Home / In Astrology, Participation is Essential

In Astrology, Participation is Essential

Please Share...Print this pageTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Email this to someone

One of the most important aspects of astrology is free will. When you approach the information in your natal chart with an active mindset it becomes a powerful tool for self improvement. Astrology is not your fate carved in stone, it’s a set of guidelines or suggestions.

For example, let’s say you consult an astrologer and find out that you’re entering a “lucky” period courtesy of Jupiter (the planet of abundance). What should you do? You can sit back and wait for something to fall in your lap, but you’ll probably see nothing. Jupiter works by expanding possibilities, so the key is to step up and work with the opportunities that appear. A little goes a long way with Jupiter and you’ll be amazed at the returns.

It’s the same idea if you’re going through a dreadful Saturn period. If Jupiter is the party, Saturn is the hangover. It’s the reality check that shows you the consequences of your actions. It asks that you expend maximum effort for what seems like minimum results. You can become discouraged and depressed. Or, you can find a way to make the restrictions work for you and realize that it’s not about immediate payback. Things like commitments, careers, and weight loss can progress very nicely with Saturn.

Maybe you have a lot of Pisces energy in your chart, making you an artist but not an athlete. Pisces transcends the physical and is more in tune with the spirit than the body. If you decide you want to get in shape, are you out of luck? You may never excel at football, but activities like yoga and Tai Chi are a nice blend of physical and spiritual. The point is that you can choose.

I’m not telling you anything new here. Everything I’ve just written is common sense and so is astrology. It’s nothing more than a guide to participating in your own life.

Powered by

About Nadia Gilchrist

  • Brian aka Guppusmaximus

    You provide some great advice here,though, I’d have to agree that it’s more about common sense & an openness to opportunities with people than having to do with a system of alignment that relies on a restricted point of view.

  • Nadia Gilchrist

    Thanks! But I’d have to argue that astrology is anything but restrictive. It’s alternative and gives people another way to view things.

  • You can argue anything you like, Nadia, but I’d like to hear a coherent argument that attempted to explain how anything at all about astrology is based on anything except ignorance and superstition – if you take it seriously – or a load of drivel if you don’t…

  • Brian aka Guppusmaximus

    @ Nadia

    It’s restricted because your viewpoint of these supposed “celestial patterns” is from this planet only. If you try to view those from other vantage points in outer space then those patterns do not exist, in which, there would be no information to base any translations of such events or predictions of future outcomes on.

    I tend to agree with Christopher. Most of these superstitions or fairy tales are based on the mentality that this planet is the center of the universe and as scientific knowledge progresses, we are learning (now with images) that this is far from the truth.

    I’m much more a firm believer in the power people have to solve their own problems & help one another without the need for traditions that impose fear & intimidation or those that relinquish such personal power to an idea that the stars & planets are smarter than we are.

    People make things possible for themselves & others as well as cause failure for themselves and others… Nothing more, nothing less. And when you rely on rubbish to make important decisions in your life then you are doing a great disservice to humanity!

  • Nadia Gilchrist

    Well Brian and Christopher…we’ll have to agree to disagree. But I’m counting on both of you to read the future astrology articles that I publish on Blogcritics and offer up your opinions. Thanks guys! 🙂

  • Nadia: YOU might agree to disagree but I certainly don’t; as far as I’m concerned this is all a cruel, manipulative con trick that exploits people.

    As to your articles, I didn’t even read this one, nor do I understand why it has been published as Blogcritics doesn’t publish fiction…

  • Brian aka Guppusmaximus

    “Well Brian and Christopher…we’ll have to agree to disagree”

    Ha… Typical defense for someone who cannot support their argument with facts. AND, if Blogcritics allows any more of this schlock to be published, that will only tarnish their reputation, but, maybe that already happened when Eric sold it to Technorati?!

  • Well, Brian, Blogcritics is a broad church, and there are abundant examples on the site of articles endorsing assorted nonsense (astrology, homeopathy, wave vibration training, all-doctors-are-perverts-and-rapists, unlocking your car with your cellphone, Morgellon’s disease, Republicanism etc). We still seem to be thriving in spite of it all: principally, I suspect, because there is a feedback space at the bottom of each article where readers can point out (in terms which adhere to the comments policy, of course!) that it’s all bollocks.

    There are very few taboo subjects: in fact the only two I can think of are cat blogging and 9/11 conspiracy theories. (Go figure.)

    I do have one question for Nadia: If you insist you and your dissenters are going to have to “agree to disagree”, then what is the point of your invitation for them to comment on your future articles?

  • Nadia Gilchrist

    @Dr Dreadful;
    I’m inviting them to continue to post their opinions even if I don’t agree with them. But that’s the whole point of Blogcritics, isn’t it? I don’t post my astrology articles with the assumption that everyone will accept what I write. I’m hoping that there WILL be some people who question what I have to say. This is what makes life interesting.

  • Nadia, it’s great that you don’t expect everyone to agree with your point of view. That’s far from being the case with one or two Blogcritics writers I could mention…

    But “agreeing to disagree” is, as Chris and Brian rightly point out, a copout.

    If I were to give you the benefit of the doubt, I’d say that you were calling a truce – except that it’s a strange sort of truce that takes effect before the battle has even begun.

    It’s more readily interpreted as a roundabout way of saying, “Shut up, I don’t want to talk about this any more”.

    Or, “I’m taking my ball and going home”.