skyscript.co.uk
   

home articles forum events
glossary horary quiz consultations links more

Read this before using the forum
Register
FAQ
Search
View memberlist
View/edit your user profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Recent additions:
Can assassinations be prevented? by Elsbeth Ebertin
translated by Jenn Zahrt PhD
A Guide to Interpreting The Great American Eclipse
by Wade Caves
The Astrology of Depression
by Judith Hill
Understanding the mean conjunctions of the Jupiter-Saturn cycle
by Benjamin Dykes
Understanding the zodiac: and why there really ARE 12 signs of the zodiac, not 13
by Deborah Houlding

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Statistical study in astrology
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
KyleP



Joined: 30 Nov 2007
Posts: 5
Location: Michigan

Posted: Mon Sep 01, 2008 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MarkC wrote:

The key question is surely whether the statistical approach to astrology is a worthwhile pursuit or is it doomed from the outset?

Will the empirical approach ever prove astrology or any particular technique of astrology? Or is the whole approach of astrological research ,excluding the astrologer at its heart, philosophically misconceived?


Earlier, I summed up the kind of approach that you're questioning like this: "driven by the idea that some quite predictable or consistent relationship will show itself when looking across many charts to correlate astrological factors with empirical observations." But if this statement leaves out something critical, I would like to improve on it, so let me know what you think.

So as you say, this approach is excluding the astrologer; it also tends to gloss over the particulars of each case by looking for what all the cases have in common. My take on it is that we have to get a better understanding of what we are trying to measure or capture in a chart. This is also a challenge for the astrologer who isn't doing research.

One way I'm pursuing this kind of problem is to compare my intuitive findings (from reading a chart) with the calculations that identify the most unusual features of the chart. Well, this gives a rough idea of it at least.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 4924
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 5:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
But then we frequently have to wonder why such extremely public people like Madonna (Sun in the 12th), David Bowie (Mercury, Mars and Sun in the 12th), Barack Obama (Saturn, the Asc ruler, and Jupiter conjoining in the 12th) and Tony Blair (Venus, Mercury and Sun in the 12th house, also Mars/Jupiter separating from the Ascendant to the 12th house) have such an emphasized 12th house. It's statistical study that shows us that actually itís not unusual at all for people like actors and pop stars to have planets in the 12th house


Hello Sari,

That is an interesting point I agree. I suppose we would need to look at the position of domicile, exaltation and triplicity rulers to try to explain this. It does seem hard to reconcile with a simplistic approach to houses using modern or traditional definitions.

Here is an attempt to explain one such chart by Robert Hand using the example of George Bush.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/rhand.html

Gordon Brown the current British PM is an interesting case study. He has his Sun, Venus, Mars and Jupiter in the 12th. His Sun's domicile , exaltation and triplicity rulers are all in the 12th house with it. His ASC domicile, exaltation and triplicity rulers are also in the 12th house. This man is the living embodiment of the 12th house! In Brown's case his complete lack of comfort in the public role is transparent for all to see.

What a contrast to Tony Blair! He has his Sun's domicile and triplicity ruler , (Venus) in the 11th,while the exaltation ruler is in the 10th house. His ascendant domicile ruler is in the 11th house. The triplicity ruler Saturn is in the 6th. However, its in an extremely close conjunction with the very fortunate fixed star Spica. Saturn is the domicile ruler of his MC, While Venus the triplicity ruler is in the 11th house.

This is all without even looking at aspects. We could layer on far more detail as you know. From a traditional perspective house placements are not something that can be considered in total isolation excluding things like the position of planetary rulers.

That is a fundamental difficulty I have with most astrological research. Astrology works as an art involving the synthesis of its complex parts while most statistical research relies on reductionism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
woodwater



Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Posts: 151
Location: lisbon

Posted: Mon Nov 03, 2008 6:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MarkC wrote:
Quote:
But then we frequently have to wonder why such extremely public people like Madonna (Sun in the 12th), David Bowie (Mercury, Mars and Sun in the 12th), Barack Obama (Saturn, the Asc ruler, and Jupiter conjoining in the 12th) and Tony Blair (Venus, Mercury and Sun in the 12th house, also Mars/Jupiter separating from the Ascendant to the 12th house) have such an emphasized 12th house. It's statistical study that shows us that actually itís not unusual at all for people like actors and pop stars to have planets in the 12th house


Hello Sari,

That is an interesting point I agree. I suppose we would need to look at the position of domicile, exaltation and triplicity rulers to try to explain this. It does seem hard to reconcile with a simplistic approach to houses using modern or traditional definitions.

Here is an attempt to explain one such chart by Robert Hand using the example of George Bush.

http://www.skyscript.co.uk/rhand.html

Gordon Brown the current British PM is an interesting case study. He has his Sun, Venus, Mars and Jupiter in the 12th. His Sun's domicile , exaltation and triplicity rulers are all in the 12th house with it. His ASC domicile, exaltation and triplicity rulers are also in the 12th house. This man is the living embodiment of the 12th house! In Brown's case his complete lack of comfort in the public role is transparent for all to see.

What a contrast to Tony Blair! He has his Sun's domicile and triplicity ruler , (Venus) in the 11th,while the exaltation ruler is in the 10th house. His ascendant domicile ruler is in the 11th house. The triplicity ruler Saturn is in the 6th. However, its in an extremely close conjunction with the very fortunate fixed star Spica. Saturn is the domicile ruler of his MC, While Venus the triplicity ruler is in the 11th house.

This is all without even looking at aspects. We could layer on far more detail as you know. From a traditional perspective house placements are not something that can be considered in total isolation excluding things like the position of planetary rulers.

That is a fundamental difficulty I have with most astrological research. Astrology works as an art involving the synthesis of its complex parts while most statistical research relies on reductionism.

not to mention GW Bush and Cavaco Silva,former premier of portugal and now president, both with Sun in 12
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Philosophy & Science All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

       
Contact Deborah Houlding  | terms and conditions  
All rights on all text and images reserved. Reproduction by any means is not permitted without the express
agreement of Deborah Houlding or in the case of articles by guest astrologers, the copyright owner indictated