91
Michael, on why astrology is not a science or pseudo science-- and unlikely to become a science.
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8963

A lot of the modern astrology you've mentioned is what I call the poetics of astrology. Or maybe the imagery of astrology. It tells a nice story. The language evokes mental pictures and allusions. A lot of it is based on theosophy. reaching astrology by way of Dane Rudhyar.

But darned if I know how one would read a chart that way. For example, when the querent asks, why doesn't that man who seems so fascinated by her in their Internet exchanges actually want to meet her in person. Why is the horoscope native ("owner" in German") still unemployed and when is he going to get a new job?

Let alone, how any of this higher-octave, new-domicile material would work in horary astrology.

With mythology-- and I mean the ancient authors in translation, or actual scholarship-- at least I can get at key words and meanings that explain something about a planet's qualities. Planet Venus rules romantic and sexual relationships, for example, because we can point to all kinds of myths where this was the goddess Venus's nature.

On the warrior vs. lover nature of Venus anciently, it took star-gazers a long time to recognize that the same planet appeared as the morning and evening star.

In Hindu (jyotish) astrology the planet Venus is represented by a male god, Shukra.

The god Pluto was preceded by the Sumerian Erishkegal and Greek Hekate, both female. In Malta archaeological evidence points to the goddess who was both "womb and tomb."

So it might be worthwhile expanding our understandings of the planetary gods.

92
Just recently, I happened to refind an interesting book written by Dane Rudhyar, called The Sun Is Also a Star. Even though it has been in my possession for years, I never looked at it much so far. To my delight, in it I found a passage that touches on several of the topics that have been raised here. Citing p. 66 f., with some comments of my own added in between:
The fact that the Crucifixion and its aftermath, the three days "descent to hell" are celebrated at the verbal equinox is deeply significant; for that moment of the year's cycle refers, at least symbolically, to the process of germination; and germination is the crucifixion of the seed. Out of the torn seed, the first thing to emerge is the rootlet, and this rootlet "descends" into the humus, produce of the decay of leaves and all that once had been living. The dark soil is the hell of the life-sphere, but it is also the foundation of all living processes - the "dark mother" which is the past, who will be redeemed as her decayed materials are drawn upward toward air and light within the new life and eventually reach the flower state.
Here Rudhyar reminds us that, since the growth of a plant starts with germination, it is in fact a process that is not only directed upwards towards the Sun and the light, but also downwards, deeper into the dark "underworld" of the soil. Lo and behold, Pluto says hello again. :)
Germination is a Plutonian process, and this is why in astrology Pluto should "rule" Aries, the vernal equinox sign of the zodiac, symbol of the creative impulse which initiates all new life-processes.
In the next few sentences, Rudhyar relativizes the applicability of the traditional rulership concept to the trans-Saturnians (a nod to Waybread :D), and then goes on:
All that can be said is that in the new galactic approach to the planets and to the zodiac - the tropical zodiac which is the background on which we plot the cyclically changing relationship of the Sun to the Earth - the signs following Capricorn (the apex of Saturn's power) correspond to the basic phases in the process of transformation symbolized by Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. Thus Uranus is associated with Aquarius, Neptune with Pisces, Pluto with Aries, and an assumed Proserpine with Taurus.
Significantly, Rudhyar sees the series of the planets and of the signs that (in his view) correspond with them, respectively, as representative of the subsequent stages of an unfolding process leading from the "saturnine" personality to the expanded consciousness of "enlightenement." He specifically mentions Proserpina (:D) as a hypothetical planet that corresponds with Taurus - not that far removed conceptually from Sevin's Transpluto aka vegetation god Bacchus which I am exploring.
Pluto however is the challenger of all that Mars represents in the Sun-to-Saturn system. Pluto's impersonality challenges Mars' essentially personal-emotional character. The challenges occur in Scorpio as well as in Aries, just as Neptune's challenge to Jupiter occurs in Pisces (symbol of the last moment of a cultural cycle) as well as in Sagittarius (which represents the achievement by a culture of its fundamental philosophical and legal character); and Uranus challenges Saturn in Capricorn as well as in Aquarius, for the moment the day begins to lengthen, the power of Saturn is doomed, even at the very apex of its power.
I was particularly intrigued by this statement as it reflects my own line of thought that, perhaps, we should assign "double rulerships" to the outers, just like the classical planets have always inhabited two domiciles each.

In regards to the pairing of Uranus with Capricorn, I once made a first attempt here:

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic ... &start=240
(see post on the bottom of the page)
_________________

Visit my blog:
https://michaelsternbach.wordpress.com/

93
That's great, Michael.

But how would you read a horoscope for someone using that stuff?

I read charts for people on Astrodienst and Astrologers Community. Very rarely have I found any querents who are interested in esoteric or evolutionary astrology solutions to their relationship or financial problems.

Let's get real?

If what one is after is a life philosophy or spiritual pathway, I think we can do so much better than the esoteric astrologers. The great philosophers on ordinary lives like Epicurus, or the great world religions, are so much deeper and more thoughtful than the kind of "cotton candy for the soul" that passes for theosophy or evolutionary astrology.

Astrology is my passion but, to be brutally honest, it has not attracted the best minds. (Present company excepted.)

95
waybread wrote:
Michael Sternbach wrote:
It depends on how you like to model your astrology. To me, modern astrology is a straightforward extension of traditional astrology. It is subject to the same principles. Thus, it is only logical to assume that the outers have their domiciles and exaltations too.
Traditional astrology's essential dignities went considerably beyond domiciles, exaltations, detriments and falls. The modern outers don't fit well into terms, faces, or triplicities
This is true as far as it goes. Terms, faces, and triplicities are mostly based on the classical system with its seven planets. As you surely know, each of these methods comes in different variations, though, and it is conceivable that new ones could be devised that would meaningfully include the outers.

By contrast, the classical exaltation scheme *calls for* extension, IMO, because as we know it, it looks kind of unfinished.

Image


The same holds true for the domicile scheme if we consider the version Firmicus Maternus passed down to us in form of his famous Thema Mundi.

Image


Note that the outers fit right into it, if we assign them to Aquarius, Pisces, and Aries (and to Taurus and Gemini by way of extension to include the hypothetical trans-Plutonian planets).

Surely many questions remain yet to be answered from a traditional perspective, for instance, what sect, gender, Aristotelian qualities should be attributed to the outers. For now, I consider Uranus to be diurnal, male and dry/hot (thus kind of fiery), while I look at Neptune as diurnal, female and wet/cold (therefor watery) - but with Pluto, things get kinda shady. He is most likely nocturnal, but his elemental makeup is a question yet unanswered to me, and the same goes for his gender - maybe he is actually hermaphroditic? :???:
Then what would you actually do with the Big Four essential dignities, once you've identified them? How would you read a nativity differently, for example?
I do have a working working hypothesis (:lol:) for aforementioned two essential dignities at least. I don't read a nativity differently (uhm, different from what?), including them. I simply consider further exaltations/falls and domiciles/detriments for adding Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, plus hypothetical/experimental Bacchus to the picture.
It is more of an approach to understanding the basic nature of the trans-Saturnian planets. The underlying idea being that the order of the outer planets reflects and repeats the inner series, with the more personality-centered forces of the latter turned universal.
OK, but again, how would you read a nativity differently, having determined that Planet A is a "higher octave" of planet B? Most people who want their charts read ask about very basic, normal problems, like "Why am I 40 and still single?"

I wrote:
The modern outers have historically accompanied a lot of misfortunes, so I don't see them as necessarily at a higher level of consciousness. (Cf. Neptune and drug addiction.)
Not necessarily. In fact, they can be at a lower level in the sense that they represent instinctive, subconscious and collective psychological forces that the ego has little control over.

However, moving beyond the boundaries of the conscious personality, the extremes do touch. There's a thin line between genius and madness. The mystic and the drug addict are dwelling in the same waters, only the former is swimming, the latter is drowning. And so forth.
OK, but how helpful is this in responding to horoscope questions? Typical ones are: "When is my money going to work out?" "Please explain the synastry between me and my boyfriend." "Why is my sister such a horrible person?"
In my experience, those clients with prominent trans-Saturnians in their charts are exactly those who understand what the hell I am talking about when I bring up concepts like the intuitive mind, inner knowledge, mystical union, universal love (agape), various borderline experiences etc.

Some such individuals I have met via forums frequented by 'spiritual seekers', and many more of those "close encounters of the third kind" date back to the days when I was counselling the patients of a psychotherapeutic practice (in context with a centre for alternative therapies I co-founded together with a psychiatrist in the 90's).

For instance, when dealing with a strongly Neptunian individual - overly empathic with people around him and trying to cover up his otherwise uncontrollable sensitivity by indulging in alcohol - the concept of Neptune as a higher octave of Venus may come in handy to gain (and share) a new perspective on what is going on.

Comes to mind the case of a young man sent to me by an associated doctor. He was HIV-positive and had an impressive history of drug abuse. For some reason, his chart reminded me of the myth of Pluto and Proserpina, so I mentioned it. To my delight, he connected to my words right away, started asking questions about it and found the story personally meaningful to him.

But with some others, I had to translate my insights into terms they could more easily grasp, to be sure. We need to pick up people where they are!
In my view, the domicile scheme is astrology's rational underpinning. It used to have a logically deducible structure before. Along those lines, it would be only logical to assign Pluto to Aries (as you say).

Without a stringent theoretical foundation, astrology cannot hope to regain its status as a science.
Astrology is never going to regain its status as a science. Science today is far beyond any level of rigor we can hope to achieve. Maybe astrology could be respected as one of the humanities, similar to history or literature.
Mostly as a form of psychology, perhaps. Also, there might be new types of science developing that do not conform with the one-sidedly positivist paradigm characterizing much of science today. Anthroposophy is a step in the right direction.
Also, if Pluto's relationship to Aries has hitherto been neglected, reestablishing it would obviously have implications for the understanding of this planet and for the practice of astrology overall.
Well, good luck with that. There is still the problem of Pluto working find as the modern ruler of Scorpio.
The article I linked in my OP, written by fellow Skyscript member Philip M. Graves, is a fascinating discussion of Pluto's zodiacal assignment mostly before his actual discovery in 1930. For (nothwithstanding the popular story that Pluto got his name from an eleven-year old girl, with reference to Mickey Mouse's dog) he had been predicted and correctly named by a surprising number of astrologers years ahead of his first observation.

While Pluto's assignments to Scorpio and Aries, respectively, were quite evenly distributed initially, the scales rather quickly tipped in favour of the former after his discovery. I remember having heard that his official nomination as the Lord of Scorpio was the result of a poll in the astrological community, but I would have to verify that.
Thanks, I'll go back and look for it.
Did you? :)
That would be notable indeed! According to that, it would have been Babylonian planetary gods that partially inspired the Greeks for their own deities, which they placed onto the planets in turn...

The only problem with it is that Babylonian gods are quite different from their Greek equivalents, though; for instance, Babylonian Ishtar is also a war goddess, which Greco-Roman Aphrodite/Venus is obviously not.
They don't transfer identically, but a lot of it does transfer. For that matter, Greek astrologers and astronomers still use their names for the planets, and the Greek and Roman ones do not always translate identically, either.
Not exactly, that's right. For that matter, Uranus (Ouranos) was taken out of the Greek pantheon - his Roman name commonly being Caelus. (Then again, anomalies like this should count as normal when dealing with this funky planet.)
Which is something else I find interesting about Eris: the war goddess.
I agree that the astrological observer may factor more heavily, than some 'objectivist astrologers' wish to give them credit for. It could even be that astrology, despite its 'exact' mathematical and astronomical framework, isn't fundamentally different from other methods of divination (Tarot, I-ching etc.) in that respect. (This may be most obvious in the case of Horary.)

However, what is really going on here appears to be multi-layered - and poorly understood.
What is an "objectivist astrologer"? Astrology clearly is a form of divination.
Well, I don't know, but some fellows seem to believe that astrology could qualify as an exact science in the modern sense. The way I see it, it could be formulated in terms of a contemporary natural philosophy. At the same time, it does have the features of a divinatory system, and the subjectivism that comes with that might explain why different practitioners can use various zodiacs, house systems, hypothetical planets etc. and still reach equally valid conclusions.
_________________

Visit my blog:
https://michaelsternbach.wordpress.com/

96
Hi, Michael-- There is a lot in your latest post, so I hope I catch most of it.

I think evolutionary astrologers (and possibly German astrologers, with their culture's love of order??) are dealing with an esthetic or design problem, not a chart interpretation problem, in wanting to assign new sign rulers.
...the classical exaltation scheme *calls for* extension, IMO, because as we know it, it looks kind of unfinished.
I mean, a lot of us are OK with a "messy" or asymmetrical horoscope set of domiciles and dignities. It is what it is. The question is whether assigning a new ruler (or in the case of Pluto, assigning an older modern ruler differently) helps is to a better job of assessing problems that real people actually care about in their real lives.

If your objective is not helping real people with real problems in real time, then your more elegant design solution risks making astrology irrelevant.

Seriously. I read charts for people who ask about how their synastry with their new live-in partner looks, whether her husband is going to jail, or whether she has incurable cancer. Please explain how a more elegant-looking chart would help me to give them more accurate answers.

We've all dealt with the "spiritual seekers," but in my experience there are relatively few of them compared with people with truly pressing practical problems. [A lot of my chart-reading is on the Astrodienst English language boards.] Then I think astrology needs to be more universal than simply targeting a few "trans-personal" souls.

[I am speaking as someone with Pluto conjunct and parallel my moon, Uranus conjunct MC trine sun, and Neptune in the first house, incidentally.]

Further, Liz Greene apparently was able to practice as a consulting psychologist back-in-the-day when no one questioned her degree from a long-defunct L. A. diploma mill. She went on to acquire a credential from a Jungian institute, not from a comprehensive university psychology department. When she finally got a Ph. D. in 2010 from an accredited British university (Bristol) later in life, she got it from the history department, not in psychology. Psychology today is not such a branch of the humanities.

See David Roell's biographical piece at http://www.astroamerica.com/greenebio2.html

This is not to take away from Liz Greene's considerable publication record-- or from your achievements-- but just to say that astrologers often mean something different by "psychology" than licensed psychologists do.

Michael, I realize that the term "science" has a secondary meaning of simply a body of knowledge. But the primary meaning of "science" includes physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy biology, &c, and their integrative fields like molecular biology, geophysics, and biochemistry. Currently these fields operate at a level that the typical astrologer cannot imagine.

If you disbelieve me, please phone up your nearest university and ask for a professor of one of those fields who is willing to give you a departmental tour and explain to you what their research is all about. Take her out to lunch and interview her about how her scientific field operates today.

Maybe you mean social science? Behavioral science? Again, interview a professor in your nearest university department of psychology, economics, sociology, anthropology, or whatever.

This isn't about dismissing "positivism." It is about intellectual rigor. Something that astrology and anthroposophy are not particularly known for.

97
it's been a real pleasure to read this thread but it will never make sense to me to use the Lord of Death, Darkness, and the Underworld as the ruler of a spring sign that stands for new beginnings, action and energy :)

As for the Eris square with Pluto that Waybread mentioned -- with Pluto and Aries linked to sexuality, I've been thinking this might be the indicator of the whole explosion of (trans)gender issues and the debates going together with it.

Also, when Mars joined Eris in the square in August 2020, the huge California fires started -- and the Belarus riots (I actually had been dreading a nuclear war)

98
waybread wrote:Michael, on why astrology is not a science or pseudo science-- and unlikely to become a science.
http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8963
Waybread,

I do have that thread, and especially our discussion there, in vivid memory. :lol:
A lot of the modern astrology you've mentioned is what I call the poetics of astrology. Or maybe the imagery of astrology. It tells a nice story. The language evokes mental pictures and allusions. A lot of it is based on theosophy. reaching astrology by way of Dane Rudhyar.
I don't have any problem with that. In fact, Dane Rudhyar was a major influence on my formation as an astrologer. And theosophy, albeit a bit outdated in some of its views and terminology today, was at least an attempt to recapture Hermetic philosophy in a framework suitable for its time. On top of that, its essentially syncretistic view on various religions and sciences continues to be groundbreaking.
But darned if I know how one would read a chart that way. For example, when the querent asks, why doesn't that man who seems so fascinated by her in their Internet exchanges actually want to meet her in person. Why is the horoscope native ("owner" in German") still unemployed and when is he going to get a new job?

Let alone, how any of this higher-octave, new-domicile material would work in horary astrology.

With mythology-- and I mean the ancient authors in translation, or actual scholarship-- at least I can get at key words and meanings that explain something about a planet's qualities. Planet Venus rules romantic and sexual relationships, for example, because we can point to all kinds of myths where this was the goddess Venus's nature.
I don't see any contradiction between those "different" approaches, though. Mythology with its archetypal language remains one of psychological astrology's foundations in my view as well.
On the warrior vs. lover nature of Venus anciently, it took star-gazers a long time to recognize that the same planet appeared as the morning and evening star.
Are you suggesting that one of these was regarded as being of more of a war like nature?

In fact, Venus was in part associated with war and destruction in Meso-American societies, although it should be considered that there may have been a socio-political background to that.
In Hindu (jyotish) astrology the planet Venus is represented by a male god, Shukra.

The god Pluto was preceded by the Sumerian Erishkegal
Erishkegal was in fact seen as the queen of the underworld[/quote] and sometimes as the abovementioned Nergal's wife - strangely reminiscent of Persephone/Proserpina and Hades/Pluto.
and Greek Hekate, both female. In Malta archaeological evidence points to the goddess who was both "womb and tomb."

So it might be worthwhile expanding our understandings of the planetary gods.


I certainly agree with you on that!
_________________

Visit my blog:
https://michaelsternbach.wordpress.com/

99
waybread wrote:That's great, Michael.

But how would you read a horoscope for someone using that stuff?

I read charts for people on Astrodienst and Astrologers Community. Very rarely have I found any querents who are interested in esoteric or evolutionary astrology solutions to their relationship or financial problems.

Let's get real?

If what one is after is a life philosophy or spiritual pathway, I think we can do so much better than the esoteric astrologers. The great philosophers on ordinary lives like Epicurus, or the great world religions, are so much deeper and more thoughtful than the kind of "cotton candy for the soul" that passes for theosophy or evolutionary astrology.
Why does it have to be one or the other? In order to give your clients something actually useful for dealing better with their daily issues, you do need to throw in what understanding of applicable philosophy you have!

Talking about the great world religions, they traditionally don't teach very much beyond moral codes of behaviour and putting faith in external saviours (talk about "cotton candy for the soul"!) - unless you dig down to their esoteric foundations!

Astrology in my understanding lives and breathes in the greater context of Hermetic philosophy - which I consider uniquely geared towards the needs of modern humanity, as it inherently connects metaphysics with an essentially scientific outlook on the world.
Astrology is my passion but, to be brutally honest, it has not attracted the best minds. (Present company excepted.)
Thank you! However, I will be more than content to consider myself in the company of minds like Johannes Kepler and Giordano Bruno. :lol:
_________________

Visit my blog:
https://michaelsternbach.wordpress.com/

100
waybread wrote:Hi, Michael-- There is a lot in your latest post, so I hope I catch most of it.

I think evolutionary astrologers (and possibly German astrologers, with their culture's love of order??) are dealing with an esthetic or design problem, not a chart interpretation problem, in wanting to assign new sign rulers.
Just for the record, I am not a German (no disrespect towards my German friends intended, of course). Also I don't look at what you call a problem here the same way - simply as a deep inclination towards an old-fashioned harmonious Pythagorean/Platonic outlook on the world. (My strongly emphasized Jupiter in Libra must have a say in this, of course.)
...the classical exaltation scheme *calls for* extension, IMO, because as we know it, it looks kind of unfinished.
I mean, a lot of us are OK with a "messy" or asymmetrical horoscope set of domiciles and dignities. It is what it is. The question is whether assigning a new ruler (or in the case of Pluto, assigning an older modern ruler differently) helps is to a better job of assessing problems that real people actually care about in their real lives.

If your objective is not helping real people with real problems in real time, then your more elegant design solution risks making astrology irrelevant.
You see, in my view, astrology (just like so many other knowledge based fields) needs both basic research and the applied art.

Take Ptolemy for example... We are not even sure that he was a practising astrologer at all! However, the compendium he created - integrating astrology with a comprehensive Aristotelian model of the cosmos - paved the way for so much of the astrological practice to follow!

(As an aside for Anna: I have the asteroid Ptolemy conjunct my Sun, and Aristotle conjunct my Moon. ;))

I can honestly say that I have a foot in both worlds - the theory and the practice. I could state that Pluto must be the Lord of Aries, simply based on abstract astro-logical considerations. However, scientific rigour (my own version thereof alright) demands that I try and support that view with mythological and empirical evidence.

That's why I started this topic. And I won't waste any time and energy further vindicating it. Take it or leave it!
Seriously. I read charts for people who ask about how their synastry with their new live-in partner looks, whether her husband is going to jail, or whether she has incurable cancer. Please explain how a more elegant-looking chart would help me to give them more accurate answers.
Perhaps because your answers might be based on a more complete and accurate body of knowledge then? :???:
We've all dealt with the "spiritual seekers," but in my experience there are relatively few of them compared with people with truly pressing practical problems. [A lot of my chart-reading is on the Astrodienst English language boards.] Then I think astrology needs to be more universal than simply targeting a few "trans-personal" souls.
Now I wonder, did you really attentively read that post of mine you said you are hoping to fully address? I thought I made it clear that, besides "spiritual seekers", I have been counselling lots of people with psychological problems as serious as you can imagine in the past!
[I am speaking as someone with Pluto conjunct and parallel my moon, Uranus conjunct MC trine sun, and Neptune in the first house, incidentally.]
Well noted.
Further, Liz Greene apparently was able to practice as a consulting psychologist back-in-the-day when no one questioned her degree from a long-defunct L. A. diploma mill. She went on to acquire a credential from a Jungian institute, not from a comprehensive university psychology department. When she finally got a Ph. D. in 2010 from an accredited British university (Bristol) later in life, she got it from the history department, not in psychology. Psychology today is not such a branch of the humanities.

See David Roell's biographical piece at http://www.astroamerica.com/greenebio2.html

This is not to take away from Liz Greene's considerable publication record-- or from your achievements-- but just to say that astrologers often mean something different by "psychology" than licensed psychologists do.
Well, I have been dealing with a lot of licensed psychologists, and quite frankly, I was not always impressed. Nor were all of their patients when they came to me. It seems like it takes more than a university degree in order to find resonance with people seeking advice and support with their pressing issues.

And yes, in the holistic therapeutic centre I mentioned, we were all licensed health-care practitioners of various kinds, with an open minded psychiatrist as well as some licensed psychologists on board.

Talking about academic psychology itself, it and astrology can only learn from one another, in my opinion. The Jungians are on the right track, overall.
Michael, I realize that the term "science" has a secondary meaning of simply a body of knowledge. But the primary meaning of "science" includes physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy biology, &c, and their integrative fields like molecular biology, geophysics, and biochemistry. Currently these fields operate at a level that the typical astrologer cannot imagine.
Darn, Waybread! For decades, I must have been filling more book shelves than I could count off the top of my head with specialist books about every single one of the disciplines you mentioned in vain! All of my reading about natural science - pretty much from the day I learned how to read at all - must have completely bypassed me!

Image


That's an image of some undressed piles of my books taken just now, randomly reflecting my widely varied fields of interest. Just to give you an inkling where I come from. ;)
If you disbelieve me, please phone up your nearest university and ask for a professor of one of those fields who is willing to give you a departmental tour and explain to you what their research is all about. Take her out to lunch and interview her about how her scientific field operates today.
As much as I would enjoy the company of a charming and intelligent lady, current pandemic restrictions are making the thing you are suggesting hardly feasible.

Fortunately, it is not entirely necessary, as I have academic scientists among my closest relatives and friends that I am often having rewarding conversations about their respective fields of interest with. :D
Maybe you mean social science? Behavioral science? Again, interview a professor in your nearest university department of psychology, economics, sociology, anthropology, or whatever.

This isn't about dismissing "positivism." It is about intellectual rigor. Something that astrology and anthroposophy are not particularly known for.
Exactly right! And introducing a more rigorous foundation to them is the very reason why I am researching astrology and its related arts/sciences the way I do. A meeting ground, if you will!

If you don't mind, could we go back to talking about mythology now please, dear Professor? :)
Last edited by Michael Sternbach on Fri Dec 31, 2021 6:58 pm, edited 2 times in total.
_________________

Visit my blog:
https://michaelsternbach.wordpress.com/

101
annadeer wrote:it's been a real pleasure to read this thread but it will never make sense to me to use the Lord of Death, Darkness, and the Underworld as the ruler of a spring sign that stands for new beginnings, action and energy :)

As for the Eris square with Pluto that Waybread mentioned -- with Pluto and Aries linked to sexuality, I've been thinking this might be the indicator of the whole explosion of (trans)gender issues and the debates going together with it.

Also, when Mars joined Eris in the square in August 2020, the huge California fires started -- and the Belarus riots (I actually had been dreading a nuclear war)
Hi Anna

Glad to hear that you are enjoying this thread. :)

See, I am not here to impose my views on anyone. Mostly just to expand my own knowledge by taking the input from others into account. If you or anyone else can get something worthwhile out of it, that's great! :D

Michael
_________________

Visit my blog:
https://michaelsternbach.wordpress.com/

102
Michael, I will try to get back to your posts tomorrow.

Let me just say that a problem of a lot of psychological astrology (as with psychoanalysis) is that it started out with medical doctors (Freud, Jung) and practicing psychologists (Greene) who were basically consulting with troubled individuals.

So there is sort of a built in bias to think that anyone seeking a chart reading has some kind of underlying psychological wound in need of a cure.

In contrast, a lot of what we deal with in chart reading does not concern clients who somehow need psychotherapy. They may be unhappy about something, but they do not need to be in therapy. There isn't some kind of pathology or mental health syndrome at the root of their problems.

"Does he love me?" "Are we compatible?" "Will I find my missing dog?" "What is my best career?"

These are common questions that do not require some kind of psychologizing.