Should Pluto be demoted as a planet in Astrology?

athenian200

Well-known member
I know that people are used to using it in interpretations, but I can't help but notice that it's smaller than Earth's moon, and incredibly far away. It's even smaller than other objects at the same distance like Eris.

I've personally found that Pluto's effect on things seems very hit and miss, a bit like using the asteroids. Basically, it MIGHT have an effect if it's on a sensitive point or something, but it only seems important in a minority of circumstances.

Given that Pluto's orbit is strongly affected by Neptune...is it possible that Pluto was just blown out of proportion, that people made it more important than it should have been?

Not saying that it shouldn't be used at all, but maybe it shouldn't have any rulerships or be used as a default object. I was thinking it should just be considered along the same lines as Vesta, Juno, Ceres, Chiron, and Pallas.

I know that some people only use 7 planets, but I've found that Neptune and Uranus actually do seem to have an impact. They're also larger than Pluto, and are gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn. Pluto just seems too small and distant to have the same impact.

So, does anyone else think it might be worthwhile to follow the Astronomers in demoting Pluto? That would basically mean that rulership of Scorpio would revert to Mars, and Pluto would be used like any other additional object or asteroid in charts where people are looking for Plutonian themes.
 
Last edited:

Jesse Booth

Well-known member
I've always found it very useful in my own chart. I'm pretty sure that the planets' ability to influence our personalities from light-years away transcends the usual arguments about size & distance. Outside of that, there isn't much I can add to the discussion. I guess I want to keep Pluto an important influence.
 

athenian200

Well-known member
Pluto packs a strong punch that can't be ignored :)

Would you mind elaborating on that? What kind of strong punch?

It's just that people did use Astrology between 1846 and 1930 without any issues, so I would think that ignoring it wouldn't be that difficult.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I know that people are used to using it in interpretations, but I can't help but notice that it's smaller than Earth's moon,

and incredibly far away.

It's even smaller than other objects at the same distance like Eris.


I've personally found that Pluto's effect on things seems very hit and miss, a bit like using the asteroids. Basically, it MIGHT have an effect if it's on a sensitive point or something, but it only seems important in a minority of circumstances.

Given that Pluto's orbit is strongly affected by Neptune...is it possible that Pluto was just blown out of proportion, that people made it more important than it should have been?

Not saying that it shouldn't be used at all, but maybe it shouldn't have any rulerships or be used as a default object. I was thinking it should just be considered along the same lines as Vesta, Juno, Ceres, Chiron, and Pallas.

I know that some people only use 7 planets, but I've found that Neptune and Uranus actually do seem to have an impact. They're also larger than Pluto, and are gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn. Pluto just seems too small and distant to have the same impact.

So, does anyone else think it might be worthwhile to follow the Astronomers in demoting Pluto?
That would basically mean that rulership of Scorpio would revert to Mars,
and Pluto would be used like any other additional object or asteroid in charts where people are looking for Plutonian themes.
Modern astrologers acknowledge Mars as 'co-ruler' of Scorpio

FURTHERMORE

For at least two thousand years
Traditional astrologers consider Mars is ruler of Aries and Scorpio
:smile:

planetsizes.jpg

Would you mind elaborating on that? What kind of strong punch?

It's just that people did use Astrology between 1846 and 1930 without any issues,

so I would think that ignoring it wouldn't be that difficult.

WHY PLUTO IS NO LONGER A PLANET http://www.universetoday.com/13573/why-pluto-is-no-longer-a-planet/
 

Bunraku

Well-known member
Would you mind elaborating on that? What kind of strong punch?

It's just that people did use Astrology between 1846 and 1930 without any issues, so I would think that ignoring it wouldn't be that difficult.

Pluto is that punch that can send you flying and land so hard that you end up in the sewer or fly so far that you land on the top of a 10 mile skyscraper in front of the CEO of a rich oil tycoon. This dramatic, yes. :cool: This planet is kind of sinister if you ask me. But it depends on the chart...say someone who has Pluto conjunct the Asc., they can't ignore it.

Yes you can take out the outers and manage fine, but using them adds more clarity. IMO anyways.
 

athenian200

Well-known member
Pluto is that punch that can send you flying and land so hard that you end up in the sewer or fly so far that you land on the top of a 10 mile skyscraper in front of the CEO of a rich oil tycoon. This dramatic, yes. :cool: This planet is kind of sinister if you ask me. But it depends on the chart...say someone who has Pluto conjunct the Asc., they can't ignore it.

Yeah, it does seem to have a lot more influence if it's on an important point like the Ascendant or the Midheaven. But I find that in that situation, the influence of something like Chiron or Vesta is more important as well.

I was mostly remarking that it doesn't seem to have the strength of Saturn, Neptune, or Uranus.
Yes you can take out the outers and manage fine, but using them adds more clarity. IMO anyways.
I've heard that before, and it seems like most people take the outer planets as group. You never hear of anyone using Uranus and Neptune, but not using Pluto. I'm not sure why that it is, but it seems to be an unspoken rule that you either use all three of them, or else stop at Saturn.

It just seems natural to me that planets of the magnitude of Uranus and Neptune would have more impact (and to me it seems like they do). They're much larger and closer than Pluto.
 

junoisuppose

Well-known member
I've personally found that Pluto's effect on things seems very hit and miss, a bit like using the asteroids. Basically, it MIGHT have an effect if it's on a sensitive point or something, but it only seems important in a minority of circumstances.

I know that some people only use 7 planets, but I've found that Neptune and Uranus actually do seem to have an impact. They're also larger than Pluto, and are gas giants like Jupiter and Saturn. Pluto just seems too small and distant to have the same impact.

I'm guessing that part of the reason why you think that pluto doesn't have an effect is because it is such a slow moving planet. The effects of a pluto transit take years to come to fruition (if that's the right word, destruction is probably more accurate). Also pluto changes things at a deep level so the effects might not be apparent at first.

I'm quite a cynic until I can test things in my own life, but one example that I do have is of the time when pluto crossed over my IC, was opposite my MC, and square my ASC/DESC (the ASC/DESC are a few degrees later than the IC/MC). At that time I left my home country for a job abroad because I was desperate to get away from my mother and the pressures at home. Robert Hand's (cookbook) explanation of pluto square ASC/DESC is of meeting a controlling person, and having severe power struggles with them. The job I took was a yearly contract. 6 months into each contract we had to decide if we would stay for another term. & each time I felt unhappy being in such a foreign environment, totally reliant on my company for housing and needing them to deal with all the things I couldn't do for myself because I didn't speak the language, so each time I would want to leave but each time my boss would persuade me to stay. Finally after my boss left the company on a sabbatical and a new boss came I was able to say "No." and not be manipulated into changing my mind. And it is not until looking back on the incident several years later that I realise that it was this boss who was the controlling pluto person I met. & the whole experience completely changed my outlook on life and what I consider to be important. So, in my case, I say that the pluto transits work as described. Control issues, deep psychological probing, understanding what is truly important (I got sick at the time too, and the boss in question helped me out in ways that you would really only expect close friends or family to) and complete change.
 

junoisuppose

Well-known member
Are you questioning whether pluto should be used in transits or in the natal chart?

In the natal chart perhaps the trouble with pluto, as with the other outer planets, is that it isn't a 'personal' planet so its function is not so clear. Pluto is about deep probing, mixed with a hefty dose of willpower. Willpower could also be represented by mars, but I don't know where else we would look for probing the depths of a situation or someone else's psyche.
 

athenian200

Well-known member
Are you questioning whether pluto should be used in transits or in the natal chart?

I mostly look at natal charts, mundane charts, and progressions. I don't really look at transits, so I wouldn't know about that.

But you did mention points like the Midheaven and Ascendant, which are the main points I've noticed where Pluto has an impact. The thing is, major planets tend to have an impact wherever they are in the chart, while Pluto only seems important when it's on an angle or something. Which is the same kind of placement that I find makes Asteroids or other factors stand out as well.
In the natal chart perhaps the trouble with pluto, as with the other outer planets, is that it isn't a 'personal' planet so its function is not so clear. Pluto is about deep probing, mixed with a hefty dose of willpower. Willpower could also be represented by mars, but I don't know where else we would look for probing the depths of a situation or someone else's psyche.
Well, I would think that Mercury could represent examining something or probing the psyche. Saturn could represent a controlling authority figure or limitation.

Pluto's associations mostly just seem to be those of Scorpio, mixed with shades of Mercury, Mars, and Saturn. Occasionally Uranus as well.

Note that I do agree it can have an impact... but lots of objects and points that can have an impact are not considered major planets. I just don't see why Pluto is more significant than, say, Chiron, Pallas or Eris. That's what I'm not getting.
 
Last edited:

Bunraku

Well-known member
Yeah, it does seem to have a lot more influence if it's on an important point like the Ascendant or the Midheaven. But I find that in that situation, the influence of something like Chiron or Vesta is more important as well.
I went ahead and googled the main/popular asteroids' rulerships...
What do these asteroids add to the mix that the main planets didn't cover?

I'm guessing Pluto became the celebrity and is now ingrained in our culture (and aren't really willing to take it out). The other planetoids/whatchamacallits never gained traction. :tongue:
 

athenian200

Well-known member
I'm guessing Pluto became the celebrity and is now ingrained in our culture (and aren't really willing to take it out). The other planetoids/whatchamacallits never gained traction. :tongue:

That's basically what I think. It doesn't seem like there's any real basis for Pluto's status other than it being the last time people got excited about finding an object beyond the orbit of Neptune. Now we know there are tons of them.

It seems to me like the reason Pluto is considered more significant is just because it was so widely known and used to be considered a planet. Any decent-sized object in the Kuiper belt should logically be just as relevant to a chart reading as Pluto is.
u mean reinstated??? cause pluto already got demoted

Oh, it was demoted in Astronomy. It wasn't demoted in Astrology, though. I'm trying to gather information on why Astrology didn't follow suit in that regard. It seems like the 8 remaining planets really are much more significant/influential bodies.

With Astrology, the two schools of thought are that you either only include Mercury through Saturn and stop there, or else you include Uranus through Pluto as well. I've never seen anyone argue in favor of a position between those two.

Pluto is treated as though it's equal to Neptune and Uranus, but it really isn't. We're talking about a hunk of rock smaller than the moon that's insanely far away... compared with two gas giants that are only rivaled in size by Jupiter and Saturn. I mean, you can see Uranus from Earth with the naked eye, and Neptune only requires binoculars or a sensitive camera. Pluto requires a pretty good telescope. It has almost no light and very little mass. I don't see how much of its energy could be reaching Earth.
 
Last edited:

tikana

Well-known member
athenian200,there had been a talk about demotion of pluto in astrology
some reserve to use mars ..
i am quite offended by that .. *bursts in tears* Leave Pluto as is.. it is a planet for god sake LOL
 

Bunraku

Well-known member
... I mean, you can see Uranus from Earth with the naked eye, and Neptune only requires binoculars or a sensitive camera. Pluto requires a pretty good telescope. It has almost no light and very little mass. I don't see how much of its energy could be reaching Earth.

This is under the assumption that more size = more power. Where did this assumption come from anyways?

You'd have to analyze Pluto from a metaphysical viewpoint. :cool:
 

athenian200

Well-known member
This is under the assumption that more size = more power. Where did this assumption come from anyways?

Well, the Sun is considered the most powerful influence... and it's also the biggest and brightest object. The moon is also fairly bright and close to Earth.

It's not just a matter of size, it's also the distance and light output. Stars produce enough light to be seen from far away.

Also, Jupiter and Saturn are each considered the "greater benefic" and the "greater malefic." They're the two largest planets, and have a pretty significant impact.

The smaller planets are closer to the Earth and Sun, and thus can have greater influence despite being smaller.

It's really the combination of three factors that makes me disinclined to believe that Pluto affects the Earth significantly:

1. Close to zero visible light output.
2. Small size.
3. It's extremely far away, an unimaginably vast distance.
You'd have to analyze Pluto from a metaphysical viewpoint. :cool:
Metaphysical? Not sure I understand. Could you give me an example of that?

If you're talking about the myth of the Roman God Pluto, then I'm sure that has a significant influence on people's psyches. In fact, that mythology probably has more impact than Pluto as a physical object does on our world.
 

Zarathu

Account Closed
I think earth should be demoted. Only planets like Saturn and Jupiter should be considered real planets. I'm also demoting small dogs to rodent status.

Seriously, Astrology has little to do with astronomy.
 

Love2Know

Well-known member
I think earth should be demoted. Only planets like Saturn and Jupiter should be considered real planets. I'm also demoting small dogs to rodent status.

Seriously, Astrology has little to do with astronomy.

Small dogs are gloriously adorable.
about pluto
http://astrology.about.com/od/advancedastrology/p/Pluto.htm

#BringBackPlutoAsAPlanet2014
- giant generational...influence Pluto travels from 0 to 3 mins a day and takes around 248 years to go through all 12 signs, staying in each sign for about 14-30 years
- interesting to relate to sociological and global happenings
- how we think as a collective and relate it to what is going on in the world
- look at the house pluto is in in your own chart and the aspects pluto creates as well
 
Last edited:
Top