Thème écliptique

Thème de domitude

Hiérarchie des Planètes

Jean-Pierre Nicola
08/05/1929 à 07 h 45 TL (08/05/1929 à 06 h 45 TU)
Nice (Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur, France)
Latitude +43° 43’ ; Longitude +7° 16’

Alain de Chivré: How can we succinctly define conditional astrology?

Jean-Pierre Nicola: Just refer to the definition of the adjective: conditional, she from a French-language dictionary. In the Larousse (1993) we read, in definition No. 1: Which depends on certain conditions: conditional promise. For conditional or conditionalist astrology, the promises of natal configurations such as transits are only realized under the condition of a context that moderates, amplifies or cancels them. This context includes family, genetic, climatic, historical, social conditions, listed by Claude Ptolemy in Book I of his Tetrabiblos (Éd. Denoël. 1974), taken over by Johannes Kepler with more insistence. Astrologers quote them, for the record and in case of failure in their prognoses, but they draw no conclusions from them. I have summed up the most fundamental in the formula “The horoscope is not the subject”… but he can be, if he has the means. One could add: if God gives him life.

The problem of astrology thus gains in clarity: the planets are material bodies with significant cycles for human development, their symbols come from the men who are their receivers and not from the stars, sources of signals and not symbols. How the external clocks of the non-living can resonate with internal clocks of the living, I gave much more than an idea in Éléments de Cosmogonie Astrologique (COMAC Editions) from formulas common to living and non-living things that involve the hydrogen atom. My work has been picked up and expanded by Jean-Paul Citron in his article The hydrogen signal (Cahiers Conditionalistes No. 28). To sum up: conditional astrology is defined by the search for modes of relationships and adaptation between heavenly conditioning and earthly conditioning. On one side the sky with its known and unknown signals, on the other the human, with its specific signals and symbols. The study of their relations requires exploring all paths of reality, all branches of knowledge.

Do you consider astrology to be a scientific discipline?

In the current state, we cannot speak of a scientific discipline. There are capricious recipes, results and failures. For lack of theory, of doctrine, no progress can be made. There is a superabundance of metaphysical explanations, of contradictory conceptions. All this put together does not constitute a “science”, but rather a “anti science”. The finest feat is to use astrometric data, to finally, in the explanations, take no account of the physical laws that determine them. A bit like a singer denying the use of his vocal cords. I have the feeling that apart from the statistics which roughly justify the principle of a relationship between the stars and men, astrologers in general do not know what a science is, this knowledge does not interest them. not (as long as “that works”).

Too bad, because astrology carries with it the possibility of becoming a coherent, open and useful discipline. Assuming that it succeeds (one wonders after how many years), it will never be a pure and hard science but, to use the terms of the economist Jean Fourastié, a science of “conditioning”. I quote, from this author, this sentence extracted from Conditions de l’esprit scientifique (Gallimard, 1966) for the attention of all researchers: In all cases where the facts do not allow, despite the efforts…, to find determinism, the researcher must not be discouraged: there is a science of the probable; there is a science of randomness; there is a science of “conditioning”.

Seen from afar conditional astrology seems causalist and astro-symbolism more analogical. Is it an optical illusion?

Undoubtedly, seen from far or near, astro-symbolism is analog. We criticize him for wanting to be just that, for imposing a unique way of thinking which, by caricaturing astrology and reality, deprives us of rational approaches. They have their say. I have always explained myself on this point. Anyone who has the honesty to read an author instead of accusing him of what he has not read, will be able to see that I do not eliminate the analogism. I consider it a form of basic reasoning as close to that of the child as the animal, and perhaps a specialty of the right brain. I point out the limits, the insufficiencies and the wanderings that analytical reasoning compensates for or corrects… at the risk of greater wanderings. The analog functions and logic are no more separable than childhood and maturity, right brain and left brain.

In an analogy versus integral analogism, I compared the analogy to the first stage of a rocket, logic to the second, and a third way of thinking to the satellite to be put into orbit. There are as many failures for take-offs as for launches. Analog astrologers do not understand logicians; scientists have still not understood how the founders of their anti-analogist science manage to transform childish analogies into revolutionary equations… or an associative mode of thought — concrete in analytical-abstract mode (answer: by preserving its childhood in the adult state). What school has posed this problem of meeting and interdependence of the irrational (supposedly analogical) and the rational (supposedly logical), if not the conditionalist school? As for the “causalism” conditionalist, you really have to read conditionalism from afar — or even hear about it — to suspect it of causalism.

To tell the truth, apart from the phenomena of elementary physics and mechanics (I push you, you fall), this term is not appropriate for the applications of astrology to Man “neuronal”, “to the living”, since — see above — the reception conditions and the receiver itself must be taken into account. I stayed “hooked” to astrology because the search for an explanation “physicist” challenges the mechanistic definition of causality. The mathematical demonstration of long cycles (Pluto, Uranus, Neptune, Saturn) linked to short cycles (Venus, Earth, Mars, average asteroids) by a constant (Jupiter) changes the conception of the chronological by involving the future in the present. See my articles and communications on the “chronology and simultaneity”… she has nothing Jungian about her. It is in terms of adaptation that we must speak of astrology. The fish in the water does not swim “because” water, it is adapted to this element, its determinisms are genetic and aquatic by adaptation. Augustians rushing to the seaside in August are determined to sunbathe, swim, have a good vacation. You’ll never make them think they’re going overboard “because” of August. If a scientist tried to persuade a vacationer that he was responding to the pattern “if it is hot” (cause), “I’m going to the sea” (effect), sound “determined” would be right to laugh in his face and go for a swim.

From the millennia leading up to the Hominid, we know from conditionalist astrology that Man is the “king of animals” and a spiritual animal, not exclusively because of its adaptation to the terrestrial environment but also by its integration of the geosolar cycles subtly introduced into this environment by the terrestrial gravity in resonance with all the gravities of the solar system. There “Theory of Ages” which associates the durations of sidereal revolutions with the stages of maturation, initially dismissed as heresy, has become an inescapable demonstration of our adaptation to planetary cycles.

The foundations of astrology can be based on two main theories: the influential theory and the theory of similarities. The second gives rise to certain drifts that you call the “magico-symbolism”. The first — the one you are no doubt defending — calls on more rational data in which astrometry holds a large place. In one or the other, are there not gray areas? For example, do you think the astrological influence is gravitational or electromagnetic? Or both at the same time? Is there formal proof or should we be satisfied with hypotheses?

I understand what can give the “similarity theory” in homeopathy and I could even predict, by analogy, the virtues of a plant by examining its “signature”. On the other hand, in astrology, apart from the comparisons with the characters attributed to the gods who bear the names of the planets, I do not see what astrometric similarities justify the meanings of the Signs and planets. The Elements are perfect for describing temperaments, practicing medicine, navigating the imagination, the Arts and Letters, but if you look for them concretely in the planets or stars, what remains? Is Water in the Zodiac as universal as in the Cosmos? How similar between Mercury, planet “air” and the thin thickness of its atmosphere? On the color side, congratulations for the red of Mars and its surface covered with iron oxide. The sequel is less happy: Uranus and Neptune, planets with opposite meanings are also blue. I read that the Sun, at the center of the solar system, rules the heart “In the center” of the human body. Anatomically, it is a very approximate analogism, as for the astrometric reference, it is only partially and partially exact (see astronomy works).

The term influence is causal, it is not suitable for a conditional option. A grain of wheat in the earth does not germinate under the influence of the earth, but under the combined effect of its own determinism, climatic conditions and the chemical elements of which the earth is the vector. For astrology, I will rather speak “effects” observed, still unexplained, if only by hypotheses, some more probable than others. The absence of material evidence, of instrumental measurements, allows symbolists and scientists to join in the common refusal of a physical explanation. It’s going a little fast. Contrary to these radical attitudes, I have underlined since 1973, and very recently (Colloquium 1999) that “Symbols and Signals communicate”. If they did not communicate, the zodiacal symbolism would not be transposable into rational formulas, the planetary meanings would not be expressible in the language of information (simple, dual, multiple). To answer your question about gray areas, in my opinion astrological practice will always use a greater or lesser part of symbolism.

The search for an explanation and rational formulation can explore symbolism and then, once the explanation has been found, do without it and create new symbols, as current scientific language does. Gravity, electromagnetism, or both? Perhaps both: gravity first, for the fundamental, electromagnetism for episodic amplifications. If, by the grace of a magico-rationalist wand, I gave the floor to a bird to question it on flight, it would speak to me of the sun, of its orientation in relation to the stars, of its magnetite, of its wings, feathers, bones… He wouldn’t have a word for the earth’s gravity to which all species have found a particular adaptive response. We bathe, blind and ungrateful, from head to toe in gravitation. We owe it everything: birth, aging, death, leaf fall… the seasons! I recommend the special edition of Science & Vie of December 1998 dedicated to The gravitational universe. We learn everything that the supporters of electromagnetism hide or ignore.

Faced with the omnipotence of gravity in our life and our ephemeris, what about the planets, electromagnetism? The Moon and Mars which have a high rating in the statistics are in the group of the weakest magnetic fields compared to that of the Earth, Uranus, Neptune, Mercury, evacuated from these statistics have, on the contrary, a stronger magnetic field than the previous planets. Would magnetism repel the astrological effect? In truth, we do not obtain anything coherent with the magnetic fields of the planets. Unfortunate heterogeneity in comparison of the data “gravity” (distances and average gravities of the main planets) which treated by a simple formula (that of the pendulum) restore the symmetries and the order of the model R.E.T. which organizes the planetary meanings from three levels of information (Representation — Existence — Transcendence). Whether by Newton’s laws or by Einstein’s curvature of space-time, gravity and not electromagnetism are used to describe and calculate the movements of the planets. This is no longer a hypothesis in favor of gravity but strong presumptions. They lead to the assumption — and this is a hypothesis — of an action by resonances, terrestrial gravity being linked, as I have demonstrated, to all the gravities on the surface of the main planets.

Another hypothesis, interesting for its perspectives, gravity could have properties — that of symmetries is important according to the great theories of physics — common to those of light. In the number of Science & Vie pointed out, I note (page 157): A certain order hides behind physical phenomena, and results in symmetries. Those who would like to know the order and symmetries of the solar system for cycles, distances and average gravities, can consult the Éléments de cosmogonie (COMAC).

The photoperiodic zodiac is one of the major concepts of conditional astrology. Should we deduce that it is a seasonal zodiac or is it not more subtle? The problem of interpreting the northern hemisphere and the southern hemisphere is very often treated equivocally by the majority of astrologers. Do the conditionalists have clearer answers on the question? Clearly, does a Leo from the northern hemisphere correspond to an Aquarius from the southern hemisphere? In this regard, you often refer to the notion of variation in declination. Can you be more explicit?

All aspects of this problem are discussed in La Condition Solaire published in 1965 (now distributed by COMAC), and subsequently, in courses, communications, conditionalist works (L’Astrologie universelle in Albin-Michel, in particular), radio broadcasts with Françoise Hardy, recently still in the Cahiers Conditionalistes (No. 27 — December 1998). The photoperiodic zodiac is not the reserved domain, the preserve of the sun. It concerns the cycle of durations of presence and absence of a star (in the ecliptic zone) above the plane of the local horizon. In astronomy, this variable duration according to the geographical location and the declination of the star (its height in relation to the celestial equatorial plane) is called “diurnal arc” for presence, “night bow” for the absence. In order to avoid the trap of words (diurnal implies day), I adopted “presence”, implied above the horizon, therefore visible if it is dark and if the weather conditions are good.

To be understood by astrologers, let us take the terminology. In this case, presence corresponds to the crossing time of a star (Sun, Planet, star, in the ecliptic zone to simplify) in the Houses “superior”: XII, XI, X, IX, VIII, VII… that is, from sunrise to sunset. The absence corresponds to the duration of crossing the Houses “lower”: VI, V, IV, III, II, I… i.e. from Sunset to the following Sunrise. The crossing times and durations vary according to the ecliptic coordinates of celestial Longitude and Latitude, which can be transformed into an hour angle (difference in culmination time between 0° Aries and the star). Take the example of an opposition between Jupiter at 0° Cancer with a low latitude and the Sun at 0° Capricorn. When the Sun sets, Jupiter rises to traverse, under a geographical Latitude of 49° North, the higher Houses in 16 hours while the Sun traverses the lower Houses in 8 sidereal hours, in rounding. First evidence: Jupiter travels at night (the Sun is below the horizon) a diurnal arc. Second evidence: whatever the star or the star having the longitude of 0° Cancer with a low latitude, whether it is day or night, its course in the higher Houses, will be 16 h for the Latitude of 49° North, its course in the lower Houses of 8 h.

Consequence: the photoperiodic zodiac is indeed photoperiodic (photo with visible light) but it is not seasonal, and if it is a question of light, it does not exclude gravity (the headlights of a vehicle do not exclude the driver). The ratio of presence/absence durations (here, 16/8) could suffice, for a given geographical latitude, to define a zodiacal degree unequivocally possible and without reference to the phantasmagoria of the Signs preserving, like a Moon in Capricorn, the winter cold, while a Saturn in Leo sweats. This realistic simplification shocked the Symbolists… whereas anyone who knows how to read the myths can see that the succession of Signs is more often about the changing balance of Day and Night than about Elements of Air, Water, Earth, Fire. The mere reference to presence/absence relationships (equality, difference or supremacy of one duration over another) has allowed observations and interpretations unthinkable by symbolism. Astrologers are not interested in it, consultants are.

A science is not built solely by statistics and experiments, deductive thought contributes to its construction in an often decisive way because, (I quote Augusto Forti, author of an article on Newton’s death): “A complex mechanism like that which governs the astronomical system can be deduced from observing the behavior and laws which govern a more common body, such as a pendulum or a projectile.” From the zodiac of presence-absence durations for a given geographical latitude, let us show logic: since it is not seasonal, then there is no need to invoke the seasons as an argument for reversing the Signs. The durations specific to a precise zodiacal position (celestial Longitude and Latitude) vary according to the North and South geographical latitudes, the declination, on the other hand, per hour “h”, universal from this position does not vary. It is therefore she who determines a single zodiac, both North and South. The figure below is imperfect but self-explanatory. We obtain as many similar figures as we want (degree by degree or other) by reporting, as I did for 0° Cancer and 0° Capricorn, in white the durations of presence, in black the durations of absence, from Latitude to Latitude. There is only one Sign, composed by the North-South meeting of different durations.

In terms of popularization, we can speak of windows united and differently open on the North and the South according to the declination of the star. They are open to anything you can imagine: light, gravity, an accordion tune if the planet plays it, perfume if the star produces it, etc. This zodiac of “openings” is terrestrial because the zodiacal declinations are determined by the inclination between the plane of translation of the Earth in its terrestrial orbit and its plane of rotation on itself. Metaphysician astrologers, such as Rudhyar and Carteret, linked the Signs in pairs of opposites (Aries-Libra, Taurus-Scorpio, etc.). Jean Carteret, for example, said that if the Sun Sign represented the “aware”, “the unconscious” returned to the opposite Sign. The conditionalist astrologer Yves Thieffry also interprets the Signs in pairs of opposites. It is perhaps the correct reading of the figure of durations… For my part, I never interpret an isolated Sign, but the whole of a distribution which can bring out a deficiency, the absence of a Sign… There, again, we have to wait for new observations with conceptual tools capable of analyzing them, other than symbolic or statistical.

In the couple “innate/acquired” dear to psychologists, is astrology a de facto option for innateness? Is this also the position of the conditionalists? Can astrological information intersect with genetic information? Has there been — on your part — interdisciplinary research carried out in this direction with biologists or neurophysiologists?

Due to the growing discredit of astrology, astrologers, conditionalists or otherwise, are unlikely to interest scientists, biologists, neurophysiologists or others in their ideas. When, exceptionally, a scientist takes an official interest in astrological research, he begins: a) by assuring his colleagues that in reality he is not doing astrology; b) by applying its methods and concepts, preferably going in a direction opposite to those of its predecessors, especially if they are astrologers. To organize interdisciplinary research on our own, we would have to have a large fortune in order to found a laboratory and remunerate the skills without consideration of their pro or anti-astrological convictions.

The duality, in astrology, of the innate and the acquired seems to me overrated, at the limit of the artificial. Whether “neural man” has adapted to planetary and geosolar cycles to the point of making them its own, it must have internal rhythms, biochemical clocks, synchronizable to external rhythms of the same origin (case of hydrogen, atom common to living and non-living). This innateness makes astrologers say, and M. Gauquelin was of their opinion, that the newborn comes under the sky which resembles him, the dominant star is only a sign of the innate temperament… and we do not take care of the rest, transits for example. This does not correspond to our practice. We all think that the effect does not stop suddenly at birth. Therefore, if the external clocks are not eliminated, one must come to terms with them, adapt to them, do “with”, whether or not we are in affinity with them. I associated this hypothesis with the image of a bather who waits for the temperature in accordance with his temperament to take a bath, but who, in any case, must learn to swim if he is thrown into the water. This may not work for everyone.

Objective tests, measures and criteria must be devised to judge this. With innateness, many astrologers, a large majority, see in the horoscope a set of composite elements (God knows if there are any!) which mark destiny and character at the very moment of birth. I am not as sure as they are of this flash of stars and Signs. It may just as well be that one responds first to one or two dominant configurations (probably family, when the birth is not provoked) and that the rest of the sky is learned later, with the transits and under the variance of the circumstances which cause the “phenotype” (what one must become) does not necessarily, not fully realize the “genotype” (what we are). This is what the conditionalist perspective teaches: the horoscope is not the Subject, later supplemented by: the Chart is a proposal of beings, since it can represent a group or be experienced by several people! This design allowed us, in the 1960s, long before knowing the work of René Zazzo, to better understand the case of twins. True or false twins, they share the same sky.

Does the astrological information contained in a chart make it possible to decode the behavior or the structure of the personality? Between the two, there is a distance which opens the doors of psychoanalysis (even of astro-psychoanalysis). But you seem suspicious (not to say hostile) to psychoanalytical theories. Does this mean that you identify behavior with structure? This point is not always very clear in the discourse of those who defend astro-neurophysiological theses. Explain to us.

The model R.E.T. (already quoted) organizes simple, less simple, complex information. No level of Unique, Dual or Multiple is privileged. You will recognize, I think, that the signals “verbal” (words) are much simpler, despite their wealth of information, than signals “concrete”. What is often expressed by “the map is not the field”. Theories psychoanalytic are more interested in the map than in the terrain, scientists, including neurophysiologists, prefer the terrain. We need words — and other simplifying codes — to talk about facts, we need facts to invent words. There is no exclusion of each other, but the dosages are different.

I am not teaching you the dizzying predominance of discourse, verb and language in psychoanalysis, its explanations and its therapies. In addition to the Verb, the referential “Subject” is omniscient. In physical sciences (astronomy, astrophysics are part of it), “the Object” rejects the “Psy-topic”. The complexes, the personality, the childhood, have no interest in front of a telescope which probes the Universe. In our school of education, the reference systems, such as the “Subject” psychoanalysts, the “Object” of scientists, are antagonistic; they are aiming for a hegemony, which the followers of the referential are aiming for as well “Integration” religions and metaphysical philosophies. The R.E.T. (already quoted) breaks down the cleavages of all the frames of reference because there is, in each of them, something simple, something less simple, something complex. Information brings down lies, as do rival systems and ideologies: love, friendship, humor, complicity, intelligence, war. All planetary functions.

I am not particularly hostile to psychoanalytical theories, but to all discourses, scientists, politicians, symbolists, metaphysicians, who only know their Chinese walls. I have nothing to say to an astrologer who takes the Moon for his mother, not because of his conviction, but because this type of conviction, like faith and ignorance, prevents the slightest beginning of dialogue. We can only dialogue on the basis of a doubt or a common need. As for psychoanalysis: what I have read so far hardly goes in the direction of a physical explanation of astrology. However, because he is a psychoanalyst, as strange as a conditionalist in astrology, I would be happy to communicate with the psychoanalyst and philosopher Miguel Benasayag, author of Mythe de l’individu (Éd. La Découverte. 1998) and with all those who have read and thought about his work. Will the supporters of the horoscope-Subject adopt this author to justify their vision of psychoanalytic astrology? I doubt it… and yet, he is a psychoanalyst. As a reference researcher “Relationship”, I noticed that the language of the neurosciences and their discoveries made it possible to structure astrology and to pass, without loss of essential information (the structures), from the astrometric reference frame to the neurological reference frame of the Subject.

The psychoanalytical discourse, useful or not in consultation (it can be catastrophic), is not suitable for researching the astrometric foundations of astrology. Contemporary astrology being under the sign of the Word and in reference “Subject”, as soon as there is a lark in a pie made up of a horse and a lark, everything that conditionalism has constructed, on the horse side, is judged as one lark’s remarks among others: the chirping of a childish desire to explain a reality that can only be, in anti-Object referential, inexplicable. The photoperiodic zodiac is mathematically structured, formulas replace observation. The distributions of complexes, over the Signs, according to the masters, myths, symbols, have no mathematical rigor… if they had any, they would be anti-psychoanalytical, because in astro-psychoanalysis, as opposed to life which is a novel, mathematics concerns death and concerns tendencies sublimated from the anal complex.

As I told you above, what do you want to answer to That? From the photoperiodic structure flow, also structured, the formulas of the neuropsychological functions, and from these functions flow, not “a” but “of the” behaviours. Under the Signs on either side of the equinox axis, Pisces, Aries, Virgo, Libra, the durations “presence-absence” are equal or substantially equal. We have an astrometrical and mathematical structure unrelated to the symbols and Elements accorded to these Signs. By deduction, it is transposed as a function “Sense of Opposites” with different variants according to other astrometric characteristics. In the case of Aries, the “Sense of Opposites” is exclusive: the for someone or something, entails a against someone or something. Aggressiveness is only an affective, possibly pathological aspect of a “Sense of Opposites” which can be a faculty, a characteristic experienced intellectually. The Aries Descartes, removed his philosophical dualism, without the need to call for a sublimation of aggressive tendencies. Under the four Signs on either side of the solstices (Gemini, Cancer, Sagittarius, Capricorn) the durations of presence or absence are extreme: maximum or minimum. This structure has been transposed into “Sense of Syntheses”, generalizing, globalizing functions, with different variants (open or closed) according to the other astrometric characteristics (increase or decrease in the dominant duration in North or South). The Cancer family spirit is an affective form of a closed Sense of Syntheses, but what about the mathematical management of a set of peas over several generations by Grégor Mendel (22nd June 1822), is it out of sociability? or paternal love?

The same logic applies to planets. The transition from duo-dual to unique, from less simple to simpler information, is an abstract structure which, transposed into a R.E.T. become “Representation of Existence” because our representations (words) simplify the facts, our codes collect sensory experiences. The statistics of Michel and Françoise Gauquelin associate the professions of actor, deputy, sportsman of team games, with the strong positions of Jupiter at birth. With different behaviors, the actor, the deputy, verbalize and gestualize the facts, by schematizing them, on stage or in the Chamber. Thanks to the athletes, we see that there is simplification of a confrontation of antagonistic forces, by the scoring of a goal. The function is identical, the behaviors varied.

The conditionalist works go around all the planetary structures and their functions by following this invariable sequence: structure to function to behavior. Enlarged functions produce “kinds”. Usually caricatures, fortunately hard to find. Followers of planetary typologies do not have a wide range of examples: it is always the same ones that come up in astrological publications. In conditionalism, the personality is not described by a juxtaposition or an amalgam of “kinds” but by easy or difficult relations between the planetary functions. Their power prioritization at birth makes it possible to deduce behavioral scenarios, which vary according to extra-astrological conditioning and according to transits.

This is why conditionalist portraits are rich in variants without detecting their structure, especially if you are used to typologies! Those, to recognize themselves in it, quickly disfigured the planetary functions by reducing them to new types of behavior, that is to say by recovering the R.E.T., under a label of characterology of properties. However, the R.E.T. is not a fixed system. His apps go far beyond the astrological and psychological framework. I had to argue hard for some editors to agree not to eliminate the formula of planetary functions in the interpretation introduction of aspects, of transits or portraits. There is still no question that astropsychology recovers structures that do not belong to it or avails itself of results whose foundations it ignores or despises because they are non-symbolic.

Astrological practice too often delights in illusion. You are probably right. Furthermore, the school quarrels poison us. But don’t you think that the most serious thing lies in the commercial popularization of astrological discourse and playful excesses? Don’t you think that this speech deserves an effort of solidarity on the part of all astrologers. There Federation of Astrologers extends his hand to you and asks you to help him build another picture of astrology. What do you answer?

The school quarrels, mercantile popularization, playful drifts, have, in my opinion, only one reason, only one cause: modern times, under the non-zodiacal sign: individualism, image, profit, of wordy politics, of scientism-power. Can you name a discipline, an institution safe from school quarrels, playful excesses, commercialism? Addressed to Minister Allègre, Philippe Pinchon, Agrégé de Lettres and conditionalist astrologer, has just written a beautiful text on the theme “Education and Society”. Inspired by his arguments on the impossibility of teaching civic, intellectual and moral rigor, in a context of time and society where these values are made fun of, I can tell you that the astrologers you quote are quite suitable for the company. A bit too much.

To change this state of mind, to revalue astrology, several solutions, not miraculous, are possible. You have chosen that of the “Representativity”, so that the media address the FDAF on behalf of French-speaking astrologers who, from different schools, have at least in common a concern for seriousness. I believed, in the 60s, that the “number” (around a common degree) would end up putting pressure. I was wrong about the strategic sense of the astrologers who, imbued with depth psychology, only wanted to see in this project ambition and ambition. You will understand that since then I have kept a careful distance from large gatherings. Of course, the conditionalists, members or not of the COMAC, are free to act according to their conscience and to adhere to all the groups which they consider of good quality for astrology.

However, if I had to do it again, I would do it differently, more individualistic since it’s fashionable, and in a directly political way. In the way “representative”, an astrologer would have to take charge of a deputation with a program including the recognition of astrology. Some causes only come forward during election periods. If you follow up on this idea, I will certainly vote for you… and I would certainly not be the only one who, whether a member of the FDAF or not, would grasp what the approach can have in order to get out of a ghetto. The way of our Association is not the “Representativity” by the great number, but that of work and research. The acronym of the COMAC which originally designated a “Centre d’Organisation du Mouvement Conditionaliste” has been changed to “Centre d’Organisation des Méthodes Conditionalistes” so that there is no longer any ambiguity.

Some left the COMAC by slamming the door, because the media coverage, the “number”, we prefer rigour, humor and the friendship of a team. These demands have been labeled sectarianism. The worst is that of rigor which revives the astrometry of the astrologer-astronomers of Sumer, Greece, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Arabia. You have chosen the Francophonie, is it less or more sectarian than choosing astrometry? It is not the same criterion of reunion… or elimination. It is because conditionalism has returned to astrometry for the greater benefit of astrology that it has been censored, fought, distorted… in the name of its sectarianism! That of Kepler, i guess? After years of crisis, there is finally a conditionalist team. The software Azimut35 of Patrick Le Guen, his website, that of Astro-consults by Jacques Mullard, that of COMAC, remedy anti-astrological and anti-conditionalist misinformation. We have teachers, members; their limited number makes us smile, their loyalty should cause concern. On the sidelines, there is the magazine Astrologie Naturelle of Richard Pellard. We regret its substitution of conditionalist astrology for “natural” astrology, especially since no one is fooled… but, if this denomination is discussed, the teaching activity of R. Pellard contributes to making known a conception of astrology worthy of his heritage. Our maintenance also contributes to this.

For your part, you make known what is happening with our research. Of ours, when the FDAF will be on television, on the airwaves, in the press, confronted with media that are not gifts to knowledge that does not have the blessing of science, we will bring you arguments other than those of common language. Knowing that we exist, that we are honest, very good… But, once recognized, in front of a scientist, do you dare to tell him that the North Node of the Moon corresponds to your reincarnation, that the retrograde planets bear witness to your mistakes in past lives, that Mars is aggressive because it is red in color… and that it is master of Aries, because in Spring this Eastern Sign of Fire? I am not asking you to join the COMAC, it is not your line. Don’t ask me to join the FDAF, it’s not ours. Let’s support each other, let’s support each other by keeping the distances that protect effective complementarities. They won’t stop me from voting for you. Because I know that next you will need the conditionalist balance sheet.

---

Le petit livre du Taureau

par Richard Pellard

49 pages. Illustrations en couleur.

Ce livre présente et explique les trois zodiaques : celui du décor des constellations, celui de l’astrologie traditionnelle basé sur les Quatre Éléments symboliques (Feu, Terre, Air & Eau) et celui de l’astrologie naturelle basé sur les phénomènes astronomiques objectifs.

Interprétation du Taureau selon la symbolique classique et selon ses réflexes dans le zodiaque naturel (force, vitesse, équilibre) ; interprétation du Taureau en fonction des planètes dominantes ; le Signe solaire & le Signe Ascendant.

Téléchargez-le dès maintenant dans notre boutique