Why I gave up on western astrology in favor of Chinese

Having studied western astrology for some year and found it accurate but lacking I decided to give chinese astrology (4 pillars & 9 star) a try. I was very pleased with them, changing the flavor of the food I eat and changing the overall colorscheme of my home has given me much more energy.
This leads me to realize the problem with western astrology, it tells you what your problems are but not how to fix them. (The exception to the rule is "Astrology for the Soul" by Jan Spiller).
Being told the my moon is in Capricorn and that I'm "Not a happy person as a rule." is not gonna help me when I'm not given any advice how a Capricorn moon should live to find happiness. On the other hand, being told that my day stem is weak earth and that I should avoid the colors green, blue and black, and to avoid sour and salty food is way more useful.

I haven't done more than a cursory study of astrology, western or Chinese, but the personality type for my Chinese (ox) is far more close to my actual personality than my western (Sagittarius).
It is difficult for me to believe, however, that everyone born in a lunar year will have the same personality type, if you believe the Chinese theory. Please correct me if my statement is incorrect.


Bob

CN

I agree with you that many western astrologers might be over concerned with delineating meaning but there are many good Astrological counsellors, using Western methods, who try and help people live with a Capricorn Moon or Saturn on their Ascendant or whatever.

Indeed whether the Astrology is Western, Vedic or Chinese (or any I've missed out) it should help people deal with life - in that sense it's a healing art.

I stress 'help', rather than 'tell' - most of the battle is getting people to accept responsibility for their own actions - otherwise you end up with the 'It wasn't my fault I've a Mars conjunct Pluto in Scorpio' excuse for whatever goes wrong.

I'm also not saying that Western Astrology is in any way superior to other approaches - it isn't - however it can be used in the way you suggest, if it is not then it is the fault of the Astrologers not the Astrology.

Bob, I'm not sure how exactly the Chinese astrological system works... but I think there is more to it than just the year. For example, there are animals for the hours you are born into. So maybe the lunar year is just a major generalization, much like the sun sign? Ah, where is Demonesse when you need her lol!

I agree...

I like chinese astrology better than western because it is simpler, and I can understand it without getting a doctorate in astrology! I am a fire dragon, I am not sure of my ascendant because I don't know what time I was born...

This is in someways an afterthought.

I'm currently reading The Real Astrology by John Frawley - which has material for about 1000 threads or more, one of the most thought provoking books on Astrology that I've ever ready (and one of the most hilarious)

Relevant to this thread is his belief that the Age of Enlightenment ruined Western Astrology, by making it seem irrational - it doesn't fit the Scientific world view. Astrology was 'rescued' from this predicament, firstly by Theosophists and then by Psychologists (though Frawley sees the 'resuce' as tantamount to murder)

The result was that Western Astrology changed orientation and began look at the inner world rather than the outer world.

Traditional Western Astrology focuses on predictions, modern Western Astrology deals with advice. Rather tongue in cheek he says that if he wants to drive from London to Glasgow he would consult the traffic information an look at the weather forecast but there would still be imponderables. If he consulted a modern Astrologer the consultation would be around motives and he might be told that his desire to go to Glasgow was something to do with his puer aeternus - but if he consulted a traditional Astrologer he could well be told that there would be an accident on the road he intended to take leading to tailbacks and long delays - so he would be better going by an alternative route.

The Traditional Astrologer provides useful practical advice the modern astrologer produces little of direct help other than ego massaging.

So perhaps its not so much Western Astrology that's at fault but the abdication of the Astrologer's real role by our modern Astrologers.

Hi Minderwiz, that sounds like an interesting book.

So... how do you feel about it? Do you agree with Frawley?

-- Lee

The book is fascinating and well worth a read by non-Astrologers because there is nothing in it which he doesn't explain and nothing that a novice can't cope with. He is concerned with the purpose and role of Astrology rather than the nitty gritty of chart interpretation.

I actually agree with a lot of what he says - though he often over-eggs the pudding - for example he argues that Uranus, Neptune and Pluto have no real astrological significance at all, let alone Chiron and the asteroids. I think more for devilment than anything else - though he has good arguments for his case.

Certainly in this area I do agree with him. Astrology is a divinatory science and should be capable of useful practical counsel.

I've decided to get this book (Real Astrology), which was a difficult decision because the book is fairly expensive.

Frawley's argument sounds reasonable to me, but I think the crux of the matter is: is it (i.e. event-oriented, deterministic astrology) true?

He's right to criticize psychological/spiritual astrology by saying it's unverifiable. But that's also a *good* thing, because then you don't need to get into the whole controversy over whether it's verifiably "true." But with traditional astrology, or what I'll call deterministic astrology, it is supposed to be actually, verifiably true, and this is a problem, because this sort of thing seems to have not had much success when people try to verify it.

I think it would be wonderful if we could use deterministic astrology to help ourselves and others in a practical way. But if astrological effects end up not having that kind of deterministic, observable effect on events and actions, then we as astrologers will simply look foolish and won't be helping anybody.

I would love to know if anyone here has had past experience which convinces them that these deterministic effects do indeed occur, and are reliably accurate.

-- Lee

You'll enjoy the book, even if you don't agree with him - because he provokes thought - why do you believe what you do? He gets you to question your self and that's never a bad thing, even if the result is that you end up saying 'I was right all along'.

Frawley doesn't see Astrology as deterministic - he sees it as an approach to undestanding the mind of God or at least guide us towards the divine. Though he certainly equates the modern view of free will with 'free whim'. The thing about his book is that it he has a clear and systematic approach, well reasoned and well grounded. Now systematic approach does not guarantee that the answer is right but it is better than vague statements about why things work as they do.

His basis for believing that prediction is possible (given the will of God) is not that things are predetermined but that our preconceptions of linear time are incorrect. He also is quite careful on the value of prediction.

I certainly have some important reservations about his book. But I got more out of it in terms of thinking about what I do than a fair number of other books. I've also ordered his follow up book The Real Astrology Applied.

PS - with the Real Astrology I bought through Amazon UK and got about a third off the asking price.