Confused about Pluto

[muchacho]

Dirius, unfortunately, you are yet again reverting to mere repetition of your generalized thesis. Declaring your preferred system to be superior while ignoring evidence to the contrary doesn't make it superior. It just means that your mind was made up, regardless, and you had no intention of listening to opposing views. or reading the references offered to you. I don't think you've read very much about Pluto or worked with it in hundreds of natal charts, as some of us have.

To y'all:
Just to recap, the OP asked about Pluto's demotion to dwarf planet status, which happened in an international convention of astronomers in 2006; and its long orbital period.

First, astrology and astronomy shared a common history, but have parted in many of our ways during the past centuries. If astrology went by astronomy's rules, we would have no interest in applying planetary positions to human conduct, and would be using a heliocentric model of the solar system. A heavenly body or sensitive point can operate in astrology independently of its status or non-status in astronomy.

Of course, the trads' idea that Pluto is turfed out because of its astronomical dwarf planet status is another smokescreen. The neo-cons won't use Uranus or Neptune, either, and they are massive.

On the second point, there are two schools of thought. One is that Pluto wasn't operative in human history prior to its discovery in 1930, when it was in Cancer. By extension, we don't need to concern ourselves with Pluto before then. The other school is that we have tons of historical information and detailed biographies of people prior to 1930, so it is a simple enough job to match up events with Pluto's position.

On the generational issue, this isn't a problem. Most people have Pluto in contact with a natal planet or chart angle, and like you-- they feel it. Many aspects of our lives operate at a generational level, moreover. Pluto in Leo corresponded with major changes in the social construction of childhood; and an explosion of entertainment media.

Just to cite an example from a traditional planet, Saturn stays in one sign for over two years. Many "Woodstock generation" Aquarians and Pisceans experienced natal Saturn opposite sun. Saturn symbolizes older authority figures. Given other chart factors, this was the generation that protested authority, and coined the slogan, "Never trust anyone over 30."

Like MissScorpio, the OPer, many of us profoundly feel the effects of astrological Pluto in our lives. And we won't be inauthentic about it, regardless of what more Saturnian types think they know about it.

Very good summary.

 

[muchacho]

Actually the first line in the OP's thread was:



Pretty much our answer is: "it doesn't, Mars rules Scorpio"

Waybread, things attributed to pluto are so abstract it doesn't seem realistic at this point. It is like you just grab a few words, put them together, and say pluto corresponds to them:

"Pluto in Leo corresponded with major changes in the social construction of childhood; and an explosion of entertainment media."

To me it honestly seems like you can just asign anything that comes to mind to pluto. Let me try:

"Pluto rules the soft fur of new born baby panda bears; it also corresponds to the reflection provided by recently polished mirrors."

I mean....seriously...

It doesn't matter how much random significance's you can give to the planet, because anyone can come up with any type. Obviously what you can't explain, you will asign to pluto.

In a way, it seems apparently that authors rather use pluto as some sort of complex spam folder, where things that no one knows how to explain end up in.

That's just cheap propaganda. It seems you aren't actually familiar with the qualities of Pluto and have run out of arguments. Waybread basically refuted the great majority (if not all) of your points against Pluto.

So, let's check it out, your original theory was that Pluto is a combination of Mars and Saturn. Let's take a concrete example:

1) How would you describe Moon in the 3rd House?
2) How would you describe Moon conjunct Mars and Saturn in the 3rd House?
3) How would you describe Moon conjunct Pluto in the 3rd House?

 

[muchacho]

to be realistic
it is unsurprising then that its effect on individual personality has yet to be fully determined by astrologers
because
it was only discovered almost 85 years ago in 1930
and another 163 years must pass before observation has been made during only ONE ORBIT of it around the sun!

No one ever experiences a pluto return

and
only those whose lifespans are at least 124 years
may experience an opposition of transiting pluto to natal pluto

This year alone
so far
almost eighteen million people have been born
and it's only mid-February 2015

approximately 129,575,000 people are born YEARLY

therefore
since you have stated that pluto can spend between 15 and 20 YEARS IN A SIGN

then
at any given time,

approximately two and a half BILLION living people all have pluto in the same sign

Impressive calculation, but you forgot that they don't have Pluto in the same house and also not with the same aspects to other planets, points and angles as Waybread just explained.

 

[muchacho]

HOROSCOPE SYMBOLS was written in 1997 ~ almost twenty years ago
clearly opinions change


Robert Hand has stated

QUOTE

'.....It is my opinion and experience
that the disuse and corruption of the traditional system regarding rulerships and essential dignities
was one of the most significant errors made by early-modern and modern astrologers.
These astrologers increasingly began to drop the use of terms, faces and even triplicity rulerships.
Then the problem was compounded by trying to fit first Uranus, then Neptune, and finally Pluto into the system.


As most of you know, Uranus was given Aquarius, Neptune Pisces, and Pluto was finally given Scorpio,
although there is a considerable party in Europe in favor of giving Aries to Pluto rather than Scorpio
This group does have some reason on its side.....' Robert Hand

Did Robert Hand also reveal that 'reason' and how 'considerable' that party in Europe actually is?

 

[Dirius]

The difference I see between Mars sexuality and Scorpio sexuality is that Mars is not in control of his sexuality. Scorpio, however, can work with sexuality to unlock hidden potentials and tap into energies that by far go beyond what mere mortals typically have access to. That's where the connection to magic comes from, i.e transformation, a trait that is typically associated with Pluto. And so this is one more reason to consider Pluto as ruler of Scorpio instead of Mars.

That is just trying to add "pretty words", like "unlock hidden things and tap into energies"

Anyone can add "mystical" meanings to things, but they remain abstract, meaningless words.

For example I can tell you pluto rules baby panda bears, and going by your logic of assigning abstract meanings, there is no way to disprove it.

That's just cheap propaganda. It seems you aren't actually familiar with the qualities of Pluto and have run out of arguments. Waybread basically refuted the great majority (if not all) of your points against Pluto.

No she really didn't. Mostly she babbled about traditional technique, and assigned the same random words to pluto as you did.

Saying that pluto explores "hidden energies", isn't really much of an argument, despite how much you try to enforce it

1) How would you describe Moon in the 3rd House?
2) How would you describe Moon conjunct Mars and Saturn in the 3rd House?
3) How would you describe Moon conjunct Pluto in the 3rd House?

Depends on the rulership othose planets have over houses, the sign they fall in, and the aspects they recieve. It is not the same to have the mars/moon conjunction in taurus, that having it in sagittarius. Astrology can-t be simplified like that. The 3rd house being the one of the moon, its joy, can have many implications.

 

[JUPITERASC]

That's also my impression.
There's too much effort spent on diverting attention from the elephant in the traditional room.
Mars doesn't have much in common with Scorpio.

on the contrary
the elephant in the modern astrological room is:
pluto was assigned to Scorpio simply because
an author of a popular book beat to the print the decision of an astrological conference in Germany

i.e.
When Pluto is originally discovered
It is assigned to Aries
and there is a conference in Germany to discuss the matter more fully.
UNANIMOUS agreement dictates that Pluto rules Aries,
and the counter idea, that some were positing at the time,
that it should rule Scorpio
is quashed.

BUT THEN

someone beats them to print,
and wrote up the attributions of Pluto saying it rules Scorpio.

The author simply beat them to print
and published a successful book
and the rest is history.
It stuck,
and from that day forth Pluto magically started ruling Scorpio

 

[muchacho]

That is just trying to add "pretty words", like "unlock hidden things and tap into energies"

Anyone can add "mystical" meanings to things, but they remain abstract, meaningless words.

For example I can tell you pluto rules baby panda bears, and going by your logic of assigning abstract meanings, there is no way to disprove it.



No she really didn't. Mostly she babbled about traditional technique, and assigned the same random words to pluto as you did.

Saying that pluto explores "hidden energies", isn't really much of an argument, despite how much you try to enforce it

I think we are getting somewhere now. I've noticed that you have problems with abstract descriptions of signs and planets. Which would explains why it gets so confusing in the details with you. Here's the thing: If you really want to understand a sign or a planet and talk about it with confidence, you have to grasp their essence first, which means you have to leave behind the details and focus on the common denominator, the basic energy pattern or 'vibe' that a sign or planet represents. And this process is naturally going to end in a very abstract and vague place. And after reading your descriptions and comparisons of the qualities of Mars and Scorpio and Pluto, I don't get the impression that you've done that. You may know what planet or sign rules what aspect of life, but why they rule what they rule, you probably don't really know.

Scorpio is on a quest for something real that can stand the test of time. And since everything in this world of appearances doesn't stand the test of time and comes and goes, it's just a question of time that Scorpio will reach beyond it and tap into something that is not from this world. Scorpio is not into half truths, Scorpio wants the real deal, everything else will be mercilessly discarded. So, Scorpio is basically running an existential cleansing operation. That's about the essence of the sign. It's abstract, but once you've got it, you can explain everything about Scorpio, why Scorpio is connected to waste materials, to loss, to death, to the occult, to the subconscious, to sexuality, to magic, to surgery etc. See how that works? Once you've got the essence, the rest is a piece of cake. So, if Pluto should really rule Scorpio, now you know what you have to look for in your Pluto placements.

So, let's go back to your ridiculous example of Pluto ruling baby panda bears. What is the essence of 'baby panda bears'? That's what you have to establish first. And then you can look at what areas of life also match that vibe and have the same essence. And then you can study charts and look for empirical evidence. Pretty simple. If it was just an arbitrary assignment, then you should see that by the lack of empirical evidence.

Depends on the rulership othose planets have over houses, the sign they fall in, and the aspects they recieve. It is not the same to have the mars/moon conjunction in taurus, that having it in sagittarius. Astrology can-t be simplified like that. The 3rd house being the one of the moon, its joy, can have many implications.

Okay, then lets try Libra.

1) How would you describe Moon in the 3rd House in Libra?
2) How would you describe Moon conjunct Mars and Saturn in the 3rd House in Libra?
3) How would you describe Moon conjunct Pluto in the 3rd House in Libra?

 

[muchacho]

on the contrary
the elephant in the modern astrological room is:
pluto was assigned to Scorpio simply because
an author of a popular book beat to the print the decision of an astrological conference in Germany

i.e.
When Pluto is originally discovered
It is assigned to Aries
and there is a conference in Germany to discuss the matter more fully.
UNANIMOUS agreement dictates that Pluto rules Aries,
and the counter idea, that some were positing at the time,
that it should rule Scorpio
is quashed.

BUT THEN

someone beats them to print,
and wrote up the attributions of Pluto saying it rules Scorpio.

The author simply beat them to print
and published a successful book
and the rest is history.
It stuck,
and from that day forth Pluto magically started ruling Scorpio

Well, I've already explained why that is counter-intuitive, so I'm not surprised that no one really jumped on that train.

Anyways, it doesn't make the elephant in the traditional room go away. So, tell me, why should Mars rule Scorpio when Pluto matches the energies of Scorpio much better than Mars? And why should Pluto rule Aries when Mars matches the energies of Aries much better than Pluto?

 

[unique_astrology]

And note your fallacy ad hominem. I am not making up this stuff as a solo practitioner, Dirius.

I am glad you called him on this. I was going to but then decided that you can take care of yourself better than I can. Besides, with transit Saturn on my birthplace Asc I need to lay back and practice some restraint as much as I can so that my progressed Mars opposite my progressed Pluto and activating my natal T-square doesn't reveal my true nature as indicated by my first house Mars.

Meek Bob

PS - You've got mail.

 

[AstroLogical]

On the second point, there are two schools of thought. One is that Pluto wasn't operative in human history prior to its discovery in 1930, when it was in Cancer. By extension, we don't need to concern ourselves with Pluto before then. The other school is that we have tons of historical information and detailed biographies of people prior to 1930, so it is a simple enough job to match up events with Pluto's position.

Yes, I seem to recall earlier in the thread someone seeming to imply that Pluto would be "inoperative" on those born before its discovery.
WHAT?
Maybe it was written poorly or—heaven forbid—I missed the point but that just seems nuts. It's like saying there wasn't a tumor in my brain until the doctors did an MRI. (which there isn't, I hope ;-)

I once met a younger fellow (which most are these days ;-) that grew up thinking the world was black and white until something mysteriously changed in the 60's which introduced color to the world... ALL because of his perception of life before his time through TV.

I found this most interesting and kind of telling how sensory input or knowledge for that matter, can be skewed without a more complete overview of the context. It idea of Plutonic cause/effect not being present in the world until it was discovered just seems absurd to me. Atoms did not exist until they were discovered... WHAT!?!?

Or is this just another example of the "tree falling in the forest?"

Waybread - you've got to realize that folks who view the world in a very black and white sort of way often miss sarcasm because it is abstract to their way of thinking. When you say you'll miss the entertainment value of Dirius' participating in the dialogue, etc. it maybe taken "literally." Although, I do know you find some juice from the pitch of hot debate... sarcasm (which I love) often scrambles their tracking the real point you are trying to make. But then again, if you're an Aquarius you likely know this instinctively

 

[AstroLogical]

So, tell me, why should Mars rule Scorpio when Pluto matches the energies of Scorpio much better than Mars? And why should Pluto rule Aries when Mars matches the energies of Aries much better than Pluto?

GOOD ENTRY, muchacho
Yeah, I'm waiting for a good answer to this as well.
I don't think it is black and white. In other words, there are not sharp lines driven between any of the symbolism. Like roots from plants that live next to each other, subtle qualities may reside in multiple planet/symbols. Good examples can be found throughout.

i.e. Anger and aggression (not exclusively) can be tied to Mars, Pluto, Sun, Moon, Saturn, (even Venus during PMS) as each processes the stimulus evoking anger differently. But they do not happen independently. They resonate together.

 

[JUPITERASC]

Well, I've already explained why that is counter-intuitive, so I'm not surprised that no one really jumped on that train.

Anyways, it doesn't make the elephant in the traditional room go away.

So, tell me, why should Mars rule Scorpio when Pluto matches the energies of Scorpio much better than Mars?
And why should Pluto rule Aries when Mars matches the energies of Aries much better than Pluto?

As Paul_ has explained:

Modern rulerships were assigned

not because of some arduous research and investigation

- as you often hear from many modern astrologers

but instead

astrologers of the time,
cogniscant of the tradition of rulership,
basically went ahead and followed Ptolemy's logic,
by assigning the next planet out with the next sign out.
So flowing from the Sun is the rulership scheme which normally reflects back to the Moon,
but breaking this they just carried on projecting out from the sun.
So the next out from the Sun is Mercury, then Venus, then Mars, then Jupiter and then Saturn,
and then when Uranus was discovered we see astrologers explicitly invent the rulership to Aquarius
because Aquarius is the next sign out after Capricorn,
then when Neptune comes along it's assigned the next one out which is Pisces.

This is explicitly stated in the very earliest sources we have for modern rulership.

So the outer planetary rulerships came about by trying to stay true to the tradition at large,
and absolutely not by channelling
or study of numerous charts.


In the context of rulership even the modern rulership scheme bows to the traditional logic as much as it can.
It does not reinvent anything,
instead it recognises the superiority of the traditional schema
and tries to accommodate itself into it as much as it can

 

[Dirius]

I think we are getting somewhere now. I've noticed that you have problems with abstract descriptions of signs and planets. Which would explains ........

It is one thing to give the signification of something simple: love, war, time, royalty, pleasure, feelings, luck, good, evil, lust, anger, etc.

Those are specific things. The signification of planets and signs are, and have always been simple. Signs do posses combinations of this things, but they've never been complicated things.

Saying stuff like:"pluto rules hidden taboos in sexuality" is just adding abstract adjectives to try to insert pluto into the rulership of sexuality, when he doesn't.

Obviously, when an author is just adding stuff they like for the sake of doing, anything can be added.

Okay, then lets try Libra.

1) How would you describe Moon in the 3rd House in Libra?
2) How would you describe Moon conjunct Mars and Saturn in the 3rd House in Libra?
3) How would you describe Moon conjunct Pluto in the 3rd House in Libra?

So in your definition, any sign is the same? rofl

You don't seem to understand. I suppose that what you are asking is for a psychological reading. So:

- Are the moon/mars/saturn oriental or occidental?
- Is the moon close to the sun, with light?
- Is it a day or night chart?
- Do mars or saturn rule a malefic, fortunate or angular house?
- Is any of those planets combusted?
- At what stage of the helyacal/acronical cycle are the planets?
- Are they retrograde or direct?
- Are they stationary or slow?
- Are they at average speed or above average speed?
- Is the conjunction with mars applying or separating?
- Is the conjunction with saturn applying or separating?
- If applying, which conjunction comes first?
- If separating which conjunction was last?
- Are the moon, mars and saturn above or below the ground?
- Is any of them ruler of the Asc (assuming quadrant system)?
- What degree of Libra do this conjunctions take place?
- Is there any important fixed star, in the degree the conjunctions take place?
- What is the sign that rules the 3rd house (if assuming quadrant system)?
- Are there any other planets in libra aside from those mentioned?
- Is the lot of spirit present in Libra?
- Where is the ruler of Libra (Venus) placed at?
- Is venus oriental/occidental/slow/retrograde/direct/etc.?

What exactly you want from the explanation of those things? A mere personality reading? Or a disposition of the individual towards certain things?

In traditional astrology, when we analyze the persoanlity of an individual, we sort of do this check for every planet that has to be analyzed. Of course, we usually don't waste time doing personality readings. But that is how it is done

Let me give you a short traditional explanation. Since you are asking mostly about the Moon:

First of all, we analyze the amounts of multiple testimonies. Given that you'd rather have me just focus on a mere conjunction of planets, I will look for the testimonies of the Moon, and how it is influenced by both saturn and mars.

The moon represents feelings. A moon with a lot of light (far from sun), indicates a person that understands their feeligns and what they want, a moon without light (close to the sun), the opposite. Of course this is trumped by the relation of the moon to the Asc ruler, as in trining the asc implies a connection which allows one to express those feelings, while if not aspecting the Asc ruler, implies a disconnection and the opposite. Also the moon in Libra (sign of fall for the Sun), in bad reception with the Sun (the will), implicates an inability to be able to connect the feelings with the will, as if the will would reject the feelings, making the individual act in a different way that what he or she really wants.

Now in a chart mars usually rules the aggresive side of the personality (anger, rage, etc), but a well placed mars can indicate courage, in this case might influence the way the person expresses the feelings, but a badly placed mars (in Libra), can indicate cowardice, specially if its occidental (femenine side), and if retrograding or slow unable to overcome it, so an implication of the individual unable to express or follow his or her feelings, because of its cowardice nature. It can also indicate a degree of rage when trying to express the feelings, or being overcame with rage by being unable to express them (and individual that is too afraid to express its feelings, getting angry instead of saying what he or she wants). The conjunction with saturn usually indicates coldness or negation of what one wants. But a well placed saturn, indicates a disposition for a more moderate and calm contact, turning more into a rational way of looking at feelings. Obviously the same rules apply, as in retrogarde/direct/combusted/etc influence how saturn really acts upon its contact with the moon. Then we look if the conjunctions are applying or separating, and which of them comes first or was last, giving more influence to the planet with the most recent contact towards the moon. If mars comes first, the individual's feelings are more subjected to the individual's cowardice/rage, rather than to the individuals rationality. But if saturn comes first, the individual is at least able to rationalize their feelings, rather than let them submit to its cowardice. Obviously the relation to the Asc is still in place, which allows one to express such feelings in the first place or not, as is the proper placement of the planets given the nature of their sect for a diurnal/nocturnal nativity.

Finally, the implication of finding the moon in the 3rd house of kin/brothers (which relates to communication), might find the way for the individual to want to express said feelings, still bound by the other aspects to either fail or succed in doing so. The fact that the 3rd house is a "cadent" house implies that this tendency to express feelings might develop further in life, but with the moon being comfortable in the 3rd (it is moon's house of joy) helps the individual in his or her task of communicating said feelings eventually.

See no need for abstract meanings as: "revolutionary, intense, hidden, taboo, spiritual, etc." These adjectives that are usually employed are pointless.

Of course, there are a LOT of other factors. I'm not well versed into "psychological" astrology. Obviously the modern definition is probably very different, I expect something like:

"You are a great person that expresses your feelings with courage, and you are awsome at what you do, and the intensity of your moon gives you the strength to express your feelings to the world in a spiritual manner...blah blah blah"

I would love to see the simplified modern version of it

 

[astralrabbit]

It is one thing to give the signification of something simple: love, war, time, royalty, pleasure, feelings, luck, good, evil, lust, anger, etc.

Those are specific things. The signification of planets and signs are, and have always been simple. Signs do posses combinations of this things, but they've never been complicated things.

Saying stuff like:"pluto rules hidden taboos in sexuality" is just adding abstract adjectives to try to insert pluto into the rulership of sexuality, when he doesn't.

Obviously, when an author is just adding stuff they like for the sake of doing, anything can be added.





So in your definition, any sign is the same? rofl

You don't seem to understand. I suppose that what you are asking is for a psychological reading. So:

- Are the moon/mars/saturn oriental or occidental?
- Is the moon close to the sun, with light?
- Is it a day or night chart?
- Do mars or saturn rule a malefic, fortunate or angular house?
- Is any of those planets combusted?
- At what stage of the helyacal/acronical cycle are the planets?
- Are they retrograde or direct?
- Are they stationary or slow?
- Are they at average speed or above average speed?
- Is the conjunction with mars applying or separating?
- Is the conjunction with saturn applying or separating?
- If applying, which conjunction comes first?
- If separating which conjunction was last?
- Are the moon, mars and saturn above or below the ground?
- Is any of them ruler of the Asc (assuming quadrant system)?
- What degree of Libra do this conjunctions take place?
- Is there any important fixed star, in the degree the conjunctions take place?
- What is the sign that rules the 3rd house (if assuming quadrant system)?
- Are there any other planets in libra aside from those mentioned?
- Is the lot of spirit present in Libra?
- Where is the ruler of Libra (Venus) placed at?
- Is venus oriental/occidental/slow/retrograde/direct/etc.?

What exactly you want from the explanation of those things? A mere personality reading? Or a disposition of the individual towards certain things?

In traditional astrology, when we analyze the persoanlity of an individual, we sort of do this check for every planet that has to be analyzed. Of course, we usually don't waste time doing personality readings. But that is how it is done

Let me give you a short traditional explanation. Since you are asking mostly about the Moon:

First of all, we analyze the amounts of multiple testimonies. Given that you'd rather have me just focus on a mere conjunction of planets, I will look for the testimonies of the Moon, and how it is influenced by both saturn and mars.

The moon represents feelings. A moon with a lot of light (far from sun), indicates a person that understands their feeligns and what they want, a moon without light (close to the sun), the opposite. Of course this is trumped by the relation of the moon to the Asc ruler, as in trining the asc implies a connection which allows one to express those feelings, while if not aspecting the Asc ruler, implies a disconnection and the opposite. Also the moon in Libra (sign of fall for the Sun), in bad reception with the Sun (the will), implicates an inability to be able to connect the feelings with the will, as if the will would reject the feelings, making the individual act in a different way that what he or she really wants.

Now in a chart mars usually rules the aggresive side of the personality (anger, rage, etc), but a well placed mars can indicate courage, in this case might influence the way the person expresses the feelings, but a badly placed mars (in Libra), can indicate cowardice, specially if its occidental (femenine side), and if retrograding or slow unable to overcome it, so an implication of the individual unable to express or follow his or her feelings, because of its cowardice nature. It can also indicate a degree of rage when trying to express the feelings, or being overcame with rage by being unable to express them (and individual that is too afraid to express its feelings, getting angry instead of saying what he or she wants). The conjunction with saturn usually indicates coldness or negation of what one wants. But a well placed saturn, indicates a disposition for a more moderate and calm contact, turning more into a rational way of looking at feelings. Obviously the same rules apply, as in retrogarde/direct/combusted/etc influence how saturn really acts upon its contact with the moon. Then we look if the conjunctions are applying or separating, and which of them comes first or was last, giving more influence to the planet with the most recent contact towards the moon. If mars comes first, the individual's feelings are more subjected to the individual's cowardice/rage, rather than to the individuals rationality. But if saturn comes first, the individual is at least able to rationalize their feelings, rather than let them submit to its cowardice. Obviously the relation to the Asc is still in place, which allows one to express such feelings in the first place or not, as is the proper placement of the planets given the nature of their sect for a diurnal/nocturnal nativity.

Finally, the implication of finding the moon in the 3rd house of kin/brothers (which relates to communication), might find the way for the individual to want to express said feelings, still bound by the other aspects to either fail or succed in doing so. The fact that the 3rd house is a "cadent" house implies that this tendency to express feelings might develop further in life, but with the moon being comfortable in the 3rd (it is moon's house of joy) helps the individual in his or her task of communicating said feelings eventually.

See no need for abstract meanings as: "revolutionary, intense, hidden, taboo, spiritual, etc." These adjectives that are usually employed are pointless.

Of course, there are a LOT of other factors. I'm not well versed into "psychological" astrology. Obviously the modern definition is probably very different, I expect something like:

"You are a great person that expresses your feelings with courage, and you are awsome at what you do, and the intensity of your moon gives you the strength to express your feelings to the world in a spiritual manner...blah blah blah"

I would love to see the simplified modern version of it

With all due respect; Thank you for this.....The delivery of this delineation feels stringent; as if I were sitting on a hospital bed with the cold air pelting my hide as the Dr comes in and tells me that I have stage four Brain Cancer speaking in medical terms that I can't understand and treating me as if I were the very essence of the cancer at the same time. When we set ourselves apart as a separate organism from the whole, we begin to place the importance of our ego far greater than those who come and ask what the hell is going on! I personally dislike those who treat themselves as if they were much more important because they can study and isolate one system with in the whole and fix that broken part, yet not REALIZING OR CARING TO TAKE NOTICE that they are throwing the balance of the whole working being, or machine into further Chaos because they remain ignorant that our lives and these energies are symmetrical in form and reality! Understanding the psychology behind the mind (which is a mirror to the astrological energies) that has come to you pouring out there life to you; could save your life or another's one day if you were to understand the human condition with compassion and treat it as such! Not the gooey overly sweet blissed out version; but the real understanding of the human condition and all of the parameters that encompass it, ie; the pain, sweat, blood, courage, fear , deception, bribery,lust, love, and the eventual acceptance of the fact that we are more than just some heavenly science experiment!
Evolution is eminent and I will be damned if I ever suggest anyone to go to someone who treats them as if they were a foreign entity in this realm of reality; as it seems to be the case with all of the negative energy that comes from most traditional interpretations that I have encountered. Blecch.....now that you've told me that Saturn has ruined my emotional nature,and I shall become a scandalous fiend who is destined to have bestial sex for the rest of my life.....Great~ Give me the pillow talk baby, I can handle that without going off into the deep, because most of us are aware of how human we are.

Pluto has a specific signature. It is a part of my reality and the reality of others that I observe. We often experience this life without being able to convey the energy of the whole experience in words. That doesn't mean that we have to be deaf or dumb to acknowledge the experience of such realities. It is a metaphysical reality; meaning, it is difficult to apply the formulas that we use to describe physics to the perceived emotional,mental, or spiritual events happening in correlation with the planetary energies. Ignorance is bliss right? Well, my friend your bliss is a blister on the palm that will heal in time and become regenerated into new flesh.

Word of wisdom friend,~Tune in to the cosmos, all the coolest evolved souls are doin' it!.....

Now let us talk about Uranus; I believed my Mars just tickled it!
No really, it is doing it now as we speak!
Just look at my chart~

Oh but wait, I forgot my binoculars!

 

[unique_astrology]

Attached image shows Pluto from the bombing chart for the explosion of the Atomic Bomb over Hiroshima, Japan on the ascendant of the Sibly chart (most widely accepted as the US chart) at that location.

Bombing Mars was on Sibly Uranus but it is Pluto on the Sibly chart Asc which speaks to the unprecedented, massive occurrence recorded for posterity, perpetrated by the U.S.. It's angular placement gives Pluto pride of place over the Mars to Uranus connection.

As far as continuing to post regarding this thread - both sides have presented arguments favoring their position multiple times and neither side has budged a speck. This reminds me of a thread infected by trolls. I believe that if one camp stops posting the thread will die a deserving death.

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." - Albert Einstein

 

[muchacho]

GOOD ENTRY, muchacho
Yeah, I'm waiting for a good answer to this as well.

I don't think it is black and white. In other words, there are not sharp lines driven between any of the symbolism. Like roots from plants that live next to each other, subtle qualities may reside in multiple planet/symbols. Good examples can be found throughout.

i.e. Anger and aggression (not exclusively) can be tied to Mars, Pluto, Sun, Moon, Saturn, (even Venus during PMS) as each processes the stimulus evoking anger differently. But they do not happen independently. They resonate together.

You are right, it's not black and white. You can find similarities between a lot of signs and planets, not only those that belong to the same element. That is also true for opposite qualities. I've already mentioned that here in reply to Dirius' list of identical qualities of Mars and Scorpio. And even where there is agreement, on a more subtle level, they differ still.

That's why it is important to grasp the essence of a sign or planet instead of just memorizing a long list of what planet/sign rules what or else the subtle nuances remain unnoticed. That's the main difference I've noticed between the traditional camp and the modern camp. The traditionalist is more detail oriented while the modernist seems to care more about the big picture. And I speculate the reason for that is because the modernist realizes the power of conscious thought and the traditionalist is either unaware of it or ignores it because it messes with his rigid system.

 

[muchacho]

As Paul_ has explained:

Modern rulerships were assigned

not because of some arduous research and investigation

- as you often hear from many modern astrologers

but instead

astrologers of the time,
cogniscant of the tradition of rulership,
basically went ahead and followed Ptolemy's logic,
by assigning the next planet out with the next sign out.
So flowing from the Sun is the rulership scheme which normally reflects back to the Moon,
but breaking this they just carried on projecting out from the sun.
So the next out from the Sun is Mercury, then Venus, then Mars, then Jupiter and then Saturn,
and then when Uranus was discovered we see astrologers explicitly invent the rulership to Aquarius
because Aquarius is the next sign out after Capricorn,
then when Neptune comes along it's assigned the next one out which is Pisces.

This is explicitly stated in the very earliest sources we have for modern rulership.

So the outer planetary rulerships came about by trying to stay true to the tradition at large,
and absolutely not by channelling
or study of numerous charts.


In the context of rulership even the modern rulership scheme bows to the traditional logic as much as it can.
It does not reinvent anything,
instead it recognises the superiority of the traditional schema
and tries to accommodate itself into it as much as it can

Okay, since you just keep repeating or paraphrasing the same old quote over and over again, I take this as a "I don't really know how to deal with the elephant in the traditional room and rather like to ignore it"...

 

[muchacho]

It is one thing to give the signification of something simple: love, war, time, royalty, pleasure, feelings, luck, good, evil, lust, anger, etc.

Those are specific things. The signification of planets and signs are, and have always been simple. Signs do posses combinations of this things, but they've never been complicated things.

Saying stuff like:"pluto rules hidden taboos in sexuality" is just adding abstract adjectives to try to insert pluto into the rulership of sexuality, when he doesn't.

Obviously, when an author is just adding stuff they like for the sake of doing, anything can be added.



So in your definition, any sign is the same? rofl

You don't seem to understand. I suppose that what you are asking is for a psychological reading. So:

- Are the moon/mars/saturn oriental or occidental?
- Is the moon close to the sun, with light?
- Is it a day or night chart?
- Do mars or saturn rule a malefic, fortunate or angular house?
- Is any of those planets combusted?
- At what stage of the helyacal/acronical cycle are the planets?
- Are they retrograde or direct?
- Are they stationary or slow?
- Are they at average speed or above average speed?
- Is the conjunction with mars applying or separating?
- Is the conjunction with saturn applying or separating?
- If applying, which conjunction comes first?
- If separating which conjunction was last?
- Are the moon, mars and saturn above or below the ground?
- Is any of them ruler of the Asc (assuming quadrant system)?
- What degree of Libra do this conjunctions take place?
- Is there any important fixed star, in the degree the conjunctions take place?
- What is the sign that rules the 3rd house (if assuming quadrant system)?
- Are there any other planets in libra aside from those mentioned?
- Is the lot of spirit present in Libra?
- Where is the ruler of Libra (Venus) placed at?
- Is venus oriental/occidental/slow/retrograde/direct/etc.?

What exactly you want from the explanation of those things? A mere personality reading? Or a disposition of the individual towards certain things?

In traditional astrology, when we analyze the persoanlity of an individual, we sort of do this check for every planet that has to be analyzed. Of course, we usually don't waste time doing personality readings. But that is how it is done

Let me give you a short traditional explanation. Since you are asking mostly about the Moon:

First of all, we analyze the amounts of multiple testimonies. Given that you'd rather have me just focus on a mere conjunction of planets, I will look for the testimonies of the Moon, and how it is influenced by both saturn and mars.

The moon represents feelings. A moon with a lot of light (far from sun), indicates a person that understands their feeligns and what they want, a moon without light (close to the sun), the opposite. Of course this is trumped by the relation of the moon to the Asc ruler, as in trining the asc implies a connection which allows one to express those feelings, while if not aspecting the Asc ruler, implies a disconnection and the opposite. Also the moon in Libra (sign of fall for the Sun), in bad reception with the Sun (the will), implicates an inability to be able to connect the feelings with the will, as if the will would reject the feelings, making the individual act in a different way that what he or she really wants.

Now in a chart mars usually rules the aggresive side of the personality (anger, rage, etc), but a well placed mars can indicate courage, in this case might influence the way the person expresses the feelings, but a badly placed mars (in Libra), can indicate cowardice, specially if its occidental (femenine side), and if retrograding or slow unable to overcome it, so an implication of the individual unable to express or follow his or her feelings, because of its cowardice nature. It can also indicate a degree of rage when trying to express the feelings, or being overcame with rage by being unable to express them (and individual that is too afraid to express its feelings, getting angry instead of saying what he or she wants). The conjunction with saturn usually indicates coldness or negation of what one wants. But a well placed saturn, indicates a disposition for a more moderate and calm contact, turning more into a rational way of looking at feelings. Obviously the same rules apply, as in retrogarde/direct/combusted/etc influence how saturn really acts upon its contact with the moon. Then we look if the conjunctions are applying or separating, and which of them comes first or was last, giving more influence to the planet with the most recent contact towards the moon. If mars comes first, the individual's feelings are more subjected to the individual's cowardice/rage, rather than to the individuals rationality. But if saturn comes first, the individual is at least able to rationalize their feelings, rather than let them submit to its cowardice. Obviously the relation to the Asc is still in place, which allows one to express such feelings in the first place or not, as is the proper placement of the planets given the nature of their sect for a diurnal/nocturnal nativity.

Finally, the implication of finding the moon in the 3rd house of kin/brothers (which relates to communication), might find the way for the individual to want to express said feelings, still bound by the other aspects to either fail or succed in doing so. The fact that the 3rd house is a "cadent" house implies that this tendency to express feelings might develop further in life, but with the moon being comfortable in the 3rd (it is moon's house of joy) helps the individual in his or her task of communicating said feelings eventually.

See no need for abstract meanings as: "revolutionary, intense, hidden, taboo, spiritual, etc." These adjectives that are usually employed are pointless.

Of course, there are a LOT of other factors. I'm not well versed into "psychological" astrology. Obviously the modern definition is probably very different, I expect something like:

"You are a great person that expresses your feelings with courage, and you are awsome at what you do, and the intensity of your moon gives you the strength to express your feelings to the world in a spiritual manner...blah blah blah"

I would love to see the simplified modern version of it

Thanks for the effort, Dirius. I appreciate it. It highlights the differences between the traditional and modern approach once again. I actually just wanted to know how, in general, a Mars/Saturn conjunction modifies the qualities of a planet, sign or house in comparison to a Pluto conjunction in order to test your theory. And obviously your system doesn't allow general statements.

Anyways, as you've already guessed, the modern interpretation will definitely be more general because the modernist usually honors free will and is also not so much into the good/bad paradigm. Where modernists differ may be the degree to which they are free from the good/bad paradigm and the role conscious thought plays in their general ontology.
So there won't be a standard modern interpretation.

From my point of view, there are no inherently good or bad influences. There are only good or bad moods which can give good or bad results. And these moods can't be seen in the chart. They are entirely in the hands of the individual and a moment to moment thing. What's shown in the chart is just some kind of trajectory, a general orientation and not at all a fate. It only becomes fate in combination with our general mood by the power of Law of Attraction. But our mood can be changed any moment by the power of our own focus and so our fate can be modified as well.

Said that, I hope it's clear why I recommend more general interpretations. And since you seem to have a more fatalistic view on things and consider predictive astrology the true astrology, I can also understand why you would prefer specifics over generalities. So there is not much common ground possible between your view and my view, we both seem to be representatives of two opposing extreme ends. Nevertheless, I got a great deal of clarity from this discussion and I hope you can say the same. I really enjoyed it. I'm not here to convince anyone and I think it's best that we leave it at that.

I had a great deal of respect for traditional astrology. But somehow that vanished after this debate. So if anyone should ask me in the future why I have lost almost all respect for traditional astrology, I'll point back at you and this debate.

Cheers!

 

[Dirius]

LOL?

Excuse me muchacho, you OWE me a modern interpretation, to see what "your technique" can do. I took the trouble to delineate that, so the proper courtesy would indicate you would show me your modern interpretation.

So please, explain from your point of view, how is moon affected by those conjunctions from the modern very general point of view.

Anyways, as you've already guessed, the modern interpretation will definitely be more general because the modernist usually honors free will and is also not so much into the good/bad paradigm.

No its not about "free will", because many aspects of our personality are not "choices", they work how they work. People have BAD personality traits. That is a fact. Ignoring them isn't better.

From my point of view, there are no inherently good or bad influences. There are only good or bad moods which can give good or bad results. And since you seem to have a more fatalistic view on things and consider predictive astrology the true astrology, I can also understand why you would prefer specifics over generalities. So there is not much common ground possible between your view and my view, we both seem to be representatives of two opposing extreme ends.

It os not a fatalistic look on life. It is a realistic one. If you rather live in magical dreamland, where every person is good, and people don't have bad traits, that is your choicer. I rather live in the realistic world, and apply a realistic view

So in your opinion a very generalized interpretation of astrology that can apply to pretty much anyone, is better?

Instead of an interpretation that actually does tell the individuals exact personallity traits?

Traditional astrology can pin point the specific personality traits. Without eomploying general things that can account to anyone. That is the beauty of it.

People have bad personality traits. It is a fact.

 

[JUPITERASC]

Okay, since you just keep repeating or paraphrasing the same old quote over and over again, I take this as a "I don't really know how to deal with the elephant in the traditional room and rather like to ignore it"...

Clearly, since you keep repeating your question
it is obvious that you have not read my answer to your question
and you prefer to continue ignoring the elephant in the modern astrological room