Atlantean wrote:

Hello Mark,

As some were confused by the many house systems and many are of the opinion that Equal Houses is kindergarten astrology, I hope you don't mind if I post these charts using Topocentric Houses and including the outer planets...additionally, I find the aspect lines to be very helpful..

Hello Atlantean,

Please avoid making disparaging comments regarding other house systems here. The same goes for other zodiacs or rulership systems. I did request that at the very start of the thread. One of the most brilliant modern astrologers I know actually uses equal houses. Your obviously totally convinced by your own choice of house system which is fine. Lets just leave it at that here.

Incidentally, your charts are excessively large. Could you minimize them a bit please?

Thanks

Mark

As some were confused by the many house systems...

... I'll just post another one!

Actually, I didn't realise it was possible to work out new quadrant house cusps without knowing what the place and time of birth are - maybe it can be worked out with the MC and the Asc.

I think Mark is posting in equal not because many of us use it, but I suggested it's a more appealing presentation, as generated by SF, than the SF "whole sign" (which shunts the ascendant down by up to 30? , rather than the signs up as required to leave Asc fully on left). It would be even better, another time, if we could have one of wheel designs that clearly show the boundaries of signs, but it's not very important.

There seem to be about as many house systems in use as there are ayanamsa by sidereal, so hard to satisfy everybody.

I think people should be able up their own minds about which aspects to use, or not - all those lines clutter up the chart a bit.

Graham

edit

Graham F

Actually, I didn't realise it was possible to work out new quadrant house cusps without knowing what the place and time of birth are - maybe it can be worked out with the MC and the Asc.

Which presumably means if your really smart you can work out not just the time + date of birth but the location too. I suppose no system is foolproof!

Mark

Mark wrote: I'm sorry that clearly wasn't my intention. Usually, we get feedback that people want another house system displayed! That must be the first occasion I have seen a complaint that too many house systems were displayed!
Mark

Hello Mark,

Please don't interpret that as a complaint, on the contrary. I think it is a great idea and they should be displayed with different charts all the time. It is quite an eye opener for me personally. Perhaps it will bear out that one house system, most accurately relfects the natives life, more than another.

In my mind, they all can't reflect the persons life accurately. We have thousands of years and volumes of the difference between an 8th, 9th, and 10th house sun. The charts all can't be correct, can they?

I am very curious and interested to see which chart most accurately reflects the person and their lives. I think the goal of everyone is to be accurate.

I never thought of changing house systems until all the discussions here, which I think is a good thing. If Placidius does not accurately portray a persons life and the details, then obviously I do not want to use it.

But it does knock the wind out of one's sails, to see the differences, and to think one may be quite a bit out in a judgement, due to the very foundations of learning, houses, angularity, strengths, weaknesses, etc., which in my mind changes considerably with the hosue systems.

So yes, for me it very much muddied the waters in my judgement, less prone to even mention details, etc.

Graham F

... I'll just post another one!

Could you drop me a PM on that first to let me know what you have in mind? We already have the charts in 4 house systems tropically and 2 sidereal! I am a bit concerned we will get so caught up in the technicalties of different house systems we will end up diminishing the key focus here which is delineation around these nativities occupation and primary motivation.

Thanks

Mark

Morning Sun wrote:

Perhaps it will bear out that one house system, most accurately relfects the natives life, more than another.

In my mind, they all can't reflect the persons life accurately. We have thousands of years and volumes of the difference between an 8th, 9th, and 10th house sun. The charts all can't be correct, can they?

I am very curious and interested to see which chart most accurately reflects the person and their lives. I think the goal of everyone is to be accurate.

I dont think one mystery chart exercise will resolve this. We have have done numerous such exercises before. Maybe I will pull the old threads into a retrospective.

I think there are brilliant and gifted astrologers using different zodiacs, house systems and rulership schemes. Ultimately, I think skill and personal insight transcends any technique.

I mean we all use planets , angles, aspects , horizon or hemisphere emphasis and often other techniques. There is a lot of common ground we will coalesce on. I personally believe this issue is as much philosophical as empirical. Have you read Geoffrey Cornelius's book 'The Moment of Astrology'? I confess this book inspired me to become an astrological relativist.

However, if your looking for scientific type objectivity you would have to lock us all up in a room with just printed charts ( without laptops, mobiles ) to work on our delineations!

Frankly, that doesn't interest me anyway. I dont want to be a mouse running round wheels for someone else. Instead I think we can gain benefit here by sharpening our technique and clarify points for ourselves not others. Its just as useful to see what we say that doesn't work out. For example, does combustion operate in nativities? We can read all the texts we like but we can only really test the idea through the acid test of studying literally hundreds of natal examples.

Mark

for those who want to talk house systems - why not just start another thread on it, rather then messing with marks thread? please don't answer this question here - consider opening a new thread about it.. thanks.

One additional comment about Chart A:

Jupiter/Aries in the bound of Mars indicates expansiveness, aggression and military themes.
It disposes the stellium in Pisces and rules the 4th of homeland in Sagittarius. This could indicate military conquests for freedom/liberation of homeland.

Mark wrote:
I think there are brilliant and gifted astrologers using different zodiacs, house systems and rulership schemes. Ultimately, I think skill and personal insight transcends any technique.

This is correct, in my thinking, since the vast majority of astrological practitioners are engaging in a mantic process. Perhaps perversely, the ones attempting an empirical approach, I feel, are the most idiosyncratic of the bunch!

Mark wrote: I mean we all use planets , angles, aspects , horizon or hemisphere emphasis and often other techniques. There is a lot of common ground we will coalesce on. I personally believe this issue is as much philosophical as empirical. Have you read Geoffrey Cornelius's book 'The Moment of Astrology'? I confess this book inspired me to become an astrological relativist.

I've had the opinion, since reading that book, that he is less advocating an astrological relativism than the actual impossibility of an astrology to begin with. I don't agree with his thesis, but then a hobby-horse of mine is believing that most astrologers are in fact astromancers, and not practicing an astrology at all. I do note that I mostly find myself in the same category.

Mark wrote:... We can read all the texts we like but we can only really test the idea through the acid test of studying literally hundreds of natal examples.

And here I disagree, Mark, because any attempt at some sort of empirical approach to astrology, or in fact anything, presupposed all manner of often unexamined assumptions of what constitutes evidence and testing & its value. Practice cannot be separated from theory, and in fact, the idea that what one is practicing is interpretable and can be made to be understood by some sort of schema has to already be in place, even if that schema is claimed to be falsifiable.

One of the largest issues, I think, is the axiomatic assumption that one individual & their respective chart is both equal to & reducible to a population of other such persons & their charts, and how this collides with the obvious, that one person's life just isn't another person's, not matter how many commonalities they may entail.

Thanks For your comments Gabe,

I would like to explore this further but I feel this discussion really belongs on the philosophy forum now. I fully accept this drift is as much my fault as anyone elses for making a few contentious points! However, I would like to request that all further contributions here are strictly delineation orientated.

Thanks

Mark

edit