Is Pluto an astrological planet?

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
pluto-names.jpg
 

CapAquaPis

Well-known member
Pluto stays in its ruling sign Scorpio for 9 years (the shortest stay in a sign), but it's in the opposite sign Taurus for 30, would it be the co-ruler of Taurus?
 

Dubyadude1986

Well-known member
Traditionally, I believe it would be the co-ruler of Scorpio. We Moderners consider it the co-ruler of Mars a lot of times.

Thanks for asking a real question.. :love:
 

greybeard

Well-known member
Astrology is an artifact of man's mind. It is not "real" of itself.

We take selected facts from the sky and arbitrarily (based on the facts as we understand them) assign symbolic meanings to them. Astrology is a system of thought.

As an astrologer I am free to use or not to include Pluto in my tool kit. It makes no difference what some astronomer in Prague says about Pluto.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Traditionally, I believe it would be the co-ruler of Scorpio.

We Moderners consider it the co-ruler of Mars a lot of times.
Traditionally the outers are completely irrelevant :smile:

To explain further, there are a few philosophical issues that arise when using the outer planets. It's true that many more classically oriented astrologers use them, but they tend to regard them as fainter fixed stars, so their importance and abilities tend to be scaled back or ignored unless they are on an angle or conjunct some important planet.

Dirius is correct in noting that the fact the outers carry no visible light is a major detriment to their inclusion into the classical framework. Astrology evolved alongside ancient optical theories and these theories still permeate astrological discourse to this day. Planets in aspect are said to "see" or "regard" one another and their light is often considered a transmitter of their influence.

The word "planet" originally evolved from the Greek "planetes aster", or "wandering star" and referred to the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter, Mars, and Saturn whose motion could be detected against the backdrop of fixed stars that are stable in their relative distance from one another, but all move together as one large group. Today we have redefined what a planet is to serve our own categorical needs. There's nothing wrong with that, but it's important to remember that we, as astrologers, have organizational needs that are different from those of astronomy.

Another issue with the outer planets in general is that they lack much of the tools that the classical planets have. This isn't just referring to dignities (though that is a large part of it), but they also lack nature, sect, gender, years, winds, orbs, signatures, etc. This may all seem superfluous or unnecessary, but its significance really cannot be overstated. Without these associations, the outer planets are essentially blank orbs without instruction or meaning.

Finally, there is the issue with the meanings contemporary astrologers have given to them.

Mostly they

either 1) don't make sense within their own context

or 2) are already taken by another planet.

About the first, a lot of the meanings of the planets have been assigned to them based on mythological interpretations or perceived mundane events happening around the time of their discovery. A lot of the mythological meanings are cherry picked and often nonsensical, like Uranus ruling rebellion, but in the myth Ouranos is the tyrannical dictator, not the freedom fighter. The mundane events are definitely cherry picked as there are many important events happening around the world at any given time. Pluto was discovered in 1930 and has taken on an association with nuclear force, but when I hear 1930s I think Great Depression and I've never heard anyone associate Pluto with financial ruination.About the second,

each of the outer planets have significations that are

more or less plucked from the classical planets.

Uranus's reported instability and recklessness can be found in Mercury and Mars.

Neptune's illusions and mysticism can be found in the Moon.

Pluto's transformation and general heavy-handedness are the domains of Mercury and Saturn.


Not only does this create strange, cross-breed planets, but it makes the classical planets into flat characters when their meanings and significations are much more multifaceted in the tradition.

MODERN ASTROLOGY DIGNITIES AND DEBILITIES :smile:
http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=67385
Yes Paul correctly understood my perspective:

no, I do NOT consider Neptune, Uranus or Pluto to be dispositors ("rulers") of any sign
-but yes I do consider them to be affinitive to certain signs and dissonant with other signs:

for me, if X planet is in, say, Aquarius, then I consider SATURN to be dispositor of that planet,
PLUS I consider Uranus to have a relationship to that planet as well
(because of the affinity of Uranus with Aquarius),
but NOT at the same level (the level of dispositorship) that Saturn has.
Oh, I just figured since they didn't reflect light...
which I'm sure that Pluto does
but we just can't see it from here.
The following quote has bolded comments
with reference to reflection of light
:smile:

source: ASTROLOGY AS SCIENCE http://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=65450&highlight=science

There are Sumerian texts from 7,000 years ago (circa 5,000 BCE) that talk about Planets ensnaring things in their "nets" and casting light and casting rays.

What does that mean? It means they were infinitely more intelligent than we are....this is the 21st Century, you have public education systems in nearly every State on Earth, and yet the vast majority of people don't even know that the formula for the Force of Gravity is...

F(g) = M1 * M2 / d^2

How would you explain Gravity to a child that is 4 years old?

"You know how you dip your net into the water to catch goldfish or tadpoles?"

"Yeah."

"Well, Gravity is just like your net, only you can't see Gravity."


It isn't until the late 1950s that our so-called "advanced civilization" figures out there really is a "net" and they call that "net" a "Gravity-well."

And so for science fiction shows for the next 20 years or so -- like the Original Star Trek -- you hear them saying things like: "Captain, we're going to get caught in the Planet's Gravity-well."

If you get stuck in Earth's Gravity-well, you need to be moving at a speed of 17,500 Miles Per Hour to escape the net...and no, I don't know what that is in Kilometers Per Hour (and don't care).

In the Arabic, Farsi, and Latin texts, you see the phrase "[Saturn]...hurling its rays at...."

That's real....it really happens....and that is science.

In reality, the Sun is the only celestial body that actually casts light;

the Moon and Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn reflect light...

....that's why we can see them.

Light is electromagnetic radiation.


In the middle of the electromagnetic radiation band are the colors....to the right of the blues, you have violet, then ultra-violet (UV), then X-Rays, then Gamma Rays.

To the left of the electromagnetic radiation spectrum, you have your yellows, oranges, reds and then infrared (IR), microwaves, radar, VHF/UHF, short wave radio, AM and FM radio bands.

Your eyes have evolved to allow you to see select frequencies in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum which are the colors.

An object absorbs frequencies of electromagnetic radiation, but reflects certain frequencies back at you, and that is what you are seeing....the reflected frequencies -- the color --- the specific wavelengths in the electromagnetic radiation band.

Asteroids do not reflect light,
therefore, logically, rationally, scientifically,
asteroids have no impact or affect on you.
Likewise, the Outer Planets -- Uranus, Neptune and Pluto do not reflect light,
and they have no affect on you individually
and there is no possible way using math or science to justify that they do.



In addition to reflecting light, the Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn also hurl rays
(although the Sun really does cast Ultra-Violet Rays, X-Rays and Gamma Rays).

Space is not "empty."
Space is filled with particles -- electromagnetic radiation -- from the Sun.



As the Planets move through Space, their mass, their orbital velocity (speed)
and their exact chemical/elemental make-up
creates something called the magnetosphere.

The magnetosphere reflects (some but not all) electromagnetic radiation away from it.



The magnetosphere on each of the Planets is "tuned"
to attenuate certain frequencies in the electromagnetic radiation spectrum.
The Earth's magnetosphere does a great job of screening out Gamma rays,
a decent job of screening out X-Rays,
a mediocre job of screening out UV rays
and then a really bad job of screening out everything from the colors through microwave, radar and the radio bands.




But, then....we already knew that, didn't we?


If the Earth's magnetosphere filtered out electromagnet frequencies in the color band,
then we wouldn't see anything outside of Earth,
and if it screened out frequencies in the radio band,
we would not be able to communicate with our satellites and probes.

Anyway, the magnetospheres of the Planets reflect certain frequencies at certain rates to Earth....

...and that is scientific fact, not speculation.



Since the advent of radio in the early 20th Century,
it has been known that radio are affected by other forms of electromagnetic radiation.
The primary cause is ionized particles in the Earth's stratosphere and mesosphere.
The region in the stratosphere and mesosphere that is heavily ionized is known as the "ionosphere."

These ionized particles severely degrade the performance of microwave, radar, VHF, UHF, Short Wave and AM radio signals,
and diminish the performance of FM radio signals.


This degrading of performance caused a lot of angst in the US Army, Air Force and Navy,
and also with companies involved in radio communications, like Motorola.

It was noted that certain alignments of Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn
could either neutralize the effects of the ionosphere, or amplify the effects.
Scientific studies, published in peer-reviewed scientific and engineering journals
showed that Planets in sextile marginally improve radio performance;
in trine they strongly improve performance;
in square they strongly hamper performance,
and in opposition they severely impede performance;
and that Planets in conjunction could harm or help.


What is the Doctrine of Aspects in Traditional Astrology?

Sextiles indicate weak friendship
Trines show strong friendship
Squares show enmity
Oppositions conflict
Conjunctions can be helpful or harmful

Well, there you go....scientific proof that people knew more about the world around them 7,000 years ago than they do now.

Anyway, asteroids do not have sufficient mass and/or speed to generate magnetopheres,
which is the other reason we ignore them,
and while Uranus and Pluto generate magnetospheres
(no verification yet on whether Pluto does),
they are nothing like the size of magnetospheres of Jupiter and Saturn,
and their vast distance from Earth precludes the possibility that the Outer Planets can affect individuals...

...F(g) = M1 * M2 / d^2

Good luck with that.


.....So, there you go.

 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
I believe Pluto has a lot of astrological powers and is useful in astrology, with the inclusion of Eris, Ceres, Vesta, Juno, Lilith and Pallas dubbed as "dwarf planets". Our star the Sun and Earth's natural satellite the Moon are highly useful in astrology, since our astrological or natal sign identity is from the Sun. The north, south and true nodes perform a role in astrology, which happen to not be planets or celestial bodies. Pluto is in fact a bi-nary system with Chiron as its largest satellite, but I don't recommend the adaptation of Chiron unless you're into the reformist astrological version of a "new" 13th sign Ophiuchus (or 14th with Orion) where the ecliptic does cross. And Pluto as an astrological "planet" rules Aries and Scorpio along side with Mars, and these planets much like the signs symbolize war, death, masculinity (or in Scorpio's case sexuality), misery and aggression. To leave out Pluto and suggest it's all Mars, then we reconsider the idea of any possible effect of "dwarf planets".

Dirius comments :smile:
The problem to us is that, in the general view of astrology, many of the things represented by the modern Pluto, are incompatible with most of the traditional teachings.

1) First of all, is what we consider the "aberrations", such as pluto ruling Scorpio (instead of Mars), or ruling sex, death, and the many more things that have been claimed to it. Like we've said in some posts, most of the attributes linked to pluto are borrowed (rather stolen) from other planets; mainly from Mars and Saturn. When we look at the many things pluto represents to modernists, we see it as a weird mix of the other planets.

2) Second, is the way this aberrations are presented to us. No reasoning or explanation behind them. It is "just because". No one explains why pluto does any of these things. No one gives evidence but saying stuff like:"pluto transiting your 2nd house, that is why you have money problems".

3) Third, is the interchangable nature and the many more significations that pluto recieves. Some go from treating pluto as an extreme malefic (associated with violence) or as a good benefic (positive and idealistic changes). It is as if authors on the subject apply anything that crosses their minds into pluto. Seems rather odd that the planet can be both good or bad, and mostly at the authors will. If someone needs to explain something good they use pluto, something bad, they use pluto too. It seems to me that pluto is rather used as a tool to explain things that don't seem to fit into modern astrology.

4) Fourth, as we said many times: the 7 classical planets explain everything. Pluto really adds nothing new. So why use something that can't give us more info?

5) Fifth and final, pluto doesn't reflect light, can't be seen with the naked eye. It is a small asteroid, with many more asteroids like him orbiting the sun. If you are going to use pluto, why not use Europa (jupiter's moon)?
We covered this in the first 3 pages so I won't go much into detail with it.

But pretty much, to us, pluto seems like a perfect solution for ignoring all the other stuff that needs to be accounted for. It seems like an easy solution for modern astrology to explain things that are complicated to explain.
 

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
Why aren't you protesting Uranus' existence as well?
I've done extensive research on the exact co-ordinates of my abode.

Get this, ancient sumerian texts have confirmed that there is an intense power source which corresponds exactly to the ground underneath my fridge!!!!

Further, when people come to my house, they feel the force or something. One commenter described it like this, "CT, you're house has some cosmic tier vibes man, you should like totally blast off to outer space with this sweet house as a space ship."

My friend, had a point and I procure some mushrooms and dmt from the local psychonaut Dr. Rev. Buzz Licker MD PhD and he told me the correct proportions to propel into hyper space.

What does this have to do with astrology you ask? I'm not sure myself but I know that I put my house in the charts that I read and that it works for me
.
https://www.astrologyweekly.com/forum/showthread.php?t=94010&highlight=astrological :smile:
 
Top