posted April 02, 2010 01:06 PM         

Scorpio: Pluto & Mars
Aquarius: Saturn & Uranus
Pisces: Jupiter & Neptune

posted April 02, 2010 01:35 PM         

As far as the rulerships, yeah, it comes into play for me when I try to look for aspects between sign and house rulers. It also comes up when I try to take a shot at a horary chart too.

posted April 03, 2010 12:22 AM         

------------------
Raymond

Supporting the Neurodiversity Movement

A Different Mind Is Not A Deficient Mind.

posted April 03, 2010 02:58 AM         

quote:

---

Scorpio: Pluto & Mars
Aquarius: Saturn & Uranus
Pisces: Jupiter & Neptune

---

Generally I think its as plain as day that the modern rulerships apply but sometimes I think they both show up seperately depending on the circumstances. My Aquarian aunt with the Earth Moon and Venus is very Saturnine most of the time. She still has that Uranian tendency to contradict though.

posted April 03, 2010 04:36 AM         

I have a Scorpio AC, and in the first house is Mars in Scorpio. The traditional ruler of my 1st is in his own house, and the modern ruler of my 1st house is in 12th. As you can see, Mars is dignified by being in 1st and Pluto is muted by being in 12th. Mars being in a sign who's traditional ruler is Mars, makes me quite Mars-like, but I have nothing in Aries in my chart. Even my Aries house is intercepted.

I would have preferred to use modern rulers only, but it is just too obvious that the traditional rulers are just as influential in my case.

posted April 03, 2010 12:00 PM         

The old rulerships might work. I don't believe in modern rulerships any more. There wasn't even much research done on modern planets before they were given rulerships. The research they did was based on the Western World and not any where else.

A Vedic Astrologer made a good point about that in his article, Fallacy of the Trans-Saturnian Planets. http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/203870.html

The use of the transSaturnian planets is pretty much New Age Astrology. It's not traditional Astrology. It's more psychological , and traditional astrologers would even say watered down.

New traits were assigned to Aquarius,Pisces,and Scorpio based on the discovery of Uranus,Neptune,and Pluto.

There are some that believe that Pluto should rule Aries.

After astronomers have discovered that Pluto is not a planet but one of many kuiper belt objects, I can't help question Pluto's rulership of Scorpio. If a dwarf planet remains a ruler of Scorpio, what about rulerships for the other dwarf planets? What about Ceres? Shouldn't it be treated equally with Scorpio in Astrology like it is in Astronomy? Maybe it could be ruler of Virgo. The constellation of Virgo was viewed as Demeter by the ancient Greeks. Ceres is Demeter's Greek counterpart. What about Eris which is larger than Pluto? Should it be given the rulership of Libra? How does Libra fit with the metaphysical orientation of Eris which orbits beyond Pluto which orbits beyond Neptune which beyond Uranus?

It really depends on the view of the astrologer.

Uranus,Neptune,and Pluto are considered to be higher octaves of Mercury,Venus,and Mars. Some astrologers believe that Eris might be a higher octave of Jupiter and maybe even Uranus. I actually believe astrologers had given traits to Uranus that belong to Eris.

The high octave of the Mercury,Venus,Mars concept are inconsistent with their sign rulerships

Uranus doesn't rule Gemini nor Virgo even though it's high octave of Mercury

Neptune doesn't rule Taurus nor Libra even though it's high octave of Venus

Pluto is an exception as high octave of Mars. It rules Scorpio, but it doesn't rule Aries. Some astrologers believe that Pluto should rule Aries.

What about Chiron? There are some astrologers including Barbara Hand Clow that believes that Chiron should rule Virgo. However, Chiron is one of over 60 centaurs in our solar system. At the time when Barbara Hand Clow published her Chiron book in 1987, it was believed to be the only centaur in the solar system. It was also viewed to be originally an outsider in our solar system. Pholus was discovered in 1992 followed by other centaurs. It was realized that Chiron wasn't the only centaur in our solar system. The Kuiper belt was discovered in 1992 as well. It was realized that Pluto wasn't alone. After finding over a thousand objects beyond Neptune, astronomers realize that the solar system goes far beyond Pluto to a possible Oort Cloud which is believed to be the source of comets. Now it's realized that Chiron as originated from the Kuiper Belt and not outside our solar system.

As new discoveries are made, previous views are outdated.

I believe that the astrological status quo (Saturn) should be challenged for the sake of change and progression (Uranus) even it means discord and controversy (Eris).

The astrological status quo has changed before by adding Uranus,Neptune,and Pluto even though other other astrologers like Vedic Astrologers,Hellenistic Astrologers,Classical Astrologers stuck with the status quo of just using only objects up to Saturn.

Western Astrology was a bit obsolete after the Enlightenment period when Uranus got discovered. Western Astrology didn't get revived until around the time of the discovery of Pluto. It makes me wonder why Pluto is not viewed as ruler of Modern Astrology with Uranus being chosen as ruler.

The discovery of Uranus didn't do much for Astrology. If anything, it separated the Astrological and Astronomical communities which remain separate to this very day. Astrology got dismissed as pseudoscience with no logical basis for it even working.

There has already been a little bridge between astrologers and astronomers in that astronomers have accepted names for centaurs from astrologers, starting with Nessus that was discovered in 1994.

There is some hope for Astrology to be recognized as a mainstream discipline again.

------------------
Raymond

Supporting the Neurodiversity Movement