|
Author
|
Topic: composite midpoint method vs davinson method
|
defeat
Knowflake Posts: 25
From:
Registered: Nov 2011
|
posted December 01, 2011 10:45 AM
  
i've heard of people using both equally.
is there one that's better
i'm gussing they have different purposes (context they're used in)
do u have a prefresne over one or the other
is there a consensus on which on is better, or is it all based on the person.
thxIP: Logged |
defeat
Knowflake Posts: 25
From:
Registered: Nov 2011
|
posted December 02, 2011 03:03 AM
how come there are no interpritation on the davison chart placemnents.the davison chart is still a compisite, right? so would that meana mars in third would be interpetated the same way for both IP: Logged |
Fuzzy
Knowflake Posts: 77
From: Libra 25°
Registered: Aug 2011
|
posted December 02, 2011 08:06 PM
+ interested in this too. anyone familiar with using davison charts?IP: Logged |
BelligerentPygmy
Knowflake Posts: 808
From:
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted December 02, 2011 08:25 PM
In all the years I've studied astrology - which has been many - I almost never hear people mention the Davidson charts, which always struck me as strange. You hear people mention just about every other obscure topic but those (and Uranian astrology).I do know from reading it someplace a few days ago that Davidson charts basically take the MIDPOINTS from each natal chart, and combine them together to get one composite chart. I'm going to assume the aspects are interpreted like any other aspects would be though. IP: Logged |
defeat
Knowflake Posts: 25
From:
Registered: Nov 2011
|
posted December 02, 2011 08:28 PM
quote:
Originally posted by BelligerentPygmy:
In all the years I've studied astrology - which has been many - I almost never hear people mention the Davidson charts, which always struck me as strange. You hear people mention just about every other obscure topic but those (and Uranian astrology).I do know from reading it someplace a few days ago that Davidson charts basically take the MIDPOINTS from each natal chart, and combine them together to get one composite chart. I'm going to assume the aspects are interpreted like any other aspects would be though.
i though it was the composite the did the midpoint method
and davinson creates the chart in some other way.. IP: Logged |
BelligerentPygmy
Knowflake Posts: 808
From:
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted December 02, 2011 09:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by defeat:
i though it was the composite the did the midpoint method
and davinson creates the chart in some other way..
Okay I didn't quite explain that right. Basically, if the Sun is in Leo in one person's chart, and in Libra in the other's, in a STANDARD composite chart, the composite sun will be in Virgo. But in a Davidson composite, it's more complex. First they take each chart separately, calculate all the midpoints for them, and THEN mash THOSE up somehow to get one composite. In a nutshell - a standard composite is natal chart based; a Davidson one is based on planetary midpoints. Am I making sense here? I wish I could remember the exact post and the forum I read that on, they explained it in a way that's way more concise and a lot easier to understand. IP: Logged |
defeat
Knowflake Posts: 25
From:
Registered: Nov 2011
|
posted December 03, 2011 12:39 AM
quote:
Originally posted by BelligerentPygmy:
Okay I didn't quite explain that right.Basically, if the Sun is in Leo in one person's chart, and in Libra in the other's, in a STANDARD composite chart, the composite sun will be in Virgo. But in a Davidson composite, it's more complex. First they take each chart separately, calculate all the midpoints for them, and THEN mash THOSE up somehow to get one composite. In a nutshell - a standard composite is natal chart based; a Davidson one is based on planetary midpoints. Am I making sense here? I wish I could remember the exact post and the forum I read that on, they explained it in a way that's way more concise and a lot easier to understand.
thx, but don't worry about it, i'm never gonna do hand calucaltions for it any way.
but which one do you think is used more, better, etc
how would you compare the two
IP: Logged |
BelligerentPygmy
Knowflake Posts: 808
From:
Registered: Sep 2011
|
posted December 03, 2011 12:49 AM
quote:
Originally posted by defeat:
thx, but don't worry about it, i'm never gonna do hand calucaltions for it any way.
but which one do you think is used more, better, etc
how would you compare the two
Standard composites are used wayyyyy more often than the Davidson ones. In fact I almost never see people use the Davidson ones. IP: Logged |
MyVirgoMask
Knowflake Posts: 3509
From: Bay Area, CA
Registered: May 2009
|
posted December 03, 2011 02:07 AM
In Davidson, it's less about the signs in the composite and more about the aspects themselves. In general, the more close an aspect is, the more important it is whether in midpoint or Davidson.
I like both.
Regular midpoint can be highly inaccurate if two people are born within close times and share similar aspects - the patterns will come up in midpoint and so it's obviously a recurring theme, but sometimes it feels more like a recycled one and less of a relationship's identity. IP: Logged |
MyVirgoMask
Knowflake Posts: 3509
From: Bay Area, CA
Registered: May 2009
|
posted December 03, 2011 02:12 AM
Also would like to add that if there's one thing in composites in general which I have noticed, it's the clustering theory - it's more present in midpoint: more likely than not, the more significant / profound a relationship will be (sometimes longer term) , the more you'll get planets clustering into a couple of houses. It's way more focused. A lot of the time planet placements which are scattered into all kinds of different houses can almost convey a lack of interest, or a scatteredness in the relationship itself (maybe not having it have a focus at all really). Just an observation. IP: Logged |
defeat
Knowflake Posts: 25
From:
Registered: Nov 2011
|
posted December 03, 2011 02:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MyVirgoMask:
Also would like to add that if there's one thing in composites in general which I have noticed, it's the clustering theory - it's more present in midpoint: more likely than not, the more significant / profound a relationship will be (sometimes longer term) , the more you'll get planets clustering into a couple of houses. It's way more focused. A lot of the time planet placements which are scattered into all kinds of different houses can almost convey a lack of interest, or a scatteredness in the relationship itself (maybe not having it have a focus at all really). Just an observation.
wow, that makes sense
it's like you guys have a solid identity and having a clear purpose would be like a bonding element.
that's s.o. interesting.
thx IP: Logged |
defeat
Knowflake Posts: 25
From:
Registered: Nov 2011
|
posted December 03, 2011 02:21 PM
quote:
Originally posted by defeat:
how come there are no interpritation on the davison chart placemnents.the davison chart is still a compisite, right? so would that meana mars in third would be interpetated the same way for both
also can someone answer this ^ IP: Logged |
MyVirgoMask
Knowflake Posts: 3509
From: Bay Area, CA
Registered: May 2009
|
posted December 03, 2011 03:07 PM
It would probably mean the same for composite and davidson composite, yeah.
IP: Logged |
Lindaland
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
