Founding Editor

This forum is for methodological discussion, not predictions or chart readings. New members may reply to existing threads. Starting new topics is reserved for validated contributors. Focus on: interpretive rules methodological assumptions structural limits Posts asking for readings, remedies, or outcomes will be removed.

Most public discussions about astrology focus on success stories. Far fewer examine where interpretation breaks down. This thread is about identifying the limits of interpretive frameworks: situations where rules contradict each other cases where multiple readings remain equally plausible points where interpretive discretion overtakes structure The goal here is not to “debunk” astrology, nor to defend it reflexively, but to examine failure modes honestly. Replies should address: structural ambiguity methodological overload or limits inherent in the system being discussed Avoid anecdotes and personal readings. Focus on why interpretation fails, not on whether a prediction came true.

Astrology discussions often collapse into outcomes: predictions, accuracy claims, and anecdotal success or failure. This forum begins at a different level — method. By method, I mean the underlying rules that govern interpretation: what is allowed to signify what how contradictions are resolved what assumptions are made before interpretation even begins Different systems (Vedic, KP, Western, etc.) disagree less on symbols than they do on methodological commitments — often implicitly. This thread is meant to clarify: what “method” actually refers to in astrological practice where methodological disagreements genuinely lie and where discussions confuse method with outcome This is not a place for predictions or chart readings. If you reply, focus on rules and assumptions, not results.