Confused about Pluto

Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
Re: Back to astrology

muchacho said:
Okay, intense sexuality may look like something Mars and Scorpio have in common. The Mars intensity, however, is a rather obvious straight-forward and short-lived intensity whereas the Scorpio intensity has more subtle depth to it, is all-encompassing and can go on for a long period of time.

Now don't get hung up with the sexual aspect of Pluto. Folks went a little overboard with this, I think. However, since Pluto is all about depth and getting to the bottom of things and therefore hates anything superficial, it makes sense that Pluto would be associated with something like the sex drive as one of the most deeply rooted drives there is.

I'll post a more extensive list later. This is going to take a little more time than I initially expected.
Click to expand...

I agree on the competition part for example, but that doesn't also apply to pluto really. I mean we can look the flaws in Mars as ruler of Scorpio, but you can also find them in pluto 2.

I do think unfaithfullness does go hand in hand with scorpio. While it is true that people with Scorpio influence to engage in long lasting relationships, they do usually spent some time with people other than their spouses.

I think the view there comes more from, "I love you, I'll be unfaithfull, but you come first".

I have a friend, Asc+Sun scorpio, who is like this: he loves his GF with a passion, she is above anything else....he still keeps things on the side.

This actually represents Mars+Venus very well: mars did go off and hooked up with half of Greece....yet Venus always came first for him :happy::happy:

I do agree also that mars is more the vengefull type, but I understand the "pluto scorpionic scheming", does make sense indeed, given pluto always conjuring up master plans, while mars is more head on vengance of savagery action.

Now for the sexual part of pluto there only reason it rules "sexuality" is this:

- Pluto is the lord of the underworld, thus it should rule the 8th house.
- Scorpio is traditionally the ruler of the 8th house, so pluto rules scorpio
- Scorpio is a sign usually identified with sexual misconduct (detriment of venus), so scorpio has affinity for sexuality.
- So pluto, rules sexuality.

It is a bit of a flawed statement, but that is the reason pluto is associated with sexuality. Lets be clear that pluto has never been identified much with sexuality in the mythical sense.

Clearly the venus/mars affair has always been identified with it.

I think the end story, is that while I could agree I can find some plutionian thiings relating well with scorpio, essentially more of the attributes are still in acordance to mars.

We can say for example:

Pluto = Scheming

Mars = Vengance, Posesive, Sexual, Confrontational.

So in the end mars relates much better with it. At least I see it that way :smile:

But I do understand why some authors would be bent on applying Scorpio to pluto, since scorpio is indeed a sign that could fit with it. It is just that mars already does better with it.

And I don't think the "co-ruler" think is an explanation either. Mars would rule Scorpio.
 
Last edited:
M

muchacho

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
and my comment is reasonable and not 'false logic' as you incorrectly claimed :smile:
Click to expand...
Your first conclusion was agenda driven. That's why I called it 'false logic'. You were unaware of the other possibility. Now you've morphed your position into something else which is more in alignment with what I've actually said initially. Simple.
 
M

muchacho

Well-known member
Re: Back to astrology

Oddity said:
Somebody would have written something. Many somebodies would have written something. For as much as the Perso-Arabic astrologers loved Ptolemy, they disagreed with him vehemently on a number of points, and disproved quite a few of his pet theories. And with other astrologers. The system remained basically intact, but you won't find a whole lot of support, for say, the trutina (I don't know the word in English) in the early medieval stuff. Or even back in Valens.

If the planetary rulerships were considered a stopgap, we would know. Much of the astrological literature of the time was written by the scientists of the time, and they were not stupid people, and they did correct what they saw as mistakes. As it stands, the rulerships are absolutely elegant - and geometric. There's a symmetry to them that's hard to ignore.



What you're dealing with is the difference between Mars in its day house (Aries) and its night house (Scorpio). It presents in different ways. As do the other planets in their day and night houses. You can read about this in most ancient and medieval astrology texts if you like.
Click to expand...
I agree, given the means and awareness they had back then, the traditional system is a very elegant solution. But we've moved past that now, our means and view have expanded. And the fact of the elephant in the room remains.

The main problem I see is that we don't know why exactly astrology works as it does. And only after we've found that out we can say with certainty what system is correct and what system is not. Until then, I suggest to treat every system as just a temporary solution, a working theory and not as the true system.
 
M

muchacho

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
Logical logic :smile:

i.e.
in response to:


and so
as 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
Click to expand...
What you did there and what you are doing again is called 'appeal to authority', and that's one of the most common logical fallacies. That's why I asked "What logic is that?"

Quoting your favorite guru who endorses your current dogma without any further explanation to the topic at hand is just a practice in fundamentalism and not research and development.

So, forget about those gurus. What do you have to say about Pluto ruling Aries and not Scorpio?
 
A

alexandre

Member
Just to say quickly that I admire some who continue to debate again and again.

For me it's impossible to debate with some who has understand nothing (0%) about my previews messages. But it's okay.

I'll try to convince when I would like to do it or not. After all it 's not a matter. Pluto is secret and maybe it's much better like that.
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Back to astrology

Dirius said:
Yes sorry, creative.

You see here is when the term twisting beggins to make the argument in order to give more credit to uranus:

Since when is Saturn about the status quo ?

Since when saturn is expected and uranus unexpected change?

Perhaps both your saturn returns whne fine, I've experience one of them, and had people closely experience it too, and trust me some of us went through a LOT of changes, unexpected ones.

So saying 1 thing or the other about saturn, doesn't make it true.

Saturn is about change. Period. Doesn't matter how much sugar coatting explanation people add to it, this is still a saturnian attribute.
Click to expand...

Talk about "term twisting"! Dirius, I am happy to have you post your own personalized beliefs about Saturn: this kind of makes you more like a modern astrologer, right?

Since Saturn rules old age, sure-- we can observe some change taking place, but at a very slow pace. Grey hair and wrinkles don't pop out overnight. Change isn't sudden when somebody suddenly hits 29.5 years of age due to a Saturn return, unless other factors are at work in the chart. In fact, permanence is always an illusion, regardless.

So right away, we can say that Saturn has the longest orbital period of any traditional planet. It changes sign and house slowly.

According to the traditional astrology to which you subscribe, the principal qualities of Saturn are cold, dry, and malefic. It is also masculine and melancholic. Cold means low energy, diminished motion, even inaction. (Compared to hot, which is the active principle.) Dry tends to separate and render something rigid, concrete. The Great Malefic usually means bad, but in certain conditions and circumstances Saturn can be helpful. Masculine is active, but melancholic is related to the earth element--reality-oriented, sometimes intolerant and cold towards others.

But gosh, Dirius-- there's just got to be a huge principle of change in here somewhere!:wink:

I note that any Saturn return, which is after all only a special kind of transit chart, is going to have a lot more going on in it than merely Saturn conjunct Saturn.

PS:
Click to expand...
Regarding your other posts, at this point you are not explaninig anything of what I asked for. Neither are you making any sense:

a) Your explanation to pluto in horary, is that both regeants can be used (despite how insconsistent it sounds), just because you preffer it that way

b) You blabble about horary for long paragraphs about how it went into miss use and obscurity, yet you don't even talk about the actual method of employing pluto as the ruler of scorpio. No information given for the relevant matter.
Click to expand...
Please mind your manners, Dirius. Personal attacks are prohibited by forum rules, and I do tend to report them.

(a) It's not just me working with two "regents" (lords, cusp rulers,) Dirius. Have you had a chance to read Karen Hamaker-Zondag's book on horary astrology yet? (I assume you know who she is-- the doyenne of Dutch astrology, whose books are available in English.)

Sorry, Dirius-- but this is the first time you asked me to explain how to use Pluto in horary, so I assumed you'd worked it out. (Or, my goodness-- studied it!)

(b) Pluto as a significator in modern horary astrology works much like another planet as a significator, with the exception that most modern astrologers don't use the entire table of essential dignities. For example, if you've got Pluto in Capricorn and Saturn in Scorpio, that counts as mutual reception. If Venus as significator of the querent applies to a trine with Pluto as the quesited, that might give your horary a "yes" answer.

Then some hybrid astrologers look at the modern outers as additional data points, like you might use an Arabian part. They would use Mars as the ruler of Scorpio, but Pluto in the house of the querent or quesited could supply additional and helpful information. What Pluto signifies depends on the nature of the horary question. Pluto might be highly relevant in a question like, "Will my mining investment pay off?" "Is my boss out to destroy my reputation?" Can I recover financially after being fired from my recent job?"

So almost 2 big post answers without tackling the situation directly just answering:

Its like a kid with 2 parents, Scorpio is ruled by both pluto and Mars.

So despite the table of dignities not being important....they are still important? contradiction right there.

You summon the table of dignities at will, then discard it when it doesn't suit you. Or you use them in an incomplete manner. You use regency, but not triplicity? why is that? The table of dignities is a table for a reason, not because you can choose what to use or not.

Choosing to use regency and exaltation, but lets discard triplicity and the rest, is a bit weird.
Click to expand...
Dirius, what precisely is your problem with someone using domicile and exaltation (for example,) but not the rest of the table of essential dignities? Surely you have a rationale besides something personally striking you as "weird." I might point out that traditional astrology is full of comparatively minor delineations that aren't in great use amongst the trads, like smokey degrees or Al-Biruni's Part of Lentils. So you-all pick and choose what to use and what to ignore, as well.

By analogy, if you are loading up your plate at a buffet table, you can select the foods you enjoy, and leave the foods you dislike. If you are looking for some light reading in the library, you are not required to check out the entire collection.

Oh the reason is because Horary and Natal are....apples and oranges? yeah right. They are both completely different things, with the only problem that....they are not. It is the same thing, applied to a different thing.
Click to expand...
Dirius, surely you see a big difference between charts that tell you how to locate the missing cat, vs. charts that tell you what a human being is like as a unique individual. Talk about technique! In horary, the first house indicates the querent-- who may not even be a relevant party if she's asking about two other people. In natal, the first house indicates the native's outward personality and body. In medical astrology the first house represents the head.

And no, the aspect perfecting has nothing to do with a planet gaining strenght or not. While obviuosly a planet moving through the signs will grain or loose strenght, the aspects still relate to changing when it is from a different sign to another. Need proof?
Click to expand...
Dirius, I can only conclude that you misunderstood what I wrote.

Well the simple fact that you are using the table of dignities...in an incomplete manner.
Click to expand...
Yes--- and why should this be a problem for you?

You see? this is the weird up mixture of bad information you conjure to make reasoning to your plea>

So essential dignities work if you need to explain out of sign aspects?
But when you have to use essential dignities for your own they are not important?

Contradiction, contradiction, contradiction, contradiction.
Click to expand...
Dirius, I recommend that you slow down, and re-read what I wrote. "Bad information"???? Essential dignities and out-of-sign aspects???? Sorry, but I cannot follow your train of thought here.

So well, according to you a simple answer can be found for everything, so I'm really done answering. Basicly there is a way to twist everything up in your way of seeing things.

But this type of posts is exactly the example of: lets describe things for our own convinience.
Click to expand...
Not so, Dirius. But this is your basic unchanged position about modern astrology, is it not? You kind of have to view my posts as inconsistent in order to sustain your own position on traditional astrology. Pity.
 
Dirius

Dirius

Well-known member
Look waybread, you can go around changing your stance as you like regarding the subject.

Clearly you can always come up with something:

You agree saturn rules change, but then you dissect the answer to include uranus (dividing it between "expected" and "unexpected" change).

Obviously if I start to invent stuff by myself just to add them into it, I can always make and endless debate, of constant contradictions. So what you wish to say is not about reasoning, but rather of always having to find a way to insert something you like into the relevant topic.

Good example is what you mention of pluto VS mars as sexuality rulers: you take just one myth of pluto as more relevant than the 50 myths of mars ---> that is just bias :sideways:

The same comes from your distinctions between using somethings for horary, others for birth, etc.

There really isn't much point to discuss theory, so why not apply things in the practical way then? And see what works and what does not?
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Re: Back to astrology

Dirius said:
I agree on the competition part for example, but that doesn't also apply to pluto really. I mean we can look the flaws in Mars as ruler of Scorpio, but you can also find them in pluto 2.

I do think unfaithfullness does go hand in hand with scorpio. While it is true that people with Scorpio influence to engage in long lasting relationships, they do usually spent some time with people other than their spouses.

I think the view there comes more from, "I love you, I'll be unfaithfull, but you come first".

I have a friend, Asc+Sun scorpio, who is like this: he loves his GF with a passion, she is above anything else....he still keeps things on the side.

This actually represents Mars+Venus very well: mars did go off and hooked up with half of Greece....yet Venus always came first for him :happy::happy:
Click to expand...

Dirius, surely you are basing your conclusion of Scorpio's infidelity on more than just your one friend!!! I might point out that a lot of male infidelity is a cultural, machismo sort of thing, rather than inherent in the sign of Scorpio. Some men (and women) have sexual addictions, as well. All kinds of guys are unfaithful in societies that tacitly promote it, regardless of their sun-signs.

Let me remind you that Scorpio rules the sexual organs in a general way, but for women's sexuality-- as apart from manly Mars, we need to look at Venus and the moon. The last I noticed, half of the sun-Scorpios on the planet were female.

What you wrote, ironically, sounds like popular modern sun-sign astrology.

Frankly, Gemini is the sign most reputed to be fickle; and well, we know what Jupiter/Zeus was like from mythology. In my experience, polyamory is often related to Mars-Venus-Jupiter inter-aspects, regardless of sign.

I do agree also that mars is more the vengefull type, but I understand the "pluto scorpionic scheming", does make sense indeed, given pluto always conjuring up master plans, while mars is more head on vengance of savagery action.

Now for the sexual part of pluto there only reason it rules "sexuality" is this:

- Pluto is the lord of the underworld, thus it should rule the 8th house.
- Scorpio is traditionally the ruler of the 8th house, so pluto rules scorpio
- Scorpio is a sign usually identified with sexual misconduct (detriment of venus), so scorpio has affinity for sexuality.
- So pluto, rules sexuality.

It is a bit of a flawed statement, but that is the reason pluto is associated with sexuality. Lets be clear that pluto has never been identified much with sexuality in the mythical sense.

Clearly the venus/mars affair has always been identified with it.
Click to expand...
I think your list needs some amendment. Scorpio is not "the traditional ruler of the 8th house"!!!!! Signs don't rule houses. I noted Pluto's responsibility for the Rape of Persephone previously, but see: http://www.theoi.com/Khthonios/HaidesPersephone1.html I would put it like this.

-- In medical astrology, Scorpio, the 8th sign, is associated with the 8th house.

--In medical astrology, Scorpio and the 8th house are associated with the genital and eliminative organs, their functions, and diseases.

--Pluto is the modern ruler of Scorpio

--Therefore, Pluto is associated with the genital and eliminative organs.

Beyond this, we have to look elsewhere in the horoscope for pregnancy and child-bearing, sex as recreational vs. procreational, and so on.

I think the end story, is that while I could agree I can find some plutionian thiings relating well with scorpio, essentially more of the attributes are still in acordance to mars.

We can say for example:

Pluto = Scheming

Mars = Vengance, Posesive, Sexual, Confrontational.

So in the end mars relates much better with it. At least I see it that way :smile:

But I do understand why some authors would be bent on applying Scorpio to pluto, since scorpio is indeed a sign that could fit with it. It is just that mars already does better with it.

And I don't think the "co-ruler" think is an explanation either. Mars would rule Scorpio.
Click to expand...
This seems very male-oriented. Given that Scorpio is a traditionally female sign and that Mars does not rule female sexuality, I wonder if you'd care for a revision? We do see a classical opposition, with Mars:Scorpio and Venus:Taurus.

Since you really haven't explored Pluto or co-rulers of signs in many horoscopes, so far as I can tell, perhaps you can permit those of us who have done so to stick with Pluto as the modern ruler of Scorpio.
 
Last edited:
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
muchacho said:
Your first conclusion was agenda driven.
That's why I called it 'false logic'.
You were unaware of the other possibility.
Now you've morphed your position into something else which is more in alignment with what I've actually said initially.
Simple.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately that's simply all flawed logic :smile:
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
muchacho said:
What you did there and what you are doing again is called 'appeal to authority',
and that's one of the most common logical fallacies. That's why I asked "What logic is that?"

Quoting your favorite guru who endorses your current dogma without any further explanation to the topic at hand
is just a practice in fundamentalism and not research and development.

So, forget about those gurus. What do you have to say about Pluto ruling Aries and not Scorpio?
Click to expand...
Mars rules Aries :smile:
 
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Dirius said:
Look waybread, you can go around changing your stance as you like regarding the subject.

Clearly you can always come up with something:

You agree saturn rules change, but then you dissect the answer to include uranus (dividing it between "expected" and "unexpected" change).
Click to expand...

I haven't changed my stance, Dirius. It is regrettable that you should think so. I encourage you to read my posts more carefully.

What I wrote was that change is inherent in all things. As you can see, by comparison, other planets indicate change far more rapidly and frequently than Saturn does. For example, Saturn stays in one sign for over two years, while the moon changes sign every 2.5 days.

In modern astrology, Uranus does rule "sudden change." I am not making this up. I wouldn't say it's the only chart factor that triggers sudden change: a Mars-Mercury square might do so, as well.

Obviously if I start to invent stuff by myself just to add them into it, I can always make and endless debate, of constant contradictions. So what you wish to say is not about reasoning, but rather of always having to find a way to insert something you like into the relevant topic.

Good example is what you mention of pluto VS mars as sexuality rulers: you take just one myth of pluto as more relevant than the 50 myths of mars ---> that is just bias :sideways:

The same comes from your distinctions between using somethings for horary, others for birth, etc.
Click to expand...
Too bad that you think so, Dirius. My seeming contradictions (to you) would probably not appear as contradictions if you either spent more time digesting what I write, or else simply asked me for clarification.

I love mythology, and would happily get into those 50 myths about Mars if it would make a difference to a discussion about the planetary rulers of Pluto. Here is a good place to start:
http://www.theoi.com/Olympios/Ares.html

You can see from this source (by a classics scholar, complete with all known ancient references to Ares/Mars) that the primary attribute of Mars/Ares was as a war god (hence his reputation as malefic.) His main love and fathering of important children was with Aphrodite/Venus, although Mars, like most of the Greek/Roman gods were credited with promiscuity--notably Zeus/Jupiter.

There really isn't much point to discuss theory, so why not apply things in the practical way then? And see what works and what does not?
Click to expand...
Right! This is exactly what I was promoting, by way of explaining why modern astrologers use Pluto as the modern ruler of Scorpio.
 
Claire19

Claire19

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
You are entitled to your opinion
however, the fact is
there is no consensus regarding this amongst modern astrologers :smile:
for example
dr. farr has studied astrology for more than fifty years and comments:
Click to expand...

Pluto fire?? I do not think so. Has no relationship with Aries, Leo or Sagittarius. Has been assigned to Scorpio, a water sign.
 
AstroLogical

AstroLogical

Well-known member
JUPITERASC said:
As I have stated previously, there is no consensus amongst modern astrologers on this topic
some modern astrologers assign dwarf planet pluto to Aries

for example http://www.astrologyonline.eu/Zodiac_Signs/Planets.asp :smile:
Click to expand...


Parting shots???

There was a time when there was no "consensus" that the world was anything other than flat. (in the western world)
Are we ONLY to consider items that have full consensus within the astrological community?

Yeah, like that's going to happen.

[deleted attacking comments - Moderator]

I believe there continues to be a tone of thought suppression by those more inclined to hold the Traditional line, as if they are trying to prevent an exodus into chaos. This phenomenon often seem to be a characteristic in "THOUGHT," (for some) whether it is political, religious, scientific, etc.; to hunker down and hope the world does not change—much.

Wasn't it Gibran that said something like, "Studying history was like man standing before the sun with his back to it examining his own shadow."

I surely don't suggest ignoring the linage of astrological teaching. There is great depth to draw from. However, so few of us today can remember a time when Pluto was not in the mix. How many years or centuries does it take to qualify for consideration? And remember, time moves much faster now. No doubt astrologers of old had to assign qualities or characteristics to other planets or fixed stars or, or, or... that now may be relegated to Pluto. To have an icon that can embody and consolidate these otherwise scattered bits under one umbrella—as much as that can even happen—is welcome progress, IMHO.

Consider - if an asteroid hit earth or a massive volcano went off and shrouded the planet in dust to where we could no longer observe the heavens, the principles and archetypes that astrologers have assigned to the heavenly bodies would still be at work in our life. Our need to understand and find meaning in life would continue... thus it's not about the size, distance, color, and orbit of a stellar object.

WE are star dust, literally and symbolically. On the most fundamental level what is "out there" is also "in here." Understanding is a matter of focused attention and consciousness—not "matter."

At the end of the day Pluto is still in the game and I would urge any and all to continue to study, observe and work with it. Astronomers may relegate Pluto to nothing more than a speck of dust and some Traditional astrologers may rush to agree with them but the concepts that have evolved in Modern astrology to establish Pluto's place in the astrological solar family are and will continue to withstanding the test of time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
waybread

waybread

Well-known member
Actually, er, um-- the ancient Greeks knew that the world was spherical http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

AstroLogical, thanks for your insightful posts.

And again-- if astrologers do not wish to use Pluto, that's fine by me. My principal concern is that the explanation for that choice not rest on misunderstandings of either traditional or modern astrology.

Just to recap what I think are the "anti-Pluto" arguments beyond my exchanges with Konrad and Dirius, and why I find these arguments unconvincing:

It's been posted before, but I will post it again, that astronomy and astrology operate with different rules. Despite significant areas of overlap, we part ways in other significant areas. That an international committee of astronomers "demoted" Pluto in 2006, while simultaneously elevating Ceres to the same dwarf planet status, isn't a problem for astrologers if they think, from years of experience, that Pluto matters but that Ceres still functions like an asteroid (or Haumea, Eris, Makemake, or what-have-you.)

The reason, I think, is simple. Astronomers' definition of a dwarf planet has only limited relevance to astrology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_planet Astrologers for millennia thought that planets were gods or under the direct supervision of the gods (or God according to Genesis) in a Ptolemaic solar system, so we can't argue that a scientific definition of a planet or dwarf planet means all that much to astrology.

I also don't think much of the historical argument, that astrologers haven't observed Pluto for a full rotation. Astrologers have gone back to the history books and biographies, to see what happened at various times in the past, in relation to planetary transits.

I can see that the modern outers do not fit into the complete table of essential dignities. For trads who use this table, they can either ignore Pluto or use it as a separate type of data point. And I suggest that they leave it at that. Most traditional western astrologers don't use the specifically Indian techniques of Vedic astrology, such as lunar mansions or navamsa charts, but this doesn't mean they do or should ridicule Vedic astrologers.

To me, modern astrology is not a watered-down or defective version of traditional western astrology. (With the caveat that there is defective modern astrology, just as any other type of astrology can be defective in the hands of non-experts.) Modern astrology assuredly has its roots in tradition, but it has branched off in sufficiently different ways from its parent that it should be understood as a separate branch--just as Vedic astrology is acknowledged to be a separate branch from traditional western astrology, despite the former's common Hellenistic roots.

Modern astrologers are not somehow doing "bad" traditional western astrology, any more than astrologers are doing bad astrophysics, or western astrologers do bad Vedic astrology. Let's judge each field according to its own lights.

If I delineate a chart using Pluto, I don't mind someone suggesting that I interpreted Pluto incorrectly. But this is very different than a traditional astrologer trying to scare or shame people away from doing modern astrology altogether, using a Pluto thread as a pretext-- notably when the shaming tactics come through misrepresentations of both of our branches.

What did that old hippy slogan say? "You do your thing and I'll do my thing, and if we find each other, it's beautiful."
 
Top