Traditional vs modern. state your case [Archive]

mdinaz

12-02-2007, 03:57 PM

All I can say on that (Saturn vs Aquarius) is that the outer planets - Uranus, Neptune, Pluto - are generational and their locations mean little to your personal makeup, only your overall view of life, which is certainly generational. If I'm looking at a chart and focusing on relationships, say, I'll look at the 5th and 7th house. If the 7th house is in Aquarius, I'll look at Saturn as much as Uranus, because Saturn is a traditional ruler of Aquarius, Uranus is a slow moving generational planet, and Saturn for centuries ruled that sign. It's not an either/or - use both to keep to the deeper meaning of the situation. Same goes for Mars and Scorpio.

Now on that same question, let's say that Saturn was in 3rd house in Aries. I'll certainly focus on how communications in relationships may be severly limited. I personally won't link Mars into the equation, just because Saturn happens to be in Aries. My own opinion is at that point, you are reading too much into it and getting information overload. Other astrologers do, and if it works for them, great. I guess that's where I diverge from other astrologers on sign rulerships.

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-02-2007, 08:46 PM

I agree with mdinaz concerning the Outers. While I would interpret the Inners based on Sign, House, and Aspect, I would not treat the Outers in such a way. Instead, I would only find the House and Aspects (and the only to the Inners) to be useful, so Signs don't matter to the Outers and since they don't, why would they bother to rule them?

For example, how can Saturn rule Aqua? That's like some kind of astrological oxymoron in my opinion. There are some similarities, but not like Uranus.

I disagree, in most cases, Uranus has shaped Aquarius to be something it's generally not, so perhaps Aquarius is rather misunderstood.

The modern association between Aquarius and Uranus has given this sign an exaggerated reputation for being rebellious, anti-social, perverse, eccentric and emotionally unstable. All of these negative forms of behaviour arise as extreme manifestations in individuals that have yet to find their centre. Anyone who is naturally inclined to care about the interests of social welfare will face their shadow in a world of political frustration where they are confronted with the mirror of their own anger and disappointment. Uranus sits comfortably within the theme of Aquarius in issues of detachment and mental separation, but the intrinsically destructive nature of that planet undermines the fact that Aquarius is regarded as a fortunate sign that rarely offers hostile conditions unless the planets within it are afflicted and heavily debilitated. Whilst some degree of separation from the group is a natural and healthy Aquarian trait, social isolation is not. Primarily this sign works best when supporting well-reasoned theoretical reform rather than violent civil disruption, leaving aggression aside in favour of its polished weapons of diplomacy, logic and tactful gathering of public support.

mdinaz

12-02-2007, 08:55 PM

Pisceanfool

12-03-2007, 07:24 AM

I realize what you are saying, and they defintly are representative of the trends. Pluto and Uranus defintly stir things up (scorpio unravelling and aqua innovating). They move very slow, but that does not make them any less valid or personal. People take thier chart and express it in thier own unique way, and 1/12 of ppl (theoritically) have the same whatever bodies sign as someone else. I don't see why the sign of any object would not matter, even if they are entirely generational.

I think of rulerships as the best suited, as far as similar "vibrations" or "energy" whatever, just how they are. I also believe the outers are the higher octaves of some of the personals. They can be expressed personally.

Mars-Pluto
Moon-Neptune
Mercury-Uranus

Personally, i think they represent the next phase in our evolution, as we expand and resonate with different vibrations. Of course, we will need Saturn and Jupiter to move forward as well.

Only my opinion, still a noob

wilsontc

12-03-2007, 04:19 PM

mdinaz,

You said:
the outer planets - Uranus, Neptune, Pluto - are generational and their locations mean little to your personal makeup

I think the outers are both generational and personal. While they do have generational effects because of their slow movements, they can have very strong personal effects as well. However, not everyone is "tuned" into these planets. But for those who have many aspects to these planets or if it hits any of the 4 points in the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Midheaven, Descendand, and IC), these energies are very strongly felt.

Strongly,

Tim

wilsontc

12-03-2007, 04:29 PM

Kaiousei,

You said:
While I would interpret the Inners based on Sign, House, and Aspect, I would not treat the Outers in such a way. Instead, I would only find the House and Aspects (and the only to the Inners) to be useful, so Signs don't matter to the Outers

I think a planet is a planet, and since planets are in signs, then planets are in signs. Whether or not it is an "inner" planet or an "outer" planet, it doesn't matter. Since the "outer" planets are planets and have signs, then signs matter to the outer just as much as to the inners.

Simply,

Tim

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-03-2007, 08:20 PM

They move very slow, but that does not make them any less valid or personal.

Are they less valid? No. Are they less personal? Yes. Uranus spends about seven years in each Sign, will that affect the world? Definitely. Will it affect individuals? I don't see it happening, unless that person's chart is colored with a specific member of the Outers (or perhaps more than one) regarding house position and aspects to by the Inners.

I don't see why the sign of any object would not matter, even if they are entirely generational.

See above. They matter, perhaps in such astrologies as mundane and predictive, but I don't see them making much of an impact in nativities unless certain circumstances are met.

I think the outers are both generational and personal. While they do have generational effects because of their slow movements, they can have very strong personal effects as well. However, not everyone is "tuned" into these planets. But for those who have many aspects to these planets or if it hits any of the 4 points in the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Midheaven, Descendand, and IC), these energies are very strongly felt.

Exactly. They're generational, and only personal in regard to the rest of the chart.

I think a planet is a planet, and since planets are in signs, then planets are in signs. Whether or not it is an "inner" planet or an "outer" planet, it doesn't matter.

Big words when we're not even sure what constitutes a planet. ;)

Do the Outers express themselves in Signs? Yes, but in a general manner I don't see it applying to individuals, but the entire group.

I don't get it, you agree with me but you're angry about it.

Liquid Green

12-03-2007, 09:12 PM

I would not yet call myself an astrologer at all......just to get this out the way.

I think that the outer planets have to do with evolution......obviously this has to do with the generations but i think that they can also have a profound experience on individuals.....
I had an experience in 1997 (psychedelic drug induced mind you) that has changed who I am as a person.......When i look to the stars on what happened that day, I am a bit blown away.......Maybe not to you guys, but to me yes! (I have trouble expalining to others what i experienced but lets just say that i think if everyone had similar experiences the world would be a safer and more loving place)
Anyway on the day....transitting sun , sat on my natal uranus at the zenith.......Transiting uranus sat on my aqua asc.........transitting neptune sat on my natal moon.......
Anyway what i am getting at is, I think I had some original thoughts that day......I think thats what the outer planets are doing.....bring ing the opportunities to think deeper and wider, to evolve......

I disagree that they are only generational.......maybe for the most part they are, but when they conjuct planets in our natal in transit, ithink they become very personal.....for me to the point that i cant expalin to anyone else what i felt and experienced.......

But like i said , I am not an astrologer.....I am just throwing this experience into the equation to see what you all think.....

I think Tim is right....because for me....when uranus hit my asc......i felt it stronger than anything else i have experienced in my life.....(truely)

mdinaz

12-03-2007, 09:39 PM

I think the outers, in and of themselves, are generational and only are there to shape the general cultural worldview of those of us who live on Earth. When they closely aspect our personal planets or transit very sensitive points, they do certainly modify some personality traits. But whether Uranus in Taurus square Mercury is any different than Uranus in Virgo square Mercury, I say, not really. It may affect certain generational viewpoints and the expression of those viewpoints but the essential personality remains the same. A very fine line to be sure, but that's the fun part of astrology.

Second part, Uranus on the ASC/MC, etc. Until Uranus was discovered, life moved very slowly. Things just didn't change much as far as overall quality of life. The discovery of Uranus coincided with the rise of technology and science as well as politics, and then things did indeed begin to change quickly. Uranus was always there, just no one knew it, and as a generational planet affecting personal planets, it simply did not exist. This is what I mean when I say "Uranus is generational and as such, does not shape the personality". It modifies the personality, it adds elements to it, but it is not a vital component of the personality, only the inner planets are. Clear as mud, I think. :)

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-03-2007, 09:49 PM

I thought it was perfectly clearn, mdinaz.

Absolutely brilliant and I agree with you 100%.

Liquid Green

12-03-2007, 10:06 PM

you dont both think that our non knowledge of these planetsfor such along time, is influenced by there placement at the time.....?

Sorry i am a bit muddy with my dodge merc placement.....bare with me

mdinaz

12-03-2007, 10:18 PM

you dont both think that our non knowledge of these planetsfor such along time, is influenced by there placement at the time.....?

That's exactly what I think - if the planet wasn't known, it essentially did not exist. And their discoveries exactly mirrors our own evolution as people and cultures. Think back - as cavemen, we knew two planets - sun and moon. That's it. And life was essentially focused on that - "Am I alive? Do I feel pain?", and that's about it. There were no thoughts about "why am I here", "what's my career path" - the only thoughts were "eat, sleep, don't bleed, and make little cave children".
As the ancients discovered other planets, life evolved. Venus and Mars, cities and trade grew. Jupiter - philosophies, religions, reasons for life. Saturn - governments, large states and nations, big business. And there life stalled, for two thousand years. Once Uranus came around, things changed rapidly. Radical political thoughts - wars over ideas rather than property. Neptune - science, medical discoveries, drugs. Pluto - radical ideas that challenged the supremacy of religion and the Church, people taking claims about who THEY were, apart from a nation or town. When the planets didn't exist, the ideas didn't exist; I think it follows very well.

gaer

12-03-2007, 11:45 PM

For example, how can Saturn rule Aqua? That's like some kind of astrological oxymoron in my opinion. There are some similarities, but not like Uranus. The others also fit very nicely. I can elaborate, but i think most of you guys agree.

First, consider the term "modern" astrology. What does it mean? And traditional astrology: same question. What does that mean?

Studying the history of astrology and what has gone before will surely enrich your knowledge, period.

The traditional rulership linking planets and signs assumed that all planets had two "sides", a masculine and feminine side. Only the Sun and Moon were exempted from this. So seven planets, five connected to two signs.

Now, consider Saturn. We tend to have a very limited idea of what Saturn represents today. We consider mostly the feminine side, linked to Capricorn. So we associate Saturn with lessons, limitations, hard lessons, restrictions.

But think beyond that. First, think of how Saturn operates in easy aspect to other planets. What does Saturn trine Mercury show? A limited mind? Or one that, through discipline, may be capable of going on to completely uncharted territory? If Saturn is trine Jupiter, does it mean that Jupiter is less expansive, less generous? Or more in control, more balanced?

When you think of Aquarius, do you think of flakes, weirdness, eccentricity? Or of freedom controlled through discipline/wisdom and focused to get something done, perhaps something new that works?

The idea that Aquarius is linked with eccentricity and weirdness is a relatively new idea, and I think a very wrong one. I would argue, for the same reason, that IF Uranus resonates with the energy of Aquarius, and I think it does, our concept of Uranus is equally flawed.

I have Mercury trine Aquarius, both sextile Saturn. You and others have read my posts. Am I tradiational? Modern? Or am I looking for solutions that bring the best of both ideas together?

Obviously the latter. I don't accept every idea that has been, in my opinion, sometimes blindly accepted simply because astrologer A or B declared it so. I'm going to test things (this is part of Saturn too, find the limitations), but I'm going to go wherever my ideas lead me (freedom), which you may associate with Uranus. So I see no problem whatsoever in seriously thinking about how Saturn relates to Aquarius.

Gaer

gaer

12-04-2007, 12:12 AM

That's exactly what I think - if the planet wasn't known, it essentially did not exist. And their discoveries exactly mirrors our own evolution as people and cultures.

I agree that the discovery of the "new planets" mirrow our own evolution, when talking about mankind as a whole.
But I don't agree that "if the planet wasn't known, it essentially did not exist."

I think that's taking a point too far.

It's unfortunate that we can't view accurate charts of people living long ago. So many times we are very lucky to have the right day, with all the calendar conflicts, incorrectly recorded data, etc. Birth-times? I don't trust them.

But IF we could examine the chart of Da Vinci, for instance, I would not be surprised to find an outer planet on the angles. Was there ever a greater genius? Someone who was more known for thinking beyond his times? The fact that we don't have an accurate chart for him does not prove to me or even suggest to me that positions of the outer planets within his natal chart, the one we don't have, and aspects from them to personal planets, would not at least support what we know already: inventive genius for the most part totally at odds with the times in which he lived.

I'm looking at the chart of Frederic Chopin right now. Uranus trine Pluto/Sun/Venus. Square Mercury. Almost exactly inconjunt Pallas, for those of you who are interested in that. We can't check the houses, no reliable birth-time, but does that mean that Uranus only counts because it was discovered already?

Okay. So what about Neptune? Chopin not only was one of the great innovators, perhaps the greatest ever in relationship to piano music, but his music has always been described as dreamy, other-worldly, romantic, and so on. Using your idea, we can't use Neptune in his chart because it was not yet discovered. A planet does not work until after it is discovered. And Chopin died at about the time Neptune was found.

So the fact that Neptune is square to those same three planets as well as trine to Mars can have no importance, following your logic. If that's what you meant.

I believe that if a planet has energy, it would be as important in a natal chart from two thousand years ago as in one from two decades ago. :)

Gaer

Liquid Green

12-04-2007, 12:15 AM

Your post is very clear, Gaer....in no way limited or eccentric.......
It seems to me that traditional astrology is the roots of the topic.....you cant go on without it.......

The weird thing i am noticing though (as useless as this info is), is that our knowledge of astrology is only going to be relative to what is going on in the sky for all of us .... and i guess we have to accept that new trends ,to our way of life, could be representd by new discoveries of planets/objects......I dont think we can ever assume that the knowledge of astrology will ever be boxed and not needed to be added too.....

[non-astrological comments moved to chat board - Moderator]

wilsontc

12-06-2007, 04:21 PM

To all,

Please stay on topic. There is a general chat board for discussions that are not about astrology. I have moved the non-astrological evolution comments to this chat board.

Moderately,

Tim

wilsontc

12-06-2007, 05:00 PM

Kaousei,

You said:
Are they less valid? No. Are they less personal? Yes. Uranus spends about seven years in each Sign, will that affect the world? Definitely. Will it affect individuals? I don't see it happening, unless that person's chart is colored with a specific member of the Outers (or perhaps more than one) regarding house position and aspects to by the Inners.

So we do agree that the outer planets can affect individuals. Perhaps it is a matter of how much it affects individuals. As we agree, there are situations in which a person will feel the outer planets more strongly and personally, so making blanket statements such as "the outer planets are less personal" is very clearly not true in all situations. As you say, if a "person's chart is colored with a specific member of the Outers (or perhaps more than one) regarding house position and aspects to by the Inners" then they could be very personal indeed. For example, if these outer planets "gang up" on the Ascendant (self), then the person may be able to personally use all the outers' energies.

Which brings us to the idea of "personal" and "generational". If something affects a person "personally" then they are immediately aware of it and see it in their life. If something affects a person "generationally" then they STILL experience it, even if they are less aware of it. And, yes, it DOES affect the person themselves...things that affect the "world" affect us, since we are in the world. It comes down to a matter of how "tuned in" a person is to the effects of the outer planets. If something affects a "group" (or a generation) it also affects the people IN the group. If a group of people all identify with certain "generational" things, then they also both individually identify with those things as well.

Which raises the question, what is the difference between "Inner" (so-called "personal" planets) and "Outer" (so-called generational planets). As you mentioned, it is all about time. The "personal" effects of transiting personal planets are one-off and quickly gone. They are the "day to day" challenges that we can easily handle: for example, if we have a Mars transit, we might feel angry for a few days and then the anger goes away. The "impersonal" effects of transiting outer planets are longer-lasting...and much more strongly felt.

As you say, when you have a Uranus transit it lasts a LONG time. And during that time the full power of the sign and the house are in effect. The sign is important since it colors the effect of the outer planet. So, for example, when transiting Uranus hits (conjuncts) your Descendant (others), there is a STRONG, LONG lasting effect on how you handle others. The way this energy comes out will be affected by the sign of Uranus, which will interact with the sign on the cusp of the Descendant. When Uranus is in one sign and the Descendant is in another, the challenges of the Uranus energy will be much more strongly felt, since the Uranus sign will "fight" with the Descendant sign. Once Uranus moves into the sign of the Descendant, the "fight" is over and things seem more "normal" to us, even though we now have this new Uranian energy affecting how we inter-relate with others.

So we have to always consider sign, planet and house in astrology, no matter which planet it is. Arbitrarily throwing out one of these important parts of astrology because it is "generational" only hurts our ability to fully understand the energy and lessons of the chart and the transits to the chart.

Generationally personal, ;)

Tim

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-06-2007, 07:44 PM

As we agree, there are situations in which a person will feel the outer planets more strongly and personally, so making blanket statements such as "the outer planets are less personal" is very clearly not true in all situations.

Yes we do. However, you yourself just said the Outers are less personal. Again, we agree, but yet you still feel the need to call me out on it. The Outer planets are less personal unless specific criteria are met. On the other hand, the Inners are always personal, regardless. So yes, the Outers are less personal than the Inners as the Outers have to perform something special for someone to 'tune in' to them, whereas the Inners are always personal, regardless.

As you say, if a "person's chart is colored with a specific member of the Outers (or perhaps more than one) regarding house position and aspects to by the Inners" then they could be very personal indeed.

Yes, they could be, but are not always. Again we agree, but you're angry about it.

If something affects a person "generationally" then they STILL experience it, even if they are less aware of it.

Perhaps, but I dare say we usually have a choice about just how much we let a generational happening affect us.

And, yes, it DOES affect the person themselves...things that affect the "world" affect us, since we are in the world.

Yes we may feel it, but what makes it 'personal' is that it affects us and not everybody else around the world. Hint person being one individual. I'm not denying the Outers their powers, I'm just saying that what's the same for you is going to be the same for EVERYBODY else, which is not personal. For instance, that which is personal property is mine. My house, my car, my stuff. Now, I may share this stuff with select individuals, but otherwise it's mine. Public ('generational') property is something I have no control over and that I must share with everyone else. Now, to apply this analogy with astrology, personal planetary placements (nice alliteration, right?) are going to affect me and those who are close to me, while the Outers and their generational placements are going to affect myself and everyone else. Not personal.

As you say, when you have a Uranus transit it lasts a LONG time.

I don't believe I've said anything about someone experiencing a Uranus transit...

So, for example, when transiting Uranus hits (conjuncts) your Descendant (others), there is a STRONG, LONG lasting effect on how you handle others.

What you are referring to here are transits which I believe are classified as a type of Predictive astrology, I believe we've been speaking of Natal astrology and the Outers' affects therein. To which house and aspect placements are what is important as they are personal, whereas the Sign placement is not so.

So we have to always consider sign, planet and house in astrology, no matter which planet it is.

Perhaps in Mundane and Predictive, but not in Nativities.

gaer

12-06-2007, 10:55 PM

Kai,

I would sum up my own view this way, using my own chart, and I'll use Uranus, since somehow it seems to have appeared in this topic UNEXPECTEDLY. ;)

I was born when Uranus was just entering Cancer. But because of the annual Rx motion for the outers, it backed up into Gemini again, much as Mars is about to do soon now.

Uranus finally entered Cancer and stayed there in July of 1949.

So, I suppose I was a "Uranus in Cancer" pioneer. :)

But what does Uranus in Cancer mean to me and for all the people who were born with it in this sign for the next seven years? This MAY be valid: it marks a period of time in which TV suddenly changed everything. Is it personal? No, because countless people my age were affected in much the same way.

The importance of the sign of Uranus may become "personal" due to aspect. I have Mercury about 4 Scorpio, so trine. The fact that the trine is formed between two water signs (which is not always the case, since Uranus could have been at 29 Gemini) is much more personal, because Mercury is involved.

So yes, the Outers are less personal than the Inners as the Outers have to perform something special for someone to 'tune in' to them, whereas the Inners are always personal, regardless.

That's pretty much how I look at it. To make the outers "personal", I want to see them angular, in meaningful aspects to other faster moving bodies, etc. The most personal would be a relationship to points, since they move so quickly. The second most personal would be to the Moon, fastest moving. Mercury and Venus CAN be more personal than the Sun in terms of movement, since at their fastest (from our perspective) they move faster than the Sun, and that makes them very tricky, since they also can be suprisingly motionless for at least a few days.

The best example I can think of involving an aspect that is truly multi-generational is that of Neptune to Pluto. The fact that we find the sextile so often in charts from the latter half of the 20th century makes that sextile, by itself, something I would pay little attention to unless there is some kind of personal connection to one of those two planets, although in a surprising number of instances there is. :)

Now, to apply this analogy with astrology, personal planetary placements (nice alliteration, right?) are going to affect me and those who are close to me, while the Outers and their generational placements are going to affect myself and everyone else. Not personal.

That's also my point of view. :) However, it's hard to find charts where the outers do not form significant aspects to the "inners".

Liquid Green

12-06-2007, 11:17 PM

would anyone like to add what they think are the main differences between modern and traditional astrology are..................

wilsontc

12-07-2007, 05:26 AM

Green,

This discussion is an interesting case of a modern interpretation vs. a traditional interpretation. The modern interpretation attempts to use every planet in the chart from the point of view in how it personally interacts with the person's psychological makeup. So the modern astrological view is to look at what does the sign, planet, and house do for every planet as an indication of the psychological reality of that person.

The traditional view of planetary chart interpretation stops at Saturn, so planets that go beyond Saturn (such as Uranus) are looked on as something that may be of interest to the public as a whole, but that don't matter that much in individual charts. So the traditional interpretation accepts that the planets exist, but insists that they don't have that much of a personal affect on the person. In order to understand the "person"'s chart (in the traditional view) it is only important to focus only on the more "personal" planets that stop at Saturn. Beyond that point the planets aren't interpreted in the person's chart.

So, as a modernist, I insist that Uranus (and other "outer" planets - planets beyond Saturn) also have a personal effect. And, as a traditionalist, Kaiousei insists that the effects of the Uranus (and other "outer" planets) are mainly generational effects and have little or no personal effect, so are of no or very little importance in birth charts.

Explaining,

Tim

Liquid Green

12-07-2007, 06:18 AM

tim,

thanks for explaining, wasnt sure if there was much othr difference.....your good at this job, helping us all out!

Thankfully
LG

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-07-2007, 07:05 AM

And, as a traditionalist, Kaiousei insists that the effects of the Uranus (and other "outer" planets) are mainly generational effects and have little or no personal effect, so are of no or very little importance in birth charts.

No no no. Kaiousei (as someone who likes to mix Traditonal and Modern) insists that the Outer planets are not personal unless made personal by placement and aspect. My Pluto in Scorpio tells people absolutely nothing about me, except that I was born within that 13 year period Pluto was in Scorpio. Now, upon closer examination, you find Pluto Squaring Sol and Luna, this makes Pluto (the otherwise generational and Outer planet), personal to me as Pluto is not Squaring everyone's Sol and Luna.

Carole

12-07-2007, 02:22 PM

Gaer:

I don't accept every idea that has been, in my opinion, sometimes blindly accepted simply because astrologer A or B declared it so. I'm going to test things (this is part of Saturn too, find the limitations), but I'm going to go wherever my ideas lead me (freedom), which you may associate with Uranus. So I see no problem whatsoever in seriously thinking about how Saturn relates to Aquarius.

I very much agree with your thoughts quoted above.

As a person who has Mercury conjunct Saturn and both trine Uranus, all I can say is that I don't consider myself either strictly traditional or strictly modern. I like to test things to see if they work and if they do, then I bring them in to my own astrological book. What does that make me? Mmmm...Definitely eclectic. But then, I don't like labels!:rolleyes:

Carole

mdinaz

12-07-2007, 03:41 PM

I guess one of the main differences is rulers used. Traditional uses Saturn as co-ruler of Aquarius and Mars as co-ruler of Scorpio.

Which would give a different interpretation.
If you concentrate on a certain house ruler, and give Saturn the weight instead of say, Uranus - you will come up with a different and most likely wrong interpretation.

I guess this is where an astrologer's best intuition comes in. I sometimes will look at Saturn when dealing with an Aquarius issue, or Mars for Scorpio. Sometimes I don't. I let my gut feeling guide me on what's important in that chart and what's not.

wilsontc

12-08-2007, 05:32 AM

Kaiousei,

You said:
My Pluto in Scorpio tells people absolutely nothing about me

A modernist would say that a person with Scorpio (transformation, also control, power, research) modifying Pluto (transformation, also control, power, research) would have a strong need to gain power and influence wherever they are and need to be in control of all situations. It also suggests a deep need to research things. And that seems to apply here! ;)

Plutonically yours,

Tim

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-08-2007, 05:06 PM

Me and everyone else born within 13 years of me.

However, is it really Pluto in Scorpio that does that? Or am I that way because he Squares my Lights? The keywords you supplied for Scorpio and Pluto were exactly the same, so it seems it's one of those toss-ups. When it's something like this it's hard to break it apart.

wilsontc

12-08-2007, 06:09 PM

Kaiousei,

You said:
However, is it really Pluto in Scorpio that does that? Or am I that way because he Squares my Lights?

This goes back to an important point I raised earlier: signs DO matter with the "outer" planets...but people don't have the same sensitivity to the effect of the signs. Those with the "outer" planet signs placed on one of the 4 major points of the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Descendant, Midheaven, and IC) will be VERY sensitive to the sign and planet energy. For the other people (with the "outer" planets in areas of the chart that aren't emphasized) they are much less aware of the sign energy of the "outer" planet. But it IS there all the same...the people simply aren't aware of it.

Another way people can become aware of the power of signs in the "outer" planets is when there is an out-of-sign conjunction, such as Virgo modifying Uranus conjunct Libra modifying Mars. In this case the Virgo energy of the Uranus "fights" with the Libra energy: the Virgo side wants to have a routine while the Libra side wants a relationship of some sorts. This means the person has to find a way to "make peace" between Virgo and Libra energies in their life.

So it comes down to a level of people's awareness of the sign's effect on their "outer" planets. Some are more aware, and some much less so. However, an astrologer can bring a person's attention to the sign of their "outer" planets and how it affects them, so they use them effectively. Obviously, in your case, you are very aware how to combine sign and planet to use it most effectively, as you have shown many times on the forum...but other people are not so aware and so need an astrologer to "show" them their sign energy so they can use it effectively in their life.

Signing off,

Tim

gaer

12-08-2007, 06:17 PM

Gaer:

I very much agree with your thoughts quoted above.

As a person who has Mercury conjunct Saturn and both trine Uranus, all I can say is that I don't consider myself either strictly traditional or strictly modern. I like to test things to see if they work and if they do, then I bring them in to my own astrological book. What does that make me? Mmmm...Definitely eclectic. But then, I don't like labels!:rolleyes:

Carole
Carole, I don't like labels either. :) When people ask me if I am a Modern or a Traditonal person, I simply say: I'm Practical. ;)

In other words, I want things to work, and they have to work according to my own personal experience! :)

g

wilsontc

12-08-2007, 06:19 PM

To all,

I do use traditional rulers in charts as well as modern rulers.

Traditionally modern,

Tim

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-08-2007, 06:43 PM

Those with the "outer" planet signs placed on one of the 4 major points of the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Descendant, Midheaven, and IC) will be VERY sensitive to the sign and planet energy.

Aquarius, Pisces, and Scorpio? Or the Sign the Outer is in?

This is where I've got to disagree personally. I don't feel Uranus in Capricorn, Neptune in Capricorn, or Pluto in Scorpio. I do feel Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto though. Uranus is on my MC, Neptune tightly Trines Venus, and Pluto Squares my Lights. Now, these things I feel and I could give a multitude of examples for how and why and where I feel them. Would there be a difference if say...Pluto was Squared from Taurus instead of Scorpio or Neptune was Trine was from Taurus instead of Capricorn? I don't think so, except that the 'where' of houses would change. They would jump from my Eighth and Tenth to my Second. (Heh...the idea of Neptune and Pluto jumping. ^.^)

Also, your posting about Pluto and Scorpio reflected what is another weakness of Modern astrology. Apparently Neptune exploded all over it and there are no lines or distinctions between planets and Signs. Basically; where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin?

gaer

12-08-2007, 07:40 PM

This goes back to an important point I raised earlier: signs DO matter with the "outer" planets...but people don't have the same sensitivity to the effect of the signs. Those with the "outer" planet signs placed on one of the 4 major points of the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Descendant, Midheaven, and IC) will be VERY sensitive to the sign and planet energy.

But Tim, the moment we consider the outer signs conjunct one of the angles, especially when the conjunction is really close, that becomes very personal, since only people with the same AC will have an outer in the same degree of the same sign in that same place.

To me personal has to do with how many people share the same "detail" in a chart.

"Personal" is a very relative term. Suppose we consider just Pluto.

Pluto in Leo, is about as "generational" as it can be.

(It was in Leo part of 1939, all of 1940 to all of 1955, most of 1956, about eight months 1957, and finally very briefly 1958).

That's most of a period lasting more than 15 years. What does anyone know about me so far if they know I have Pluto in Leo? Only that I was born during that period.

How about Pluto in Leo square Mars in Scorpio? Even so, that square can last a fairly long time when Mars is moving slowly, and the that square occured about every 26 months during the whole Pluto in Leo cycle. Still not too personal. But at least I know that only a few people born close to my birth have Mars in Scorpio.

Pluto in the 12th? A bit more personal, since I will share that with perhaps one person in 12.

More personal: 12th house cusp is Leo.

Finally, Pluto in Leo in the 12th, square Mars in Scorpio in the 3rd is something you might have to look through a lot of charts to find, and adding other planets in signs and other aspects finally makes everything unique.

We all know this. So I think our discussion is becoming totally circular.

The position of the Moon in any sign, by itself, is somewhat personal, since it is shared by one in 12 people. In a specific degree of a sign, shared by only one person in 360.

I don't even want to THINK about how many people are born while Pluto makes its way through one degree of one sign. Those who are saying that the "outers" are not felt personally in the same way as the "inners" are simply expressing this point—in my opinion. :)

Gaer

starlink

12-09-2007, 11:57 AM

Hello friends! It is Sunday and that gives me time to look over other threads and I found this one, which I thoroughly like. I have seen that Kaiousei does not want to use sign rulers. I personally do think that signs greatly influence the basic energy of the Planet . A Pluto in Leo will take on Leonic traits, is more of a despot than say, a Pluto in Pisces where it's destructive qualities (face it) sort of swim into all directions and diminishes it's powers. Pluto in Virgo gets terribly nitty gritty, obsessively clean in many cases and critical, Pluto in Libra, very possessive in relationships or a formidable mediator and so on and so forth. I always look at the background because that background shows me how that planet is likely to use it's energies.
The rulers of the houses show us where we will use that energy elsewhere, apart from the house he is in, so lets say that Pluto is in Virgo in the 4th. We could, amongst other interpretations probably find a dominant parent who could me mentally abusive. When the ruler of that house is Mars placed in the 7th, in Leo, these same traits (all that we experienced in childhood)will be brought over (in stronger or weaker form) to partners or closed one's (mainly,) but also to others in gereral and will then be expressed in yet another way, mainly to attract attention (Leo) or by trying to be the leader , in a business relationship maybe or the boss (Mars).
By looking at this from that point of view (houserulers in other houses), we can then see why people have become the way they are and do things in such ways. How often dont we see abusive patterns, or patterns of self sacrifice repeat itself! Always keep in mind that a house represents a certain department of our lives. The 1st, the personal , the 4th, the family , the 6th, the work or health department. So the ruler of one house and the planets therein, can influence, through the house ruler, another department of our lives. Thats at least how I have always used it anyways. Rulers for me are extremely important. Look at my 6th house for instance. BADLY aspected. Sun in T-square with Pluto and Moon (yes Kai, I also have the lights connected to Pluto!!), but the ruler is Mars and Mars is very well and strongly placed in the 5th house in own sign and trines the MC and conjuncts Venus, ruler of my Sun. So, with that really not nicely aspected Sun AND Mercury square Saturn as well in that house, you would think I would be spending my life in hospitals. I have been twice in hospital in my entire life so far and only one of them was an acute intestinal operation. The other I almost asked for to be operated on. Why?? because the ruler determines (in my point of view) the outcome of what happens in that house, by its placement in another sign and house. When the ruler falls in the same house and sign, then yes, you get exactly what you see.
Then, about traditional and modern astrology I can only say the following:
If the antique Astrologers would have been able to see Uranus, Pluto and Neptune, they would have, just like the modern one's, used them accordingly. Maybe they would have assigned them to different signs, that we will never know of course, but they would have used them!! I do use them, but also only when they rule Sun, Moon, Ascendant and MC. and when personal planets like Mars, Mercury and Venus aspect them strongly. Personally I use them as main rulers when they rule Sun, Moon and Ascendant and use Mars, Jupiter and Saturn as co-rulers, not the other way around. I do look at both always and depending on how many aspects either receives, I make them more important in a chart.
Greetings to you all, Starlink

mdinaz

12-09-2007, 03:59 PM

I have Pluto in Libra and was born at a time when marriage and social values went through a profound change. Also obsession over beauty and fashion and cosmetic surgery. Pluto is supposed to function poorly in Libra as Libra is an Air sign and can be too superficial for intense emotional Pluto. My depositor of Pluto is Venus and squares Pluto in the 2nd. Power battles in relationships have been a strong theme for me. I can be obsessed with my appearance and how I look, I always used to buy all sorts of beauty products to try and look beautiful and feel like I socially fitted in, my Venus is in Capricorn 5th. Low self worth feelings would drive me to fit in but in a superficial way. Having Pluto in 2nd is forcing me to change my values, my feelings about my self worth as a person through relationships (Libra). That was just part of a personal experience of how I have felt with Pluto in Libra in my chart when connected to personal planets.
This is the part that confuses me. I would have made that exact same interpretation, regardless of what sign Pluto was in. The 2nd house reflects our values, what we consider important, and self worth. You have Pluto here, which signfies deep introspection, analysis, and transformation of those values. Which values? Well, Venus rules the 2nd house traditionally, and you have Venus square Pluto. So the values related to beauty and feelings of self worth would be examined, as well as what makes us feel secure. In what manner? Venus in Capricorn lends a practical, analytical process to what it takes to evaluate this value. Change your clothes, change your hair, find ways to "fit in". Whatever it takes to make you fit in with society (which means for most people, "what makes me attractive to the opposite sex", 5th house). For me, that Pluto is in Libra had no bearing on that interpretation, yet we come out with the same result. :confused:

The only relevence I can find is that with Pluto in Libra, your generation in particular is more concerned with superficial values. Okay - but what, specifically, does that have to do with you? It only has value because natal Venus is square Pluto, and Pluto is in the 2nd, which is far more important than your generation as a whole is more concerned with superficialiaties. If Pluto was in another house and made no aspect to Venus at all, it may have made absolutely no difference, other than you're aware of the superficiality of your generation but choose not to focus on that element.

starlink

12-09-2007, 04:00 PM

Shiny, as always, you do a marvellous job explaining something! I agree totally with what you wrote. Me, having Scorpio Asc. and Pluto in Leo square Moon and Sun and trine Venus, ruler of my Sun, what do you think I feel!!! And you are (in my case at least) totally right when you say:

On a positive note the person with the Moon/Pluto aspect could grow up to be a very good family therapist and help other people process their painful feelings.
My kids, nieces, future daughters in law, all come to me for advice and it is all about love relationships in turmoil!!
also this:

I can be obsessed with my appearance and how I look

This is in my case caused by Venus in the 5th trine Pluto and Venus ruler of my Sun who is in the 6th (perfection, beauty treatments). I even became a
beautician and did modelling, so you can imagine, it was all about "the exterior". I am better now as I am getting older and even dare going out without make-up at times which I never dared to do LOL!!!
Yes, for me, those planets do affect us personally BIG TIME when connected with Asc. and/or personal planets. Cheers, Starlink

mdinaz

12-09-2007, 05:04 PM

I think your nitpicking Mdinaz :rolleyes: I don't think I have to answer you on my own personal value system that is private.Ummm, I wasn't asking your values, that was a rhetorical question.

I am not understanding what you are getting at, please clarify. I think the interpretation is how I personally experience it, I don't know what it is you don't understand about the interpretation I will try to help you out with keywords. :D And it wasn't just a Pluto in Libra reading it was a Pluto in Libra 2nd house square to Venus in Capricorn 5th house.Yes, I know, I agreed already that we made the exact same interpretation.
The question is: how much difference does the outer planet sign make in the interpretation, whether or not it makes an aspect to a personal planet. My thought is, we made the same interpretation on this aspect even though I did not consider the Pluto sign and others did. For me, it made little difference that Pluto was in Libra, what was important was the house positions, the hard aspect of Pluto to Venus, and the Venus sign.

The point is I do have a personal planet connected to Pluto which disposits it and squares it. So I do connect into Pluto in Libra 2nd. If I didn't have this placement, I obviously would not be talking about this aspect. As I wouldn't personally connect into the superficial values or be influenced by them as much.
My only point is that it would have been important to you whether your generation agreed with it or not. Hence, the fact that Pluto was in Libra, to me, has little bearing. Just my thoughts here. I think we essentially agree on this topic, just for different reasons. :)

wilsontc

12-09-2007, 05:36 PM

Kaiousei,

You said:
I don't feel Uranus in Capricorn, Neptune in Capricorn, or Pluto in Scorpio...Would there be a difference if say...Pluto was Squared from Taurus instead of Scorpio or Neptune was Trine was from Taurus instead of Capricorn?...where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin

I've already talked about Scorpio modifying Pluto, so let's talk about Capricorn (duty, also authority) modifying Uranus (friends, also astrology). This suggests that you want to be an "authority" in astrological things. Now let's compare how it would work if Taurus (physical, also personal values) modified Uranus. This would indicate you would would focus on astrology through an issue of your personal values. However, since you have Capricorn (not Taurus) modifying Uranus, you don't argue from a sense of personal values, but from a sense of "authority". So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views. I have Virgo (daily work, also analysis) modifying Uranus, so my approach to astrology is through analyzing how it works in daily life...I don't rely on "outside authorities" or someone's "say so". Continuing this idea of the importance of the sign ruling the outer planets, a person with Taurus modifying Pluto (instead of Scorpio) wouldn't be so strongly focused on the need for "pure" research...they would be more likely to trust their personal values in their research.

As to "where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin"...surely you jest ("I DON't jest and don't call me Shirley!" ;) )! Scorpio is a SIGN and Pluto is a PLANET. A SIGN is NOT a PLANET. A sign MODIFIES a PLANET. So, even though they have the same KEY WORD, a sign and a planet have a different FUNCTION in the chart. The sign affects the way the planet is expressed. Planets in their own sign are more strongly expressed than planets in different signs. I'm PRETTY sure you know all this...so maybe you are only testing ME? ;)

Out there, ;)

Tim

mdinaz

12-09-2007, 06:25 PM

I've already talked about Scorpio modifying Pluto, so let's talk about Capricorn (duty, also authority) modifying Uranus (friends, also astrology). This suggests that you want to be an "authority" in astrological things. Now let's compare how it would work if Taurus (physical, also personal values) modified Uranus. This would indicate you would would focus on astrology through an issue of your personal values. However, since you have Capricorn (not Taurus) modifying Uranus, you don't argue from a sense of personal values, but from a sense of "authority". So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views. I have Virgo (daily work, also analysis) modifying Uranus, so my approach to astrology is through analyzing how it works in daily life...I don't rely on "outside authorities" or someone's "say so". Continuing this idea of the importance of the sign ruling the outer planets, a person with Taurus modifying Pluto (instead of Scorpio) wouldn't be so strongly focused on the need for "pure" research...they would be more likely to trust their personal values in their research.

Well that made more sense for me, as I have Uranus and Pluto in Virgo as well. I'll study on this further. Thanks.

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-09-2007, 10:01 PM

You can't just say Pluto in Leo is not personal because it is never alone it is somewhere in the chart connected to other planets and placed in a house in your personal natal chart - some people are more tuned in to the outer planets because they have them on angles and inner planets aspect them.

And this is the entire point. We can say that *insert Outer here* in *insert Sign here* are not personal because they usually do aspect an Inner. However, I'm sure many of us here have an unaspected planet. What if that unaspected planet is a member of the Outers? That would make it less personal. I'm pretty sure we all agree on this, but what the main thing seems to be now, is how much a Sign matters to an Outer in Nativities. Pluto in Leo, not very personal unless he is aspected by an Inner.

mdinaz, again, you and I are in agreement. Very nice points, by the way.

This suggests that you want to be an "authority" in astrological things.

Or perhaps this is my Leonine Mercury? I want to be King. ;) Hehe.

However, since you have Capricorn (not Taurus) modifying Uranus, you don't argue from a sense of personal values, but from a sense of "authority". So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views.

Or perhaps we can argue this as Mercury conjoined to Mars. I bring in the Royal Guns.

My personal views of things run rampant in my astrology, most obviously where my groupings of planets are as Lights, Guardians (combined to make the Inners), Outers, and the Quartet. Views on the Tenth/Fourth and Mother/Father are at odds in astrology, modern views it one way and traditional views it the other way, however it is not that one group says it's one way that I agree with a camp of thought, it's that I can use my own brand of logic that just happens to coincide. Everyone has their personal views locked into their astrology, so we must all have Uranus in Taurus. Something that strikes me as odd is that I didn't expect modern astrology to interpret Uranus in Capricorn as a docile little puppy, answering to a master of authority, what with Uranus being the rebellious little rascal he's noted to be.

As to "where does Scorpio end and Pluto begin"...surely you jest

Not at all.

Scorpio is a SIGN and Pluto is a PLANET. A SIGN is NOT a PLANET. A sign MODIFIES a PLANET. So, even though they have the same KEY WORD, a sign and a planet have a different FUNCTION in the chart. The sign affects the way the planet is expressed. Planets in their own sign are more strongly expressed than planets in different signs. I'm PRETTY sure you know all this...so maybe you are only testing ME?

It wasn't a test and I didn't think you'd take it in that way as if I were asking it in an elementary fashion. After two years in astrology, one begins to understand how Signs and planets work around one another. :p The idea of it is, though, that the Outers have - unfortuntaely - been heavily embraced in the idea of the once mentioned X=Y=Z mentality. That meaning Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto have become so intimately connected with Aquarius and the Eleventh house, Pisces and the Twelfth house, and Scorpio and the Eighth house that it is hard to rip them apart from one another to see where Pluto ends and Scorpio begins. I guess my own nativity must be the biggest Plutonian mess of all, as my Pluto in Scorpio resides in my Eighth house. Squaring my Lights, goodness, I must be more Scorpion than I thought! ^.^

Liquid Green

12-09-2007, 11:23 PM

Hi everyone....calming down a bit from my own personal worries, has allowed me to come back to this thread.......for one, you are all very knowlegeable and your posts have a lot of value to the newbies to astrology..

I particularly liked Starlinks comment:
"If the antique Astrologers would have been able to see Uranus, Pluto and Neptune, they would have, just like the modern one's, used them accordingly."

I think this statement has a lot of truth to it.............and think its really worth pondering.

Thanks everyone for your posts........
Have a great day

wilsontc

12-10-2007, 05:39 AM

Kaiousei,

You said:
Pluto in Scorpio resides in my Eighth house. Squaring my Lights, goodness, I must be more Scorpion than I thought

And that is the value of an astrologer talking to another person about the effect of signs in their chart...it opens them up to a whole new way to understand themselves!

Making a breakthrough? ;)

Tim

starlink

12-10-2007, 07:58 AM

YES!!! Tim, you hit the nail on the head. I have even seen a chart without obvious Scorpio signs like an Ascendant or Sun, whatever, but a chockeblock full 8th house with Sun, Merc, Venus, Jupiter, Moon etc. all in there and the sign was not Scorpio. Nevertheless a strong Scorpionic trait was evident in this person and he felt more of a Scorpion than anything else.
Houses really show how a planet's energies are expressed (it's almost as if the ruler tells them: got there, to the 8th house and see how you cope! It will teach you some insight and courage!
Starlink

starlink

12-10-2007, 08:12 AM

Hi Tim, I think Kaiousei is rightly surprised with this last part of the otherwise very good deduction of Uranus in Capricorn:
So you look to "authorities" to back up your astrological views. Personally I dont think Kai looks up to anyone really. He has his own very unique ways of expressing himself, with friends and/or through Astrology in an authorative way. But maybe we understood this last remark wrongly. Maybe you meant to say that he gets his astrological knowledge from only looking at other astrologers who are authorities in this field?
Starlink

lillyjgc

12-10-2007, 09:31 AM

Firstly I think it is counter productive to view any natal aspect in isolation of the chart as a whole, and so Tim, I think, unless you have access to Kai's entire chart, no astrologer can reasonably shed light on Kai's *personality* as defined by a particular aspect/placement. I would have strong objections if anyone took an aspect *out of context* from my chart and extrapolated on that...

As far as I'm concerned, all the known bodies *count* to a greater or lesser degree, depending on their aspectual (new word?) involvements.
When I analyse a natal, I look at overall patterns first, what connects to what.... Like most astrologers (aren't we an egocentric lot!), I studied my own chart in depth first- still going on that after 20 or so years! To me my chart made much more sense after chiron was discovered- Chiron is very prominent in my chart, a definite *key player*..Until Chiron was included, my chart did not make sense.
(I'm not mentioning chiron to stir you up, BTW, Kai- I respect your right NOT to use Chiron and hopefully you respect MY right to include it.Simple)...There doesn't need to be a *gulf war* between the traditionalists and the moderns. To tell you the truth, until I joined this forum had i been asked whether I was a *traditionalist* or a *modern* , I honestly would not have known what to say- I hate being pigeon-holed too.

In my own chart all the outers are involved in personal relationships with my inner planets. So when I studied my own aspects obviously I could not just leave out the outers-they were all very much involved in my chart.
I rarely see *unaspected planets* in charts...but on the rare occasion that it turns up I see it as a very important planet/asteroid/star/whatever, BECAUSE it is unaspected-thus free to exert a *pure* effect in the house its in and behave like the sign its in.

For horary it was logical for me to include the outers if they were prominent or conjoined with significators of the question...I don't apologise for *not sticking to the rules* here because in horaries on this forum even where the traditional system has been used the answer was sometimes WRONG and the chart done including the outers was RIGHT. (Like I think it was Gaer said *the proof of the pudding is in the eating*.)

Actually it amuses me to see posters vehemently claiming there is only one way to read a chart then getting it wrong with the method they have vigorously advocated!THere is just no room for arrogance in astrology yet I am disturbed to see it creeping in...

I don't have any astrological *gurus* as such- I think most astrologers who preceded us have contributed to the general wealth of knowledge and thus to a certain extent become *authorities* to which one can take recourse in a debate. No single astrologer, past or present had ALL the answers.We are now *the authorities in the making*- we can take from the works of the past but also from the works of the present. Surely?

I don't think its a clear cut case of *there are differences in approach therefore someone is wrong*!..There is more than one recipe to bake a cake.

On the issue of *generational planetary placements* surely it is obvious that everyone in ones peer group HAS the placement or aspect- say Pluto sextile neptune. Surely the FACT that a certain generation shares this aspect gives a sort of *common ground*-We've all heard of *the generation gap*-well whos not to say that that very phenomenon is not one that arises out of differences in the *generational* settings...In which case it brings those outers right into the sphere of personal influence- our peers would have to be a very significant influence in our lives and therefore in our charts.
I think it was Starlink who earlier said something like, if a planets in a certain part of the chart (even if unaspected), it forms part of the big picture.Its THERE. I would be very interested to have someone accurately read MY chart without including the outers...it would simply NOT tell the story of my life-I've tried it..

Maybe if anyone is having trouble trying to work out *what sort of astrologer* they are they should delineate their own natal using BOTH methods-and see what tells the story the most accurately.
As Robin Williams said in the film the *Fisher King* "Work out what you really are and BE THAT as best you can"..
Cheers Lillyjgc

starlink

12-10-2007, 11:14 AM

Hello Lilly! You are a good writer, I always like reading your posts.
You wrote:

My Uranus conjuncts my I.C. Also Uranus in 3rd Scorpio squares my Mars in Aquarius 6th house, do you think I come across as challenging or rebellious concerning my views.

I would like to see this in context with your chart, like you wrote to Tim (I guess he has Kai's chart by the way, I do too because I think, when it was Kai's Birthday, he was concerned about the Solar Return and posted his chart after I asked for it because I told him that I cannot see anything in SR charts without his natal next to it).
Purely on what you wrote, a Scorpion Uranus (very much astrological I would say) in trine to your Moon/Mercury in 7, does just that: it communicates your astrological insights to the public in a very insightful, deep psychological way. Now that square to Mars?? Have you seen the mutual reception between Mars and Uranus?,( that is, if you take the traditional ruler of Scorpio.....) Mmmm, are you intensely, almost fanatically tidy? or could it be that being involved so deeply with astrology you would like to also include medical astrology? Or maybe doing so much astrology makes you forget to eat and you get ill!! for all I know LOL!!! or the other way around, if you cannot do astrology, you get sick (this is a bit my case really, astrology is medicine for me). You could have an extremely intense need to organize things around yourself and in your head as well otherwise you cannot get going? Mars in 6 often lacks taking the initiative .You could get mad at people who want YOU to do their dirty work in the office or generally. Astrology can be a good outlet for your anger. But these are all separate interpretations and I have no birthchart which makes for guessing games.
Now this one I find înteresting:

Until Chiron was included, my chart did not make sense.

It depends on what you thought you saw in your chart. I think that it is more a certain aspect in your chart which did not make sense without Chiron.
If you talk about helping people through astrology, then I think that the trine from Uranus to Moon/Merc shows that, especially because Mars and Uranus are in mutual reception and Mars being in the 6th house of service to others.
Personally I have Chiron in Scorpio in the 12th house in opposition to Mercury in Taurus in the 6th and Mercury rules my 8th house and my 11th house.
What boggles me is that I still cannot remember the "wound" I got , even though I can see it with that Moon in 12 as well, square Pluto and opposed to the Sun. I MUST have felt bad, maybe so bad that I probably burried it so deep, I dont remember it anymore. I cant remember anything up till I was 12. Everything I know is from photo's. It does show my dramatic birth.

I don't apologise for *not sticking to the rules*

I use them the same way as you do, it makes sense to me.

There is more than one recipe to bake a cake.

This goes for natal and horary astrology both!

on the rare occasion that it turns up I see it as a very important planet/asteroid/star/whatever, BECAUSE it is unaspected-thus free to exert a *pure* effect in the house its in and behave like the sign its in.

I totally agree with you.

Cheers, Starlink

lillyjgc

12-10-2007, 11:30 AM

Starlink- I'm glad you enjoy my writing- I love writing ).I'm a bit confused-your first paragraph refers to a quote-but the quote is from Shining Ray- (I dont have uranus on the IC- just clearing that bit up first.)
Chiron is in my first house- it creates an opposition from Uranus/jupiter conjunction in h8 cusp which is also part of another major configuration in my chart. Mars is right next to Chiron....I have had to deal with life-death issues most of my life...Mars BTW is not conjunct Chiron enough to create a double opposition- orb of 9 degrees but its *influence* is there. Without Chiron, in saturn's sign in my chart, the *wounds would not be described, nor my response to them.As a child, adults injured my body..Mars in my first house doesn't describe this because mars has only positive aspects to it- the presence of chiron there brings in a whole new dimension- the opposition of chiron to uranus/jupiter very well describes the abuse I suffered as a child.
In your own chart, Chiron being in your twelfth may well describe a *past life* or kharmic wound- or one so well hidden it doesn't need to come up in this lifetime.
I guess the main point I am making is if you can see how a planet/star/asteroid/whatever plays out in your own chart it inclines you more to apply it when looking at others' charts.
I think you and I approach astrology very similarly star.
Cheers, Lillyjgc

wilsontc

12-10-2007, 02:55 PM

star,

You said:
He has his own very unique ways of expressing himself, with friends and/or through Astrology in an authorative way...Maybe you meant to say that he gets his astrological knowledge from only looking at other astrologers who are authorities in this field?

That is another way to say it. Although I wouldn't use the word "only" and instead suggest "mostly". The other part of that "authority" issue is Kai wanting to become an authority on astrology.

Agreeing,

Tim

wilsontc

12-10-2007, 03:00 PM

lilly,

You said:
Tim, I think, unless you have access to Kai's entire chart, no astrologer can reasonably shed light on Kai's *personality* as defined by a particular aspect/placement.

My goal is to show how signs work with outer planets. Kai's sign placement emphasized "research" and this fit in with what Kai has revealed of his astrological methods on this grouplist. So I suggested the importance of "research" as a way for him to personally "connect in" with the importance of sign placement to his outer planets. I deliberately kept the interpretation general, with no indication of Kai's "personality" at all.

Keeping it general,

Tim

gaer

12-10-2007, 08:48 PM

Firstly I think it is counter productive to view any natal aspect in isolation of the chart as a whole, […]

I agree with you. It's necessary to simplify things when trying to explain what we are doing to people who are just learning the essentials, but the people involved in this discussion are all experienced. :)

When I analyse a natal, I look at overall patterns first, what connects to what.... Like most astrologers (aren't we an egocentric lot!), I studied my own chart in depth first- still going on that after 20 or so years!

Actually, I think it's more polite to use our own charts to make points than to make comments about the charts of others unless they have specifically asked us to do so. :)

To tell you the truth, until I joined this forum had I been asked whether I was a *traditionalist* or a *modern* , I honestly would not have known what to say- I hate being pigeon-holed too.

As a Libra Sun/Moon, it won't surprise you that I'm looking for a balance between tradional and modern views. :)

I rarely see *unaspected planets* in charts...but on the rare occasion that it turns up I see it as a very important planet/asteroid/star/whatever, BECAUSE it is unaspected-thus free to exert a *pure* effect in the house its in and behave like the sign its in.

I have also found it very rare to find an outer planet that is not in aspect with an inner one. I would pay little or no attention to an unaspected outer planet when working without an accurate birth-time. But that's because then we would have no houses. We are already working with too many handicaps when trying to read a chart lacking an accurate time of birth.

On the issue of *generational planetary placements* surely it is obvious that everyone in ones peer group HAS the placement or aspect- say Pluto sextile neptune. Surely the FACT that a certain generation shares this aspect gives a sort of *common ground*-We've all heard of *the generation gap*-well whos not to say that that very phenomenon is not one that arises out of differences in the *generational* settings...In which case it brings those outers right into the sphere of personal influence- our peers would have to be a very significant influence in our lives and therefore in our charts.

In fact, this may also give us a clue as to why we do not get along with people of our own generation, in general, and find more in common with another. If we place great importance in Pluto's sign, then I would be out of sync with those born after 1984, Pluto in Scorpio. However, if for a number of reasons I am atypical of the people of my own generation, I might find myself at war with the values of people my age and very much in tune with people under the age of 21. So with Mars and Mercy in Scorpio in my own chart, with Mars itself square to my own natal Pluto, that might explain my own continuing personal battle against dogma and blind acceptance of ideas of any nature. :)

One final thought: in my experience, astrology charts are mysteriously redundant. By that I mean that there will usually be multiple indications of the same basic character traits, and this is why several fine astrologers, all coming at the matter with a different approach, often end up with surprisingly similar results. Different ways to make the cake, but the cake still tastes good!

Gaer

Kaiousei no Senshi

12-10-2007, 08:53 PM

And that is the value of an astrologer talking to another person about the effect of signs in their chart...it opens them up to a whole new way to understand themselves!

It was a joke, I'm not Scorpion at all. However, in the eyes of Modern astrology I must be, as Pluto, Scorpio, and the Eighth house are inseperable, and I have Pluto in Scorpio in the Eighth.

As far as I'm concerned, all the known bodies *count* to a greater or lesser degree, depending on their aspectual (new word?) involvements.

Well...I don't know about all that. Just because it's there doesn't mean it's useful or doing anything. I mean...just look at the president for an example. What's he really doing? Just standing there; something to look at. ;)

I'm not mentioning chiron to stir you up, BTW, Kai- I respect your right NOT to use Chiron and hopefully you respect MY right to include it.Simple

-.-' Why do people expect me to explode over mentions of...Chiron? Bleh. I don't like it and I'll never speak of it positively, but it doesn't mean I'll take every chance I get to sneak a snide at it...

That is another way to say it. Although I wouldn't use the word "only" and instead suggest "mostly". The other part of that "authority" issue is Kai wanting to become an authority on astrology.

I've four planets in Leo, being on top of things is what I do, regardless of the newfound gentleness of Uranus. Saturn in Capricorn helps too.

Kai's sign placement emphasized "research" and this fit in with what Kai has revealed of his astrological methods on this grouplist.

But you see, it can be explained alternatively. As for my 'research', I don't take the Scorponic approach and delve into the study of charts myself, psh, I'm a Leo, I don't do dirty work. ;) I go to people I respect as astrologers to point me in the right direction and then I'll run from there. So, I don't really 'research' at all, I just ask around. Now, is this Uranus in Capricorn? I personally don't think so and would mostly place this on Saturn's residence in his domicile. I have yet to embrace Uranus as the significator for astrology, and in doing so I still use Mercury as I feel it is more appropriate for me. Mercury in Leo, I want to be king, the authoritative voice. Conjoined with Mars and this is where I obtain my stinger, my defiant and argumentative tone, and the power to back it up.

We've all heard of *the generation gap*-well whos not to say that that very phenomenon is not one that arises out of differences in the *generational* settings...In which case it brings those outers right into the sphere of personal influence- our peers would have to be a very significant influence in our lives and therefore in our charts.

That's not personal, that's a stereotype, which I daresay would be about as opposite as you can get. Obviously the generation gap is going to be shown here, but this isn't personal. One generation being unable to see eye-to-eye with another generation isn't a personal phenomena, it's a social circumstance. Would this be reflected in astrology? Well, yeah, just about everything is. So, it's not that a generation cannot understand individuals within another generation, but that they do not necessarily agree with the supposed ideals associated with that generation collectively, which again is not personal. So I don't really see how that works.

Liquid Green

12-10-2007, 09:14 PM

gaer

12-11-2007, 12:03 AM

Gaer, you said, "I agree with you. It's necessary to simplify things when trying to explain what we are doing to people who are just learning the essentials, but the people involved in this discussion are all experienced. :)"

I disagree, I am not experienced, and considering I started the thread, feel I am part of the discussion.
Good luck! The problem for you might be that we have really wandered over a lot of territory. The simple answer to the problem of traditional vs. modern astrology is that there is no simple answer. It REALLY gets complicated. :)

If you have questions, just ask. I'll try to answer them, if I can. :)

g

Liquid Green

12-11-2007, 12:37 AM

Thanks Gaer,
Its great getting so many different opinions......I understood in the beginning that this was gonna be a tough one....and i also knew there would be no right answers.......I like gettting lots of view at a topic before heading on into it.....It is necessary for my personality to question everything (which is probably the reason i know heaps of info on heaps of different subjects, but am master of nothing!).....you are all masters for sure and although dont agree, all have good reasons for believing what you do..........From the discussion so far, I am leaning more towards the modern approach.....;)
will have to reread a few times to ask some more questions

blueheron

06-03-2008, 10:16 PM

mdinaz,

You said:

I think the outers are both generational and personal. While they do have generational effects because of their slow movements, they can have very strong personal effects as well. However, not everyone is "tuned" into these planets. But for those who have many aspects to these planets or if it hits any of the 4 points in the chart (i.e., Ascendant, Midheaven, Descendand, and IC), these energies are very strongly felt.

Strongly,

Tim

I fully concur. I like Rudhyar's way of looking at the outer planets as "Emissaries of the Universe," to lead us out of our Saturn-bound world into higher realms. That they do so with style (the Uranian 2 X 4 to bash out of an unhealthy rut; the Neptunian labyrinths until the spiritual path is accessed; and the Plutonian purge of Self-limiting patterns.)

http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll204/yanaar/astrosigns/mysticalforest.jpg

dr. farr

10-11-2010, 04:03 AM

Eclectic: a very heavy Hellenist and (mostly early/Arabic times) traditionalist influence, but with a substantial amount of Modernist ideas and concepts as well (mostly those of Charles Carter, Vivain Robson, and Manly P. Hall) I have also been influenced by Jaimini (a lesser known branch of Vedic astrology), but not in using the sidereal zodiac-however, several Jaimini techniques work beautifully within our Tropicalist framework. And, relative to Time as an important astrological element, I have also been much influenced by certain concepts involved in Chinese astrology.

Kannon

10-12-2010, 09:18 PM

I used to frequent another forum.......based on psychological astrology...

Here i am seeing a definite, new amount of information, on traditional astrology.

I dont know what to follow.....i cant study both at once i dont think....

Anybody who would like to state why they prefer one over the other, or perhaps to share some problems with the style not chosen would be great.....all opinions are valid....

And please dont fight....i hate starting threads that turn into war zones.....nobody will be getting any prizes;)

I personally don't think its an "either-or" choice. I think traditional astrology has things that we can learn from. I've studied some of it, even though I'd be labelled as a modern astrologer. I don't hold to any limits as to what modern astrology is.

So first, don't put yourself into a category (box). Its limiting. Go with what attracts you. Mix and match and create a quilt work of your own approach that makes best use of your natural bent. If a modern approach attracts you, it doesn't mean you can't learn from traditional/historic astrology.

What has guided me has been an interest in Truth, not methodology. I'm genuinely interested in the Truth of human beings and our Spiritual essence, our Intentions and Purpose in living. If you study astrology mostly as craft and don't stay intent on Higher Truth in the overriding sense, then you will be diluting your ability in my opinion.

Traditional or historical astrology has things to teach us. This doesn't equate to the belief that older/original-is-better. There are reasons why things have developed the way they have. Astrology practice has mostly evolved and progressed into something better. This doesn't preclude that something valuable and helpful may've been left behind unnecessarily.

So be intent on Truth and putting your own natural ability to use as you develop it. Observing and Listening to People is just as important as studying books and astrological principles. Sometimes we astrologers do a bit too much talking and not enough listening.

R4VEN

10-13-2010, 08:49 AM

...But, I suspect that the 1977 arrival of Chiron (with an orbit that links Jupiter/Saturn/Uranus) symbolises the future development of an astrology that can be easily understood (and practiced) by the masses...

Perhaps one day, understanding (and learning to live with) our Chiron Wound might be all we need know to overcome the specific/detailed issues of our natal charts.

EJ
I'll second that - :smile: - Chiron forms a large part of my astrological viewpoint.

I suppose I am a modern astrologer, but I like to think that I am in the process of creating a niche for myself where the astrology is little more than a framework for a much larger body of thought/belief, much of which was eloquently described by Kannon in his 3rd paragraph, beginning: What has guided me.....

Like EJ53, I look forward to a time when astrology is understood and accepted by the masses, and used as a tool by which each individual can take responsibility for their own life and personal journey.