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:
A Correct Prediction: the NYC buiding strike, 1991
by Robert E. Zoller
Book II of Carmen Astrologicum by Dorotheus
translated by David Pingree
Compiled by Deborah Houlding
Astrology and Cosmology in Early China: Conforming Earth to Heaven, by David W. Pankenier
Reviewed by Gill Zukovskis

Skyscript Astrology Forum

Aquarius not so individualistic
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Fri May 04, 2012 1:04 pm    Post subject: Aquarius not so individualistic Reply with quote

http://www.charlescarter.co.uk/


It`s interesting that on the link above it is said Carter ,as a good Aquarian, avoided the use of the word "I" unlike Leos normally do. According to Sociologist Geert Hofstede in the more collectivist Spanish and Portuguese speaking societies, the word I is normally omited. In english or German this is not possible.We cannot say : " am going to the cinema". We have to use "I". Chinese speaking countries are even more collectivist and they don`t even have a word for "personality". Makes me wonder if Aquarians feel better in these countries than in the Anglo saxon world http://www.charlescarter.co.uk/marriage-house-system.html#housesystem


Are you familiar with his house system?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote:
Quote:
It`s interesting that on the link above it is said Carter ,as a good Aquarian, avoided the use of the word "I" unlike Leos normally do.
But DO “Leos” normally do that any more than other signs? Is having the Sun in Leo enough to get the person to say “I” a lot? You gave this thread subject as “Aquarius not so individualistic.” Is a person with Sun in Aquarius indeed usually individualistic? Here's the tough one: Says who? Laughing A person has a hard time finding individualistic 'Aquarians' in the astrological literature prior to the 18th century. The signs have taken on some pretty radically different characteristics the past century or so. In the astrological literature of the two thousand years before 20th century astrology you don't find talk of Aquarius being individualistic or rebellious, or of Leo dancing around and wearing a lampshade on its head – anything to get some attention. This is not the traditional astrology discussion area, so a discussion isn't appropriate here about which approach – traditional or modern – might be the more valid one. However, it is always appropriate to acquire an historical perspective and to be aware of how astrology has developed and how the symbols and images have changed over the centuries. For all those many centuries of 'old' astrology the signs weren't used in the same manner as they are now. My own belief is that the use of Sun sign astrology has made the signs into 12 easy and convenient boxes. Just pick a box and use the list of traits found written on the packing list. The reality of good astrology is much more complex. As an alternative to thinking in terms of the signs and their alleged characteristics it's more useful to consider important planets in a chart and how those planets are modified, strengthened or weakened by zodiacal and house placement, and by aspects to other planets. When it comes to determining who says “I” time is better spent looking for the placements, strength and aspects of the Sun rather than merely the sign the Sun occupies. I'm sure that most knowledgeable 'modern' astrologers would agree with that. I wouldn't pin "I" completely on the Sun, however. In fact, look also to the Asc. and its ruler and the Moon. Even all those together are just a beginning. As I've always said, I is very complex. Confused Anyway . . . This isn't a matter of old vs. new astrology, but of adding an historical perspective to astrological practices and of seeing if things may have taken some questionable turns regarding effectiveness, usefulness and accuracy. Maybe they have, maybe they haven't. I think they have in this case.


Hi Kirk
I admit I jumped to conclusions based on that link.
Still Aquarius tends to want to be different.He`ll be a fascist in a democratic state(breivik) and a liberator in a totalitarian one.
I don´t know much about the ancient version of Aquarius. They didnt seem to care much about personality traits,the focus was on prediction.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 7:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote:
Quote:
Still Aquarius tends to want to be different.He`ll be a fascist in a democratic state(breivik) and a liberator in a totalitarian one.
Very, very few good astrologers of any era would make such a statement. You're reaching into the Aquarius box. I'm afraid it doesn't even make much sense: Now a fascist, now a liberator. Is that for the mere chance to be "different"? If you are talking about people with Aquarius Sun signs I must reject what you wrote. If you're talking about the sign Aquarius as a pure type that can never be expressed through a person I still must reject it. Wink I came back to add:
Quote:
I don´t know much about the ancient version of Aquarius. They didnt seem to care much about personality traits,the focus was on prediction.
Yes, prediction was higher on the list than it is now. But at least those old guys didn't sit around talking about one's creativity and ability to be a healer. You know, the sort of astro chatter we tend to be treated to these days. It's a reflection of the societies, then and now. It's not just about old and new astrology, but the fact that we are now in an age of strong individual focus which so often leads to self-absorption. An astrologer naming off one's traits and talents feeds it - as do the market-driven media and self-help books. Astrology now most commonly has a different focus than it did back then.


The problem is that is what most cookbooks say about Aquarius today. Friendly but individulistic and contradictory
I had a look at old books like the one by John Middleton. They seem to focus on Horary. That´s like doing Taro,which sound highly unscientific to the modern mind. No wonder modern Astrologers feel uncomfortable with it
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote:
Quote:
The problem is that is what most cookbooks say about Aquarius today.
With the simple intent of pointing out the difference between today and yesterday: The current astrological cookbooks do tend to go on with a lot of this and that concerning the signs. That's the difference between modern astrology and the astrology of the old days. Back then they would have written that Aquarius was a fixed, air, diurnal, warm and moist sign that was cooled and dried somewhat by its ruler Saturn. That described what a planet was getting into when it entered Aquarius. The focus was not on the sign, but on the planet as it was influenced and modified by the sign. Hence, not many lists of Aquarian characteristics. A person back then wasn't an Aquarian but had an astrological Sun that was modified and influenced through its placement in Aquarius. The person wasn't assigned to the Aquarius box. But, truth be told, in most cases they weren't even all that interested in the Sun's sign. The Sun wasn't used in astrology in the manner it is now.


That suggests seasonal influences(winter,moist etc) which again ,are a headache if you`re an Australian Astrologer. An Aquarius born in Sydney would then have Sunny,dry qualities like Leo,rather than Saturnine ones.
Remember those were the days of flat Earth. If you wanted to learn Astronomy would you by a book by Ptolemy or by say,Carl Sagan?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kirk wrote:
Quote:
That suggests seasonal influences(winter,moist etc) which again ,are a headache if you`re an Australian Astrologer.
They are philosophical qualities which are modeled upon, but not identical to, earthly physical qualities. The western horoscopic astrology that we use was created in the northern hemisphere and incorporates models of the natural world in that hemisphere. That doesn't mean there must always be a tightly matching fit with the physical phenomena of the natural world in all locations. Aries, Taurus, and Gemini are spring signs both north and south. Archetypal 'Spring' - that sort of thing. The philosophical model has been created and works anywhere.
http://www.astrologycom.com/values.html One of the interesting things about the old way is that they dont seem to value a planet for ruling a stellium. Saturn rules two stelliums in my chart but is cadent and under Suns beams. And I` d agree is a weak planet. The Moon and Jupiter on the contrary in 10th or MC depending on house system,are strong if only because theyre far from Sun. I have the Pisces Moon need to get away from people because the discipline that social requires is somtimes too much to bear and restrictions are difficult for me. Yet modern astrologers are obssessd with planets that rule a stellium
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
varuna2



Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 323
Location: Lemuria

Posted: Sat May 05, 2012 11:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

delete

Last edited by varuna2 on Sat May 04, 2013 6:40 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
varuna2



Joined: 20 Feb 2012
Posts: 323
Location: Lemuria

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 8:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

delete

Last edited by varuna2 on Sat May 04, 2013 6:41 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 3954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Varuna wrote:
Quote:
People in the developed countries in the West have no idea of what political freedom actually is. How are you free when someone has the power of coercion to tell you how you can live and how you can think? You are not free and you never have been. You were born into bondage.


Varuna please try to stick with the astrology. You have a a tendency to veer into highly controversial political opinions. Your welcome to your personal views but Skyscript is not the place to air such debateable opinions. For every political point you make there will be someone else out there with equally passionate opposing political opinions. I know because I am one of those people. Hence you are inviting a lot of energy being put into your political views rather the actual topic of this thread. This is an astrology site not a debating chamber for amateur political philosophers.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:02 am; edited 4 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 3954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 1:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Getting back to the focus of the thread I recomend this article by Deborah Houlding on the traditional understanding of the sign of Aquarius.

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

Here is a selection:

Quote:
Saturn's traditional rulership of Aquarius further colours this sign with the qualities of detachment, objectivity and restraint. In astrological philosophy, the Sun and Saturn are conceived as enemies, neither able to express itself fully within the other's sign of dignity. The Sun craves attention and when the planetary energies are drawn though the Sun it centres them firmly upon the self. Hence the Sun is said to be 'in detriment' in Aquarius, where the personal ego is subjugated in favour of egalitarian concepts and far-ranging humanitarian concerns. The Aquarian perspective is drawn from a broad angle, and places the vision of the wider perspective above that which it sees from a position of self interest. The spirit of Aquarius is to look beyond the immediate and self-centred, to nurture the interests of progress for collective society and humanity as a whole.


Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 3954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 1:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorge wrote;
Quote:
Remember those were the days of flat Earth.


This is incorrect. Ancient astronomer/astrologers like Ptolemy believed the earth was spherical.

Your wider issue of southern hemisphere astrology does undeniably throw up searching questions for tropicalists. I actually opened a thread on this very topic some years ago which got some very thoughtful replies.

http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=5135

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Sat Sep 15, 2012 10:01 am; edited 6 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 1:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
Getting back to the focus of the thread I recomend this article by Deborah Houlding on the traditional understanding of the sign of Aquarius.

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

Here is a selection:

Quote:
Saturn's traditional rulership of Aquarius further colours this sign with the qualities of detachment, objectivity and restraint. In astrological philosophy, the Sun and Saturn are conceived as enemies, neither able to express itself fully within the other's sign of dignity. The Sun craves attention and when the planetary energies are drawn though the Sun it centres them firmly upon the self. Hence the Sun is said to be 'in detriment' in Aquarius, where the personal ego is subjugated in favour of egalitarian concepts and far-ranging humanitarian concerns. The Aquarian perspective is drawn from a broad angle, and places the vision of the wider perspective above that which it sees from a position of self interest. The spirit of Aquarius is to look beyond the immediate and self-centred, to nurture the interests of progress for collective society and humanity as a whole.


Mark

So,an Aquarius ASC would be a totally different ball game?!
By the same token any sign rising must have a completely different influence from its position under the Sun.
What you said about Aquarius probably applies to Capricorn as well, but was ignored because Capricorn isnt opposite Leo.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mark
Moderator


Joined: 30 Sep 2005
Posts: 3954
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 2:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jorge wrote:

Quote:
What you said about Aquarius probably applies to Capricorn as well, but was ignored because Capricorn isnt opposite Leo.


It was wasn't me it was Deborah Houlding. Smile

Traditionally there is a distinct difference between the role of Saturn in its two signs of traditional rulership in Capricorn and Aquarius. In Aquarius the diurnal planet Saturn finds more harmonious expression in a masculine diurnal sign rather than the feminine , nocturnal sign of Capricorn. As the masculine, diurnal expression of Saturn Aquarius is more focused on the outer world and the collective rather than the more individualistic focus of Saturn in Capricorn. As a feminine sign Capricorn is oriented towards individual progress in the world.

Hence ancient astrologers said Saturn had its 'joy' in Aquarius. This would be more marked in a day chart.

The combination is less harmonious in the case of the Sun in Aquarius for the reasons given by Deborah Houlding in her article. The link of Aquarius to unconventionality seems to have really taken off with the modern assignment of Uranus as its ruler. i am not aware of traditional sources stating this.

However, the medieval tradition does indicate a planet that is debilitated ( especially in detriment) could express itself in a manner of social unconventionality or deviance. I therefore dont find the idea of modern astrology that Sun in Aquarius can indicate unconventionality that implausible. I just think it gets heavily over-emphasized in modern astrology.

Mark
_________________
''Man is troubled not by events, but by the meaning he gives them"

Epictetus


Last edited by Mark on Sun May 06, 2012 2:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
Jorge wrote:
Quote:
What you said about Aquarius probably applies to Capricorn as well, but was ignored because Capricorn isnt opposite Leo.
It was wasn't me it was Deborah Houlding. Smile Traditionally there is a distinct difference between the role of Saturn in its two signs of traditional rulership in Capricorn and Aquarius. In Aquarius the diurnal planet Saturn finds more harmonious expression in a masculine diurnal sign rather than the feminine , nocturnal sign of Capricorn. As the masculine, diurnal expression of Saturn Aquarius is more focused on the outer world and the collective rather than the more individualistic focus of Saturn in Capricorn. As a feminine sign Capricorn is oriented towards individual progress in the world. Hence ancient astrologers said Saturn had its 'joy' in Aquarius. This would be more marked in a day chart. The combination is less harmonious in the case of the Sun in Aquarius for the reasons given by Deborah Houlding in her article. Mark


Thanks.
Suppose then one is born with Saturn in capricorn by day.Since Saturn is favorable by day,would that Saturn function like a Saturn in Aquarius?
And the reverse for a night birth with Sat in Aquarius?

thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hence ancient astrologers said Saturn had its 'joy' in Aquarius. This would be more marked in a day chart.

Ah the above probably answered my question.
Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jorge



Joined: 13 Mar 2012
Posts: 124

Posted: Sun May 06, 2012 2:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mark wrote:
Jorge wrote;
Quote:
Remember those were the days of flat Earth.
Oh dear you are really showing up your ignorance of astronomical and astrological history. Ancient astronomer/astrologers like Ptolemy believed the earth was spherical. As for your wider the issue of southern hemisphere astrology does undeniably throw up searching questions for tropicalists. I actually opened a thread on this very topic some years ago which got some very thoughtful replies. http://skyscript.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1172 Unfortunately, some of the more shallow siderealists use this issue as a cheap debating point. Of course if we are going to play that kind of game siderealists have the dilemma of the growing lack of seasonal alignment between the sidereal signs and the seasons. Hence we have the equinox occurring in a mutable (Pisces) or fixed sign ( Aquarius). This confusion of where the spring equinox even is sidereally highlights the dilemma of not one but numerous 'sidereal zodiacs' with different starting points. I dont make these point to take a cheap pot shot at siderealists but just to demonstrate that any system of astrology throws up challenging issues which need to be engaged with by its practitioners. Mark


Well the signs are only slighty related to seasons.Otherwise there would be no signs for those born at the Equator.Theyre all born in the Summer
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum Index -> Nativities & General Astrology All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
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