1 8 S p i r i t ua l i t y S t u d i e s 2 - 2 Fa l l 2 0 1 6 6 Spectrum Psychology, Archetypal Dynamics, and Transit Astrology In conclusion, I would like to bring up another major point of disagreement between Ken Wilber and myself, namely the relevance of astrology, particularly transit astrology, for depth psychology and consciousness research. After almost four decades of research into NOSC, I have come to the conclusion that psychiatry, psychology, and psychotherapy could profoundly benefit, both theoretically and practically, from a creative synthesis of transpersonal psychology and archetypal astrology. Numerous observations made in cooperation with Richard Tarnas, who has been a great teacher for me in this regard, have convinced me that transit astrology is a tool (and the only tool I know) that predicts with extraordinary accuracy both the timing and content of spontaneous and evoked episodes of NOSC, such as mystical experiences, spiritual emergencies, psychotic breakdowns, and psychedelic or holotropic sessions. In the early years of my professional career, astrology would have been the last discipline I would have possibly taken seriously into account. It has been a major irony of my professional life that after years of unsuccessful search among psychological tests of Western academic psychology for tools that would predict the nature and content of psychedelic experiences and other types of NOSC, I found the answer in transit astrology, a field that is even more controversial than psychedelic research itself. Ken considers our respective perspectives on the value of astrology to constitute one of the “genuine disagreements” between us and has stated that he would probably never share my enthusiasm in this regard. I can easily understand the resistance against astrology that exists in academic circles, since scientists with conventional educational backgrounds, committed to the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm and materialistic philosophy, cannot accept astrology without undergoing a major conceptual cataclysm. However, Ken’s unswerving resistance comes as somewhat of a surprise, since he has been able to accept many claims of perennial philosophy that are certainly not less extraordinary and challenging than those of astrology. Introduction of the astrological perspective would help to clarify some of the points of disagreement between Ken and myself, such as the importance of perinatal dynamics, the relationship between psychotic and mystical experiences, the question whether the centaur or the perinatal domain of the unconscious represents the interface with the spiritual dimension, and the problem of the integration and stabilization of perinatal and transpersonal experiences. It would take a separate paper to explain the basic principles of the relationship between archetypal astrology, transpersonal psychology, and consciousness research. A convincing argument would require bringing in the remarkable evidence of a clinical, as well as historical and cultural, nature illustrating these correlations that Richard Tarnas has accumulated over the years. I have had the pleasure of teaching with him a graduate course at the California Institute of Integral Studies (CIIS) on this subject and have been repeatedly impressed, even astonished, by the accuracy of astrological correlations for a wide variety of fields. The results of his meticulous research with hundreds of convincing examples will be presented in his comprehensive scholarly study entitledCosmos and Psyche: Intimations of a New World View (Tarnas 2007), the astrological sequel to his bookThe Passion of the Western Mind (Tarnas 1991). I believe that this book will be a major contribution to both transpersonal psychology and astrology. Forty years of research into NOSC have convinced me of the limitations and relativity of all models and theoretical constructs. As Thomas Kuhn showed in his groundbreaking work The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Kuhn 1970), the entire history of Western science could easily be written as a history of human errors rather than major triumphs. None of the theories considered definitive at any given time have survived later discoveries, except the most recent ones that are still waiting for it to happen. Reality is clearly much more complex than any of the theories that we make about it. Whatever transpersonal psychologists have discovered and described during the first quarter of a century of the existence of their young discipline will necessarily be complemented, revised, and modified. The future will show how the upcoming generations of professionals will view the issues explored in this paper in the light of their own experiences and findings. They will very likely scrutinize the statements on both sides and change or adjust them to accommodate new observations and theories. I therefore feel very strongly that instead of engaging in the battle of models as if they were and ever could be definitive and all-inclusive, it is wise to do the best we can to improve them and bring them into consonance, but leave the field wide open for surprises and new discoveries.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzgxMzI=