in embracing certain ways of thought and rejecting others.  And yet, each personal world view will focus on one way of looking at things while rejecting others in conflict.

Many (most) posts on this forum might be written to say “this is how things are.”  I can’t read things that way.  I read, “this is how my world view perceives things to be.”  Posts don’t propose truths.  They expose perspectives.

As one aside, at one point I was much into the Golden Dawn’s spin on tarot and the tree of life as an occult system for understanding and predicting the world.  I saw the four suits reflecting types of human activity or types of energy.  For example, the suit of swords exemplified conflict and strife.  In each minor arcana a story, a perspective on the world was echoed.  You start with the pure and unrefined energy of the aces.  A path was drawn from this initial state to the completion, the end of the path, shown with the tens.  This completions show both accomplishment and achievement, and a flaw and death, an approaching failure and ending.  The major arcana told of a similar but extended path, lacking the flawed ending.  ’The World’ shows a stated of completion and enlightenment, showing the end of an enlightened mystical path, while lives lived pursuing the world views of the mundane pursuits were depicted as empty.

I found it positive that the minor arcana suits were more or less equal, that they showed different aspects of human culture and activity, while not judging that economics (Dew) is inherently superior or inferior to the military (Cynic).  At the same time in the story line of ace to ten, I saw a theme, a judgement of how the world operates.  That can be construed as a bias in the deck, an assumption of how the world works, or of how one should best view it.  One starts with bright optimism and energy (aces), but ends, perhaps having achieved one’s goals, but empty.   (Tens.)  This not so subtle repeated theme that to me sets the tone of the deck and everything that might come from it.

Any world view, whether deliberately or not, has such biases or themes.  Finding, absorbing, respecting and learning from such themes is a large part of the exploring anyone’s world views.

Your planets do divide human endeavor, perspectives and energy into many flavors, much like tarot suits.  OK, cool.  However, the value of each perspective is prejudged.  The result is a scheme for advertising your own view of things while disparaging or rejecting that which you do not like.  ‘You remind me of this color, or that planet, sneer, spurn, insult.’

One key difference is in embracing the approach of Newton, I have come to look for repeatable evidence.  While religious and mystic tradition supposes wise minds without brains, what I saw in practice was not wisdom.  ‘Christian coincidence’ and similar occult induced weird happenings were more emotional than wise.  I saw a similar pattern in parapsychology results.  I pursued not what made me feel warm and cozy inside, but an approach which explained what I had actually experienced.

Anyway, I’d expect from anyone who cares about seeing and understanding the world a scheme for defending one’s own scheme.  It seems that planetary dynamics is just that, a series of judgements of anyone who doesn’t think like  you.  As such, I consider it a poor tool if one is seeking to understand things naturally.  The purpose seems to be to protect and defend, rather than to grow.