posted October 25, 2008 06:45 PM         

I said you and AquaScorp should get together! It's on the last page.

posted October 25, 2008 06:46 PM         

lol

posted October 25, 2008 06:49 PM         

It's the Capricorn caution (My Moon/Mars)

posted October 27, 2008 12:59 PM         

It seems that today people would prefer to make up their own methods that they immediately understand rather than actually study methods handed down to us from some 1900 years ago to make sense of them. That's too difficult.

Also, my youth has nothing to do with my lack of understanding of Chiron. I understand perfectly that Chiron simply lacks. I had an excellent childhood, regardless of what Chiron in the Fourth in Cancer is supposed to signify.

posted October 27, 2008 02:47 PM         

while it is perfectly possible to leave chiron and the nodes out and get a good reading, and i do understand that we are now coming across so many heavenly bodies no one can include them all, i find that both have a definite impact on charts that isn't well explained without them. that said, there are always ways of rationalizing facts with a chart - have you had the experience of doing a reading that worked very well and then finding you got the birthtime wrong? the new reading tends to work too...some would say this disproves astrology altogether. i say it proves the ability of the human mind to rationalize pretty much anything. what you see is what you get...

i don't mean to put you down for youth. i started with astrology when i was 16. in those days chiron was not yet discovered. so i was here studying astrology when people started talking about chiron and i have been using it in charts for 20 years. i have watched its transits. i am currently experiencing it opposite my sun and inconj my venus and trying to decide for myself whether the magi stuff has any validity for me...

i don't consider myself to be an astrologer, though people come to me with questions and charts all the time. i am a slow learner partly because i am super cautious about accepting theory as fact!(merc conj sat in virgo!)but i consider myself a learner..

also - the nodes connection with past and current lives is not a theosophist idea, but an idea the theosophists copied from the ancient eastern religions..

time may prove you right but till then i will agree to disagree and hope you can do the same! XX

posted October 27, 2008 03:40 PM         

It is because we have come across some odd millions of heavenly bodies that we must continue to be picky about what we do and don't use in astrology, otherwise we simply overwhelm ourselves with too much fluff that we lose sight of what the reading was actually about. I have no problem with using new bodies in astrology, but they must be used correctly and they must be used for the right reasons, not because some author told us so or because we rationalize it as necessary in a chart when in reality it never was.

The theosophists were great a copying things, weren't they? Thank you, though for the information concerning the Nodes. I'm assuming you mean it comes from Vedic astrology, which is a system I have very little knowledge in, however, it's still silly to try and cross different astrological traditions with one another. They are what they are for entirely different reasons. So, it's impossible to single out parts of it to be adopted while rejecting the majority.

posted October 28, 2008 01:53 PM         

chiron is not however just another asteroid, it has shape and orbit and in my experience, a definite effect...

posted October 28, 2008 02:55 PM         

quote:

---

but all those "extra" bodies do have their place when looking for specifics.

---

A friend of mine made a point similar to this as well, I'm not sure if I agree or not. I suppose it could work out right, but I'm unamused by the concept of "some things work some of the time".

quote:

---

chiron is not however just another asteroid, it has shape and orbit and in my experience, a definite effect...

---

All asteroids have a shape and orbit, so you've gone and made Chiron an individual with the attributes it shares with everything else. That's not a good way to differentiate, and still leaves open the gate for everything else in the solar system to be used under similar arguments. "It has a shape, and it orbits something" would be the rallying cry of everything.

quote:

---

as someone born with pluto smack on my sun, uranus in evidence everywhere and neptune sq mars, i have to say that those outer planets certainly pack a wallop.

---

posted October 28, 2008 05:45 PM         

I think the outter planets *do* rule their specific signs. Pisceans are much more suited to Neptune, than the traditional ruler - Jupiter.

Also, when you mention planets/asteroids and the order in which they were discovered and named - I don't think the time line is highly significant, because we (humans) are responsible for naming *all* of the planets (based on the names of ancient Roman gods)

:edit:

quote:

---

You don't call on Uranus to handle your mundane affairs

---

posted October 28, 2008 08:44 PM         

quote:

---

I'm not sure about that. Neptune is pretty personal to me. It's square my Sun and conjunct my Mars.

---

Yes, thank you for proving my point. Perhaps I didn't state it, but what I was getting at is that that Outers aren't personal until they make themselves personal through aspectual contact or house placement. Uranus in the Twelfth or whatever isn't going to do much for you unless he's got some kind of relationship with some other planet in your chart, whereas Mars in the Twelfth (regardless of aspectual contact) would always be personal.

quote:

---

I think the outter planets *do* rule their specific signs. Pisceans are much more suited to Neptune, than the traditional ruler - Jupiter.

---

Yeah, but that's only because you don't know the reasons why the planets were said to rule the Signs they rule. The Outer planets can't rule Sign, it just doesn't work out, regardless of how much better you think Neptune is for Pisces.

quote:

---

Also, when you mention planets/asteroids and the order in which they were discovered and named - I don't think the time line is highly significant, because we (humans) are responsible for naming *all* of the planets (based on the names of ancient Roman gods)

---

I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here, can you clarify? What I got out of it is that what we name a planet has nothing to do with significations of the planet, is that right or am I off?

quote:

---

No, but I call on Neptune to handle my mundane affairs lol Mars is a very mundane - every day action, planet.. and it's also the ruler of my Sun.

---

posted October 28, 2008 11:43 PM         

About the names of planets. I am personally not convinced that a planet has a certain meaning before it is given a certain name.

As an example, from wikipedia, on Neptune:

quote:

---

Naming

Shortly after its discovery, Neptune was referred to simply as "the planet exterior to Uranus" or as "Le Verrier's planet". The first suggestion for a name came from Galle, who proposed the name Janus. In England, Challis put forward the name Oceanus.[28]

Claiming the right to name his discovery, Le Verrier quickly proposed the name Neptune for this new planet, while falsely stating that this had been officially approved by the French Bureau des Longitudes.[29] In October, he sought to name the planet Le Verrier, after himself, and he was patriotically supported in this by the observatory director, François Arago. However, this suggestion met with stiff resistance outside France.[30] French almanacs quickly reintroduced the name Herschel for Uranus, after that planet's discoverer Sir William Herschel, and Leverrier for the new planet.[31]

Struve came out in favour of the name Neptune on December 29, 1846, to the Saint Petersburg Academy of Sciences.[32] Soon Neptune became the internationally accepted name. In Roman mythology, Neptune was the god of the sea, identified with the Greek Poseidon. The demand for a mythological name seemed to be in keeping with the nomenclature of the other planets, all of which, except for Uranus and Earth, were named for Roman gods.

---

Sometimes this strikes me as the question about "what came first, the chicken or the egg?" Was there a *real* god named "Neptune" before the Romans decided to believe in him?
Did the name mean anything back in say, Egyptian times? Would *the planet* itself mean what it means for us today prior to being discovered and named "Neptune"? Probably not.

If They decided to name the planet "Chiron" instead, we may be stuck with a very different vibe.

posted October 28, 2008 11:50 PM         

quote:

---

Urbain Jean Joseph Le Verrier (March 11, 1811 – September 23, 1877) was a French mathematician who specialized in celestial mechanics and is best known for his part in the discovery of Neptune.

---

posted October 29, 2008 12:11 AM         

quote:

---

Did the name mean anything back in say, Egyptian times? Would *the planet* itself mean what it means for us today prior to being discovered and named "Neptune"? Probably not.

If They decided to name the planet "Chiron" instead, we may be stuck with a very different vibe.

---

You've offered the single greatest attack against modern astrological thought and philosophy. You seem to forget that the traditional seven planets were named after being observed for a long time. The red star in the sky (the color of blood and heated iron), became the seat of the war god (be he Nergal or Mars) after he was observed to be this color and figure prominently in times of war. You seem to also be under the impression that astrology started in Greece and Rome, it didn't.

I agree though, I don't think it's a name that makes a planet. Naming a planet Neptune and expecting it to be related to similar things as the god with the name is ridiculous, I much prefer the traditional method which was to observe it for some time and then give it a name that matches its characteristics, not just something that sounds good. Also, you'll find a lot of things that separate the planet from the god, for instance, the god Neptune was not psychic, yet the planet is still associated with psychic activity.

quote:

---

All astrological interpretations are based on mythological stories, i.e. Neptune was god of the seas, so many astrologers will tell you things like: you have a love of water sports etc.. if Neptune is prominent in your chart.

---

All modern astrological interpretations are based off of mythological stories and archetypes, yes they are, and it's one of the reasons I disagree with their methods. Granted a lot of traditional significations are based in mythological thought as well, more of it is based on astronomical observation.

quote:

---

He looked kind of Piscean (and he was born before he discovered the planet).
Although I'm not sure.. would you say he looks more Jupiter-like (Sagittarian).. or Neptunian?

---

You're under the impression that Jupiter=Sagittarius and Neptune=Pisces, so therefore someone who looks Piscean must look Neptunian, which is silly. Signs have had separate physical descriptions for a good long time, mostly separated from their planetary ruler.

For Sagittarius: It represents a well-favoured countenance, somewhat long visage, but full and ruddy, or almost like sunburnt, the hair light chestnut color, the stature somewhat above the middle size, a conformity in the members and a strong able body.

Pisces: A short stature, ill composed, not very decent, a good large face, palish complexion, the body fleshy or swelling, not very straight, but incurvating somewhat with the head.

posted October 29, 2008 03:58 AM         

quote:

---

You seem to forget that the traditional seven planets were named after being observed for a long time.

---

Observed by people who had prior definitions of "Mercury", "Venus", "Mars" etc.

quote:

---

The red star in the sky (the color of blood and heated iron), became the seat of the war god (be he Nergal or Mars) after he was observed to be this color and figure prominently in times of war.

---

Different colours have very different meanings depending on your culture. In China, many wedding dresses are coloured red and for them "red" represents good luck.
So I guess, if a Chinese person had to observe the same planets, they would come to different conclusions.

quote:

---

Granted a lot of traditional significations are based in mythological thought as well, more of it is based on astronomical observation.

---

What would be some examples of this?

quote:

---

This was written by William Lilly, long before the discovery of Uranus, and you can see the physical descriptions of the Signs come more from the graphics of the Signs and their humour moreso than the planetary lord, lest Sagittarians and Piscens end up looking the same, they are, in fact, quite different looking as with all the Signs.

---

I've said this before. I never guess someone's sign based on pre-set descriptions. To me it boils down to having a good memory and intuition about people. When someone reminds me of someone else I know, I guess astro influences correctly.

posted October 29, 2008 11:56 AM         

quote:

---

Observed by people who had prior definitions of "Mercury", "Venus", "Mars" etc.

---

Wow, thanks for intentionally missing the point in all of that. So, there's this star, it's really pretty and it's the brightest star in the sky, so you associate it with beauty and love, and then you infer that it's the seat of your goddess of love, and name it after her. So...I'm not sure how you think the name came before the associations in the ancient world, when obviously they did not.

quote:

---

quote:The red star in the sky (the color of blood and heated iron), became the seat of the war god (be he Nergal or Mars) after he was observed to be this color and figure prominently in times of war.

Different colours have very different meanings depending on your culture. In China, many wedding dresses are coloured red and for them "red" represents good luck.
So I guess, if a Chinese person had to observe the same planets, they would come to different conclusions.

---

Actually, you couldn't be more incorrect. Even in China and Japan, Mars was associated with destruction and fire, its name (in Japanese at least, I don't know the Chinese name, but I know it means the same thing) is Kasei, meaning Fire Star.

quote:

---

What would be some examples of this?

---

Study your houses and stars.

quote:

---

It's never clear cut. It has no connection with height, hair colour or the shape of their nose. It's more about facial expression, body language (if I meet them in person) and overall vibe.

---

posted October 29, 2008 02:21 PM         

but tell me sei no, why do you think that new discoveries are irrelevant? do you ride a horse to work? send your foreign mail by boat? you get my drift...just because telescopes made it easier to see the planets does not mean they were not there or felt before, and in fact uranus is visible to the naked eye but because it moves so slowly was always considered to be a star in olden times.

i think you might find liz greene's "Outer Planets" an interesting read. she talks at great length about hitler's unaspected (except for the nodes!) uranus and how its activation affected his place in the collective consciousness of the time...

posted October 29, 2008 03:41 PM         

1. Ascendant is most important but you must look at decanate to affect the face shape. Dwads are highly important and affect the facial features and expression.
2. Chart ruler - sign, decanate, dwad
3. Planets in the first house - sign, decanate and dwad
4. Aspects to the ASC - both the the planet itself and the sign it is in will affect appearance
5. Major planets' signs - eg Sun, Moon. These may affect presentation of the person and expressions.

Example: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/018812.html

I have looked at classical astrology appearance analysis on the thread. Whilst it has some interesting theories and pointers, I'm in two minds as to whether it works.

Madonna - http://www.astrotheme.com/portraits/cp596bap67TK.htm

Virgo ASC - Virgo decanate - Sag dwad - neat facial features, clear eyed, defined eyebrows, wide filtrum leading to a idiosyncratic Virgoan upper lip - mutable apperance - maybe slightly firey appearance with a bigger lower lip, at least it should lean a face to an oval face shape.

Example of a comparable Sag rising - look at the facial expression and features of our knowflake (Rising is Sag - Sag decanate - Sag dwad) to Madonna's features and expression: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum23/HTML/000054.html

Moon - Virgo - Tau decanate - Tau dwad - rounded face shape and pale yet neat - lunar and echanting - light coloured
Mercury - Virgo - Virgo decanate - Sco dwad - this should lead to some darkness and pursed lips that are seen in the fixed sign dwads - conj ASC from 12th
Pluto - Virgo - Virgo decanate - Virgo dwad - conj ASC from 12th (but wide, 7 deg) - again adds neatness to face but maybe adds Sco qualities such as deep and penetrating eyes that are slightly upturned at the outer edges - cat eye; pursed lips and maybe a face shape with a bulge in the middle and a hairline lowered in the middle
Other aspects - Neptune sextile ASC, Mars trine ASC - might add martian and neptunian qualities in appearance.
Sun - Leo - Aries decanate - Tau dwad - again some leoness and roundness. I think this manifests in her expression - her clothes, her hair, her brassiness and the way she moves even. Strong and bold. Flexible is Virgo rising, the precision of dancing might be a Virgo thing.
And then we should look to maybe aspects of the sun...

posted October 29, 2008 03:50 PM         

quote:

---

He looked kind of Piscean (and he was born before he discovered the planet).
Although I'm not sure.. would you say he looks more Jupiter-like (Sagittarian).. or Neptunian?

---

I can see both. I can see Pisces overall but he has just a tiny bit of fire in the eyes. This is very similar to SW's (former?) love interest on Soul Union.

I looked up the ephemerides and he does have Neptune in Sag so it would make sense if he was Pisces rising to produce both effects.

posted October 29, 2008 04:36 PM         

quote:

---

no it is not ONLY the ascendant that shapes the appearance. madonna (a virgo rising or if her assertion is correct, aquarius) has the TYPICAL heart shaped face and mane of hair of LEO. just one example since i don't have much time right now...

---

I apologize, I did not mean to suggest that the Ascendant is the ONLY thing that affects appearance, you'll see that earlier I said planets that aspect the Ascendant and all of that effect it too. What I meant to get across was that's pretty much the only thing the Ascendant does, other than describe how we react to things usually.

quote:

---

but tell me sei no, why do you think that new discoveries are irrelevant? do you ride a horse to work? send your foreign mail by boat? you get my drift..

---

QUICK! Let's change the subject by discussing modern conveniences! We're discussing astrology here, not scientific achievement and how that's made things easier.

quote:

---

you get my drift...just because telescopes made it easier to see the planets does not mean they were not there or felt before, and in fact uranus is visible to the naked eye but because it moves so slowly was always considered to be a star in olden times.

---

Now you're putting words in my mouth. Never did I say the Outer planets didn't have significance. I just said they don't rule Signs because they can't.

Also, Uranus is only visible some of the time (like right now, it's too dim to see) and the fact that they wouldn't be able to see it for some time and would then lose it is why we don't see Uranus in any of the star catalogs from the ancient world. It's difficult to put down a star that keeps disappearing on you!!!

quote:

---

i think you might find liz greene's "Outer Planets" an interesting read. she talks at great length about hitler's unaspected (except for the nodes!) uranus and how its activation affected his place in the collective consciousness of the time...

---

posted October 29, 2008 05:49 PM         

If the entire population on earth was replaced by a different population with different visual perception, e.g. they would see everything in shades of black and white - then presumably the planet Mars would still be *there*, exactly as it is now, but we would have a very different perception of it, and probably no reason to give it the name "Mars" or any other name associated with war.

*Colour* is subjective also.

What if humans had never existed at all? Presumably again the planet would still be there and according to "some" it would objectively have a *specific* influence upon whatever life forms inhabited earth (like worms for instance)
I think it's very much so up for debate, whether Mars would cause differences in worm-behaviour and have the *exact* same influence it has now upon humans - if the worms had no intelligence, no concept of "war", no perception of "red", no ability to ever spot "Mars" and no awareness whatsoever that Mars even exists.

I am not saying that it's impossible that Mars would *objectively* have the exact same influence.. but there is no way for someone to prove that it definitely would.
Which is why, as I specifically said - it is exactly like the question about "what came first, the chicken or the egg". I am not convinced either way..

I simply think it's more likely that planetary influences are connected to our general consciousness and name resonance. I think Iqhunk explained the meanings of letters/names and the way celestial entities might resonate to a particular vibe due to their names - which I thought was closer to my own views of "why astrology works"

But each to their own. Any perspective is valid - Although there should be some awareness that there exist perspectives other than ones own..

posted October 29, 2008 05:58 PM         

quote:

---

If you met a girl of an Indian background with a similar chart to Madonna, she might have different physical features.. but things like body language and facial expression would still be similar.

---

posted October 29, 2008 06:18 PM         

quote:

---

I believe concepts like "beauty" and "love" are entirely subjective to ones own perspective, to your own *species* (the way you are biologically equipped to perceive things) and that of the society and culture you live in.

---

Not sure what that has to do with anything, but okay. Yes, of course there are different cultural and societal definitions of beauty and love, but this has very little to do with the way the star today known as Venus or Mars got their names. So, again, your point is irrelevant.

quote:

---

If the entire population on earth was replaced by a different population with different visual perception, e.g. they would see everything in shades of black and white - then presumably the planet Mars would still be *there*, exactly as it is now, but we would have a very different perception of it, and probably no reason to give it the name "Mars" or any other name associated with war

---

Definitely true, though I find this type of argument to be silly. It's the "Let's see if things would be the way they are if everything was different" idea people like to jump on, and it's full of what-ifs and all that that just happen to waste time and fill up space.

The fact of the matter is that people were put on the Earth, and they see in color, and they associate colors with various things. We do it everyday of our lives. I do, though, want to point out that last little sentence. Again, you seem to think that color and whatnot was everything. Do you not think ancient astrologers thought it strange that this planet was prominent in times of war and hostility? Or would you find these merely coincidental?

quote:

---

*Colour* is subjective also.

---

Disagree. Red is red.

quote:

---

What if humans had never existed at all? Presumably again the planet would still be there and according to "some" it would objectively have a *specific* influence upon whatever life forms inhabited earth (like worms for instance)
I think it's very much so up for debate, whether Mars would cause differences in worm-behaviour and have the *exact* same influence it has now upon humans - if the worms had no intelligence, no concept of "war", no perception of "red", no ability to ever spot "Mars" and no awareness whatsoever that Mars even exists.

---

Now I'm wondering if you're arguing against the validity of Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto in the classical era since there was no "concept" of them back then and why, suddenly, since we have concept of it, it must mean something. I assume that no matter what, even if Mars was unknown to the worms, it would still effect weather and have its use in ages.

quote:

---

I am not saying that it's impossible that Mars would *objectively* have the exact same influence.. but there is no way for someone to prove that it definitely would.

---

Then why even think about it and waste cognitive energy on it?

quote:

---

But each to their own. Any perspective is valid - Although there should be some awareness that there exist perspectives other than ones own..

---