Objectivity: where?

We are in an age where a ton of information is available to us, but that information is not always correctly reported/deciphered/accurately presented:

• Sometimes information is withheld for a reason, and in the absence of information, it is human nature to fill a vacuum with what you think is there.

• Uranus and Neptune were conjunct for a long while in Capricorn and then Aquarius in the 90s and then just Neptune was in Aquarius by itself (similar energy). And people with this energy are adults or becoming adults:

  • Neptune is where you have illusions that get dissolved over the course of your life.

  • Uranian energy is about having the right idea.

    • Squish these two concepts together in an inseparable way: can't have one without the other if this is your energy.

• Many also have Pluto in Sagittarius which is partially about moral superiority and belief systems and Sagittarius is prone to oversimplifying or generalizing when it should not (trust me).

  • Many of these people have cameras and opinions and the ability to speak convincingly.

  • It’s not just this generation of people, but this is literally part of the pervasive issue with said generation that is life-long, while for others it can be fleeting or temporary (long 9th house transits will change some firmly-held opinions, just as one fun example).

Do the math on this: "what's true? you sure? you'd bet your life or reputation on it?"

Basically you'd better hope the conclusions you draw are correct, especially if you’re assembling an angry mob. And people might get taken out by an angry mob who are innocent based on bad or incomplete data. With Pluto in Aquarius now, people with power are capable of painting really convincing pictures based on skewed data. Or! People amass power by assembling different narratives from the prevailing narrative. Or! People only consent to interviews where they get asked the questions they *want* to be asked and that fit the narrative they want to convey (to some extent this has always been the case, obviously, but now there is *more*). And! People show up to crime scenes and post real-time videos of what's happening because everyone is a journalist now because we all have cameras on our phones. Also: every time you unlock your phone you run the risk of seeing some shit you can't unsee.

(I got annoyed with all the footage from Rob Reiner's house this week, including his poor assistant just trying to process what was going on while being hounded by people with cameras. I don't want to watch a grieving man try to make sense of his losses in real time. Have some decency, you know?)

As you can tell, I have mixed feelings here. I encounter people constantly who are trying to interpret data they don't have the training to read, and often I am also that person, seeking out an expert to explain to me what the hell the document they just sent me means (one time I got sent un-interpreted water quality test results and had to write back "respectfully, no, but thank you for the compliment of thinking I can understand this.") I meet people who believe they are smart enough to practice law without having ever attended law school (and I have cackled while reading a filing and realizing that it says "pro se," meaning the legal "expert" is representing themselves while the actual lawyers rub their hands together in billable hours). I learned when I was working in academia that intelligence in one area is great to have, but it doesn't necessarily transfer to other areas. Our gifts do not make us universally gifted. I'm good at "woo" shit but I'm terrible at contact sports, you know?

I would also like to state: journalism is not presently a lucrative industry. With a few notable exceptions, it does not pay. So we have a collection of journalists with very limited resources in every sense of that word who are conveying information, and they are doing their best. I am not trying to shit on noble efforts. But I do work with a smattering of journalists sometimes, and more often than I am comfortable with, they have already decided what story they are writing rather than letting the facts be what they are, so they are looking for you to either confirm or dramatically refute their story, but don’t want ambiguous information. When you get paid by clicks or views, you need an interesting story. Consider this. But also consider: how often in your own life do you encounter situations that are truly black and white or open and shut? How common is that, really?

@dnlfoxx

Come see me on tour? 😌 #comedy #comedian #standup Recorded at @Frog & Bucket Comedy Club

Also consider what it's like when someone is arguing with you who is fixated on their own conclusion being the correct one and trying to recruit you to their way of seeing the world: do you like it when that happens? Do you cooperate with them? Personally, I'm not going to willingly feed someone information who is going to skew it to further their own argument. Professionally I am going to state facts or (when doing psychic work) I am going to say what I see even if it doesn't make sense to me (it usually makes sense to whoever I am reading for, but sometimes I am seeing things they are not aware of yet because that’s how this works sometimes), because my job in life is to be the messenger. I give you the information. You make the meaning.

So what's real? What's true? I'm not trying to incite paranoia by writing this, but our collective pivot to video and the fact that there are people who can speak very convincingly about things they know little to nothing about while real journalists are doing their best (benefit of the doubt here) has resulted in at least some of us drawing conclusions that are premature or not correct (especially when you leave out ambiguous data that does not confirm or blow up the argument itself). If you have the energy in the form of the bullets listed above, there are serious stakes involved with being loud and wrong because your energetic makeup implies that this would cause an internal meltdown (at least) if not public dishonor. It hurts real bad when you realize you believed or perpetuated some lies, and we don't all have great bullshit detectors.

High stakes, you know?

Look, there are a handful of things you should just never, ever do. I actually think it would be a fun thought experiment for people in the same Neptune/Pluto generations to gather in clumps and compile such a list because my point would be so comically reinforced I think I’d experience a solid month of nonstop glee (if any of you want to steal my idea, please go nuts. I don’t even need credit) because the things on the generational lists will DIFFER. But life teaches you (if you pay attention) that there are life scenarios that don’t appear on that list of “completely and totally morally/spiritually wrong” that you can find yourself navigating if you’re put in desperate or horrible circumstances, and your formerly black & white world becomes awfully gray very fast. Which is why I don’t judge much anymore: it’s not my place and I usually don’t have all the information. Plus, minding your business is a very relaxing endeavor.

P.S. I recommend rhetoric teacher Mr Rupp on Tiktok (or wherever you distract and possibly horrify yourself) if you would like to learn more about defending yourself rom manipulative argumental techniques (if you can tolerate someone yelling rhetoric at you)

P.P.S. New video: where are Travis Kelce’s good transits? I’m scratching my head.