Skyscript Astrology Forum

Therese Hamilton wrote: So this thread is about the question of whether observed traits of the tropical signs (since the time of Alan Leo and Charles Carter) better fit the rulership and exaltation planets of the underlying sidereal signs.

But how will this tell us anything about Sidereal or Tropical signs?

You are comparing traditional sidereal with modern tropical - but is that a fair comparison? It is if you wish to only caveat at the end that you are making distinctions only between traditional and modern but instead you are aiming to talk about tropical generally against sidereal generally.

Since Michael specifically cited tropical Taurus and the traits of "persistence and stubbornness," I?ll begin the discussion with charts of those with Aries emphasis known for those traits
...
I checked the above sources for similar traits under Mars

So, to be clear, Michael made a statement about the sign, and so you checked the ruler of the sign? Why not just check what those authors said about Aries? Also presumably then you apply everything you said about Mars to Scorpio?

One could say there is a general ?fixed? quality to these terms, a quality noted in tropical Taurus, but not in Venus, the lord of Taurus nor in the Moon which is exalted in Taurus. Taking planetary symbolism into consideration, Taurus should be a ?feminine? sign.

But are you implying that fixity is a quality which derives from a planet?

If so consider Capricorn and Aquarius, whether in tropical, sidereal or anything else you wish (after all Aquarius will precess back to Capricorn). Here we have the same ruling planet, ruling both a fixed sign and a cardinal sign.

This seems to strongly contradict the assumption you made that the modes are derived from descriptors of their lords (one which is not backed up by any of the textual references you describe - you just assume a priori that this is the case).

he first Aries chart belongs to race car champion, Dale Earnhardt (ADB, BC in hand). Known as ?the Intimidator? due to being a relentless hard-charging driver with a reputation of refusing to give up

Right, but surely the elephant in the room is that Mars is conjunct the Sun and the MC?

You mention Gauqelin as a source, but here you have chosen a chart with Mars in a key Gauqelin sector, and seem to be ignoring this obvious testimony of Mars-like symbolism in favour of making a case for dispositorship? Is this wise?

Ascendant lord Sun is placed in sidereal Aries with Mars and Mercury. A Mars-ruled sign for Dale?s race driving career is much more suitable than a sign ruled by Venus who is friends with the exalted Moon.

Since when do we associate the Ascendant with career more so, than, say, the MC?

The next chart belongs to Terry Fox, Canadian athlete, whose transcontinental run helped raise more than $24 million for cancer research.

And another individual with Mars in that key Gauqelin sector. Also again, Mars is conjunct the MC. This time, our Lord of the ascendant is overcome by Mars by partile degree.

Same for a couple of the other examples you gave (I only checked some).

These are hardly examples telling us anything at all about sidereal astrology and surely are great examples of why we ought to look at the planets which are in aspect to the MC and are angular and so on. We can throw away the entire zodiac and look at these charts and see that Mars is powerfully configured to be important in them.

Therese wrote:
Since Michael specifically cited tropical Taurus and the traits of "persistence and stubbornness," Ill begin the discussion with charts of those with Aries emphasis known for those traits.
...
I checked the above sources for similar traits under Mars

Paul replied:
So, to be clear, Michael made a statement about the sign, and so you checked the ruler of the sign?

I checked Mars in Aries.

Why not just check what those authors said about Aries? Also presumably then you apply everything you said about Mars to Scorpio?

I don't know which authors you're referring to? Scorpio as the solar sign for Mars (the solar-lunar sides of the zodiac) is a totally different sign than Aries.

Therese wrote
One could say there is a general "fixed" quality to these terms, a quality noted in tropical Taurus, but not in Venus, the lord of Taurus nor in the Moon which is exalted in Taurus. Taking planetary symbolism into consideration, Taurus should be a "feminine" sign.

Paul replied
But are you implying that fixity is a quality which derives from a planet?

Stubbornness and persistence as per the Gauquelins belong to Mars. The thesaurus gives "resolute" as a synonym for fixed.

This seems to strongly contradict the assumption you made that the modes are derived from descriptors of their lords (one which is not backed up by any of the textual references you describe - you just assume a priori that this is the case).

No, I'm not saying that the modes relate to planetary lords. I relate the qualities of stubbornness or persistence to Aries as the more internally focused sign for Mars. (Scorpio is externalized Mars energy.)

Therese wrote:
The first Aries chart belongs to race car champion, Dale Earnhardt (ADB, BC in hand). Known as the Intimidator due to being a relentless hard-charging driver with a reputation of refusing to give up

Paul replied:
Right, but surely the elephant in the room is that Mars is conjunct the Sun and the MC?

But see the post below (May 3). Charts with the same configuration (Sun-Mars-Mercury) in Taurus and Gemini produce people with different types of lives than those with those planets in Aries. Because Dale Earnhardt was a superstar of the race track, an exalted Sun fits his status much better than Sun in Taurus and Mars in detriment in Taurus. And Taurus has Venus for its lord. Racing isn?t a Venus occupation.

You mention Gauqelin as a source, but here you have chosen a chart with Mars in a key Gauqelin sector, and seem to be ignoring this obvious testimony of Mars-like symbolism in favour of making a case for dispositorship? Is this wise?

I know this will sound strange, but because I use equal houses, initially I didn't focus on the M.C.! So those two charts I posted have Mars in a key sector. Then for comparison I need to take charts with Mars in the same key sector in other signs. (I'll do a search in ADB.)

Therese wrote:
Ascendant lord Sun is placed in sidereal Aries with Mars and Mercury. A Mars-ruled sign for Dales race driving career is much more suitable than a sign ruled by Venus who is friends with the exalted Moon.

Paul replied:
Since when do we associate the Ascendant with career more so, than, say, the MC?

Actually the old texts do that. But in this case we have the triple conjunction in the M.C. sign. I've found that the ascendant lord is ALWAYS a key to the chart in that it's a focal point for aspects from planets.

Therese wrote:
The next chart belongs to Terry Fox, Canadian athlete, whose transcontinental run helped raise more than $24 million for cancer research.

Paul replied:
And another individual with Mars in that key Gauqelin sector. Also again, Mars is conjunct the MC. This time, our Lord of the ascendant is overcome by Mars by partile degree.

Overcome?? Mars makes a powerful applying aspect to the Sun. So the Sun absorbs the energy from Mars.

These are hardly examples telling us anything at all about sidereal astrology...

If you study the comparison of the Sun-Mercury-Mars Aries charts with those with the same triple conjunction in Taurus and Gemini (in a May 3 post further down the page), we are starting to see different kinds of charts for each of the three signs. Also it's certainly significant that a superstar of the race track has an exalted Sun with Mars in its domicile.

...and surely are great examples of why we ought to look at the planets which are in aspect to the MC and are angular and so on. We can throw away the entire zodiac and look at these charts and see that Mars is powerfully configured to be important in them.

A place to start is Mars in the 9th house Gauquelin sector in different signs of the zodiac. No, we can?t throw the zodiac away because the planetary lords and exaltations of signs help us to understand the expression of planets. (A reminder that according to Robert Schmidt exalted planets were often seen as co-rulers of signs.) So Aries, for example, being the exaltation sign of the Sun, may have more to do with respect and status than other signs.

And a racing super star shouldn't have key planets in a Venus ruled sign. You see, what has happened in the tropical zodiac is that the signs have become disconnected from their domicile lords and exalted planets. That's the crux of my argument for sidereal signs.

Therese Hamilton wrote: No, I'm not saying that the modes relate to planetary lords. I relate the qualities of stubbornness or persistence to Aries as the more internally focused sign for Mars. (Scorpio is externalized Mars energy.)

I really do not follow this. Where are you getting that Scorpio is an externalised Mars energy? If we're comparing with traditional texts, then is this idea found in them?

I understand Scorpio to be a feminine sign and Aries to be a masculine one. So Mars ought to be more expressive or externalised in Aries than in Scorpio. Are you relating this to the fact that Aries is on the lunar hemisphere of the zodiac? And Scorpio is on the solar one?

And Taurus has Venus for its lord. Racing isn?t a Venus occupation.

I agree, but I think we probably place different emphases on dispositorship. For me, the big thing in these charts is the accidental placement of Mars, conjunct the MC. Irrespective of what zodiac you employ, Mars could be said to be powerfully placed.

I know this will sound strange, but because I use equal houses, initially I didn't focus on the M.C.! So those two charts I posted have Mars in a key sector. Then for comparison I need to take charts with Mars in the same key sector in other signs. (I'll do a search in ADB.)

Right, I wasn't sure if it was a deliberate oversight, or whether you just hadn't noticed this.

Actually the old texts do that. But in this case we have the triple conjunction in the M.C. sign. I've found that the ascendant lord is ALWAYS a key to the chart in that it's a focal point for aspects from planets.

I think the old texts describe careers for multiple placements, including the ascendant, as well as the lots and aspect configurations. But I still think the MC is favoured for the idea of occupation or social standing.
The MC is usually referred to as the place of occupation or activity, or used to examine matters related to career.

For example take Valens, Book IV, pg 79 of Riley's translation

In addition, when we investigate the length of life and bodily or mental activities, we count from the Ascendant....For forecasts of occupations, livelihood, and work, we will start with MC

I'm not sure what sources (I'm sure some exist) who focus mostly on the ascendant than the MC for career matters. I think it's clear enough that most would associate it with the MC though.


Overcome?? Mars makes a powerful applying aspect to the Sun. So the Sun absorbs the energy from Mars.

Also it's certainly significant that a superstar of the race track has an exalted Sun with Mars in its domicile.

Possibly, but for me, having Mars conjunct the MC is also very telling. Too much so to be able to state with any surety that it is Aries which is the important factor.

i think the issue of tropical verses sidereal places undue emphasis on sign positions. i don't know that most astrologers share that emphasis on sign position over other equally and perhaps more important considerations.

as i understand it, the majority of research done by the gauguelin's placed emphasis on planet and position in relation to the angles for example.. signs, aspects, midpoints and other considerations astrologers might make were left out.

in making a case for a particular emphasis on signs using either zodiac requires another astrologer turn off the particular way they balance all these factors while going along with the story in an attempt to understand how another astrologers perception functions and how they conclude something off a chart as they do. many ways of looking at a chart lends itself to the idea that much is plausible.. trying to be fully objective seems impossible, especially when all the weight of a persons presentation is towards an emphasis on sign position.

as i and others have said here at skyscript - hindsight astrology works with 20/20 vision.. doing this in any of the mystery tests offered using a particular emphasis to produce some astro wisdom in advance of knowing who the chart belongs to is a completely different matter. from my pov it is a much more legitimate way to make the case for a particular approach.. it would also force others to pay more attention! alas - not many have expressed an interest in these mystery examples for various personal reasons of their own. fwiw - i removed the last mystery chart exercise on the sidereal forum after it failed to receive any response!

Paul wrote:

Therese Hamilton wrote:
No, I'm not saying that the modes relate to planetary lords. I relate the qualities of stubbornness or persistence to Aries as the more internally focused sign for Mars. (Scorpio is externalized Mars energy.)

Paul replied:
I really do not follow this. Where are you getting that Scorpio is an externalised Mars energy? If we're comparing with traditional texts, then is this idea found in them?

I understand Scorpio to be a feminine sign and Aries to be a masculine one. So Mars ought to be more expressive or externalised in Aries than in Scorpio. Are you relating this to the fact that Aries is on the lunar hemisphere of the zodiac? And Scorpio is on the solar one?

The zodiac half system I?m referring to is the lunar/solar halves you mentioned that go back at least to Ptolemy. But the understanding of ?feminine? and ?masculine? is a modern tropical teaching. For the sidereal view (which tends to be more universal as well as Eastern), you?d have to check out articles on my web site. If astrology was taught in the universities, and you were a student, you would already have learned the answer to your question in a course perhaps titled, ?World Symbolism.?

The concepts of male and female can be related to the Sun and Moon as discussed in the linked article below and in articles following that one. (?Symbolism of the Sun and Moon?)
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/apolar1.htm

And a sidereal overview which includes principles from recent translations of ancient texts:
http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/aatriplicities2013.htm

Paul wrote:
I think the old texts describe careers for multiple placements, including the ascendant, as well as the lots and aspect configurations. But I still think the MC is favored for the idea of occupation or social standing.
The MC is usually referred to as the place of occupation or activity, or used to examine matters related to career.

This is a big research area, and we?d have to look up material in all the texts that have been translated so far. This would be a great topic to investigate for a university course. Perhaps someone will tackle this topic sometime on their own.

Therese wrote:
Overcome?? Mars makes a powerful applying aspect to the Sun. So the Sun absorbs the energy from Mars.
(...)
Also it's certainly significant that a superstar of the race track has an exalted Sun with Mars in its domicile.

Paul replied:
Possibly, but for me, having Mars conjunct the MC is also very telling. Too much so to be able to state with any surety that it is Aries which is the important factor.

I?ll reply to this concept in the next post. I've completed an ADB search for Mars conjunct the M.C.

I?ve gone to ADB and done a search for all the charts that had Mars conjunct the M.C. within three degrees for Aries, Taurus and Gemini. I kept the orb to three degrees because when I asked for five degrees, over 500 charts came up. I don?t have time to check 500 charts now, so I changed the orb to three degrees which gave 86 charts (and this is only for three zodiac signs!). Then I had to separate the charts into those with Mars on the 10th house side of the MC or the 9th house side, which is a Gauquelin plus zone. Here are the results for that plus zone:

ARIES MARS DEGREES: Mars conjunct the M.C., 3 degree orb, house 9, Krishnamurti ayanamsa:

0.2 suicide: hanged 8135
0.5 Zieman, George, bishop at the center of a sex scandal. He had to resign.
2.0 homicide victim 1198
4.1 Maguire, Toby (?Spiderman? movies)
5.6 suicide: gunshot 9947
5.7 suicide: hanged 1610
6.6 alcoholic 7060

(With the Fagan-Bradley ayanamsa, the first two charts would be back in Pisces.)

These are all the ADB charts in the first decan of sidereal Aries, which isn?t looking so good! Mars is the classical (Chaldean) ruler of this decan. This section of Aries is also the Jyotish lunar mansion belonging to Ketu (Moon?s south node). There is a big degree gap until the next charts:

15.0 Roberts, Meade, playwright
19.4 Seixas, Raul, singer, composer
23.8 Leonor, Princess of Spain
27.1 Carpenter, Kingi, founder of fashion company
29.7 Vezzali, Valentina, female fencer, Olympic gold

TAURUS MARS DEGREES: Mars conjunct the M.C., 3 degree orb, house 9, Krishnamurti ayanamsa:

0.4 Wauters, Eric, equestrian, Olympic bronze
1.8 Russell, anna, singer, comedienne
2.3 homosexual 10613
3.9 Thompson, James R., politician and professor
4.3 Jarrahy, Alizeh, noted family member
8.2 Fisher, Eddie, top rated singer, then quick fade

12.2 Hardy, Francoise, singer
18.2 Devineaux, Raymond, fencing champion
27.0 UFO sighting 11899
28.4 sex extremes, a groupie who kept a score card on her conquests

GEMINI MARS DEGREES: Mars conjunct the M.C., 3 degree orb, house 9, Krishnamurti ayanamsa:

5.6 Einhorn, Ira, LSD, ?peace, love? guru
6.6 baby born by c-section 14767
12.6 Cook-Fahey, Jewell, astrologer, Mercury Hour owner (business)
13.6 King, Coretta Scott, civil rights leader with her husband
20.8 lesbian 7831
21.6 homosexual 10725
22.1 Christensen, astrologer, artist, columnist
24.1 White, Mike (1970), screenwriter, actor, pastor, gay rights activist
26.5 Twins 10732

Since the first decan of Aries seemed to be so critical, I decided to see if the bordering charts (late Pisces) would show a similar pattern. I had to enlarge the orb to seven degrees to get only one chart in the ending degrees of Pisces:

29.4 lesbian 12807 (No other Pisces charts beyond 26 degrees.)

This gave me an idea for further research attempting to isolate the boundaries between sidereal signs (ayanamsa). If there is a clear break in types of charts, that would help to isolate the ?correct? sidereal zodiac. (Mental note to study this concept.)

But getting back to the short list of charts with Mars conjunct the M.C. with a total of 86 charts for Aries, Taurus, and Gemini:

1. It?s obvious that the greatest number of Mars positions will be on the 10th house side of the M.C.

2. It?s also obvious that Mars near the M.C. either doesn?t mean much at all in many cases, or has a large number of possible expressions which aren?t necessarily psychological.

3. For further research we?d have to form categories of activities, and then use a wider orb and total the number of cases in each decan or sign to see if any sign or sign area came out with a signature as such. The best observation we have from this data is a troubled Mars area in early Aries. This type of study isn?t statistical research as such. It?s simple counting and observing.

4. In the decans or other small areas of signs we might begin to see why ancient astrologers broke the signs into smaller sub-divisions and degree areas, each with different meanings. In general, they didn?t give one interpretation to an entire sign of the zodiac.

My tentative conclusion about the two charts I posted earlier on this topic is that the M.C. as such may not enter into the key biographical details. Instead these details would be related to zodiac sign symbolism and aspects:

Dale Earnhardt: Mars and Mercury conjunct Sun (ascendant lord) in Aries.

Terry Fox: Mars in Aries in square to the Sun (ascendant lord) and trine the Moon

Remember, initially we were talking about the traits of stubbornness and persistence which I gave to Mars as a planet toned by Mars-ruled Aries.

One small research project can suggest so many others!! Next: a search of Leo ascendants with a square to the Sun from Mars or Mars conjunct the Sun in Aries, Taurus or Gemini.

Therese Hamilton wrote: The zodiac half system I?m referring to is the lunar/solar halves you mentioned that go back at least to Ptolemy.

Thanks Therese, I wondered if this was so.

However, from what I remember, Ptolemy doesn't suggest that those signs are more expressive, or more masculine. Instead this topic is introduced from which the tropical logic for rulership is given.

But the understanding of ?feminine? and ?masculine? is a modern tropical teaching.

Not so, and is at least as old as the lunar/solar halves. In fact Ptolemy, you cited for this explicitly refers to the signs as masculine and feminine - he does not refer to the lunar and solar halves in this way.

Tetrabiblos, 1:12
(Robbins translation)

Of Masculine and Feminine Signs.

Again, in the same way they assign six of the signs to the masculine and diurnal nature71 and an equal number to the feminine and nocturnal. An alternating order was assigned to them because day is always yoked to night and close to it, and female to male. Now as Aries is taken as the starting-point for the reasons we have mentioned, and as the male likewise rules and holds first place, since also the active is always superior to the passive in power, the signs of Aries and Libra were thought to be masculine and diurnal, an additional reason being that the equinoctial circle which is drawn through them completes the primary and most powerful movement of the whole universe.72 The signs in succession after them correspond, as we said, in alternating order.

This idea is far from modern. Other authors likewise refer to the planets as masculine or feminine - I won't quote from other authors but you could check Valens for example and you will see that he lists the signs as masculine or feminine.

If astrology was taught in the universities, and you were a student, you would already have learned the answer to your question in a course perhaps titled, ?World Symbolism.?

Perhaps, but then I don't think we need a University for an opportunity to learn more about the history. I am not saying it would not help. Just that we do not necessarily need astrology to be respected for it to be studied by academia either.

This is a big research area, and we?d have to look up material in all the texts that have been translated so far. This would be a great topic to investigate for a university course. Perhaps someone will tackle this topic sometime on their own.

Right, but again, Universities do not have a monopoly on research. And we can still research history of symbolism without anyone respecting astrology either.

I have nothing against university, or university education. I'm currently studying a post-graduate, and in fact astrology forms part of my final submission, but it doesn't interest me if academia actually respects astrology, which isn't to say that it's not helpful to leverage academic resources for our own pursuits of astrology.

First, Paul, I'd like to say that I appreciate you taking the time for a conversation centered on the topic rather than coming in with your own arguments and basically ignoring the topic at hand. This is done far too often on Skyscript. So, thank you!

Paul wrote:

However, from what I remember, Ptolemy doesn't suggest that those signs are more expressive, or more masculine. Instead this topic is introduced from which the tropical logic for rulership is given.

Yes, that's true as I remember.

Therese wrote:
But the understanding of "feminine" and "masculine" is a modern tropical teaching.

Paul replied:
Not so, and is at least as old as the lunar/solar halves. In fact Ptolemy, you cited for this explicitly refers to the signs as masculine and feminine - he does not refer to the lunar and solar halves in this way.

Tetrabiblos, 1:12
(Robbins translation)
Quote:
Of Masculine and Feminine Signs.

...Now as Aries is taken as the starting-point for the reasons we have mentioned, and as the male likewise rules and holds first place, since also the active is always superior to the passive in power, the signs of Aries and Libra were thought to be masculine and diurnal, an additional reason being that the equinoctial circle which is drawn through them completes the primary and most powerful movement of the whole universe.72 The signs in succession after them correspond, as we said, in alternating order.

I meant the understanding of those terms is modern. I've taken up the terms "active" and "passive" in my article on the triplicities: http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/aatriplicities2013.htm

The meanings of "active" and "passive" are reversed in the modern understanding of those terms.

Perhaps, but then I don't think we need a University for an opportunity to learn more about the history.

Right!! But a university has a library! How many of us have the resources to keep purchasing all these new and wonderful translations?! It's really helpful to go to a section in a library and see a selection of books on the topic we want to read about.

And we can still research history of symbolism without anyone respecting astrology either.

Yes, if you live in a town with a university library and are allowed to use it! Otherwise, head for Amazon, do your research, and you'll probably be lucky enough to find the books you need cheap from an Amazon seller. That's what I generally do now. But it's ever so helpful to mix with other students and share ideas and experiences. And to learn about all the resources we didn't know about by ourselves. But we do have the Internet which is very helpful.

Is there a difference in wanting to share knowledge because it's interesting and exciting, or only studying for oneself as an individual? Maybe that's at the core of any topic that touches on education in a formal student setting?

Therese Hamilton wrote:First, Paul, I'd like to say that I appreciate you taking the time for a conversation centered on the topic rather than coming in with your own arguments and basically ignoring the topic at hand.

Well I think the topic is one I'm very much interested in and in hearing different views about it. So thank you.

But the understanding of "feminine" and "masculine" is a modern tropical teaching.

Right, but which understanding? Do you mean to say that traditional astrologers do not recognise feminine signs as being receptive as opposed to the more outward moving masculine signs?

Perhaps we could find an example of Mars in Scorpio as being its externalised sign and Aries as its internalised one? Because for me that seems more modern than recognising that feminine signs are receptive.

The meanings of "active" and "passive" are reversed in the modern understanding of those terms.

Can you expand?

Right!! But a university has a library! How many of us have the resources to keep purchasing all these new and wonderful translations?! It's really helpful to go to a section in a library and see a selection of books on the topic we want to read about.

As this topic of university is spanning two threads, I've responded on the other thread instead.

Therese Hamilton wrote:I?ve gone to ADB and done a search for all the charts that had Mars conjunct the M.C. within three degrees for Aries, Taurus and Gemini.

Is this the sidereal signs or the tropical ones?

Surely we should be looking at mars like careers based on dispositorship by examining those which have it connected to the MC (irrespective of sign) as opposed to those who have Mars strengthened by an accidental fortitude.

Therese wrote:
But the understanding of "feminine" and "masculine" is a modern tropical teaching.

Paul replied:
Right, but which understanding? Do you mean to say that traditional astrologers do not recognise feminine signs as being receptive as opposed to the more outward moving masculine signs?

I posted a link to my article that explains ?active? and ?passive,? but it looks like you didn?t have time check it out. Ptolemy refers to active and passive signs. It?s really best to read the article, but here is an excerpt:

http://www.snowcrest.net/sunrise/aatriplicities2013.htm

----------------------Begin quote:-----------------------
In order to understand the four basic qualities as applied to sidereal signs, we first have to define their components according to Aristotle:

Male and Female: Reflecting the society in which he lived, Aristotle elevated the rational over the passionate or emotional. Aristotle observed the female to be softer in character, more easily moved to tears, more compassionate, but also more jealous and quarrelsome. (That is, the female displays emotion!) Aristotle respected the male characteristics of courage and rationality over ?inferior? emotional traits.

Active and Passive: Aristotle's Active and Passive don't resemble our contemporary astrological understanding of those terms. Instead, they are related to functions of intellect. One understanding is that the active intellect relates to a fixed and stable set of concepts, a link to a universal mainframe (hard drive), so to speak. A modern commentary states: "The active intellect...is more properly called the Agent Intellect, as it is the force...causing thoughts to pass from the potential to the actual." (Absolute Astronomy.com)

We might call this the inner creative energy that manifests especially in the arts or in functions such as entrepreneurship, the inward motivation to produce something original and significant over which one has personal control. This is basically a solar function, the Sun being the power and light center of the solar system.

Aristotle?s Passive is external to the active, and is related more to the outer world. (Thus, the usual astrological understanding of "active" is what Aristotle might term passive!) Aristotle's passive has been said to relate to matter or the world of forms. The passive intellect would represent computer data files, but not the hard drive itself. This function can be related to the Moon which collects and reflects light from the Sun.

In our human world this would be the sociability factor where we reach out and link with others, asking opinions, joining energies to produce the finished product. This is the energy needed in team sports where cooperation is essential, committee meetings, conformity to a church or other organization, the helpful secretary, even the person who frequents the lecture circuit sharing concepts with an audience and soliciting response.

[Important!!]
This is the type of energy that is called "active" in western astrological systems. This is an important distinction because it solves the apparent tropical-sidereal contradiction of signs which tend either to extroversion or introversion. For example a sign with a primary inward focus is called Active in Aristotle?s philosophy (the mainframe), but passive (feminine) in the western astrological system.
-------------------End article quote---------------------

Perhaps we could find an example of Mars in Scorpio as being its externalised sign and Aries as its internalised one? Because for me that seems more modern than recognising that feminine signs are receptive.

This is easily recognized if you happen to be around a person with an important stellium in either sidereal Aries or Scorpio. Aries (tropical Taurus) is generally a ?man of few words,? and operates from his own motivation. Sidereal Scorpio is extroverted and a mixer (tropical Sagittarius). But I can see what ADB brings up in searches.

As this topic of university is spanning two threads, I've responded on the other thread instead.

Yes, thank you for your detailed reply on the other thread, which must have taken a great deal of your time to write.

Paul wrote:

Therese Hamilton wrote:
I've gone to ADB and done a search for all the charts that had Mars conjunct the M.C. within three degrees for Aries, Taurus and Gemini.

Paul asked:
Is this the sidereal signs or the tropical ones?

Sidereal, as I noted in my post that I was using the Krishnamurti ayanamsa when I listed the M.C. Mars degrees.

Surely we should be looking at mars like careers based on dispositorship by examining those which have it connected to the MC (irrespective of sign) as opposed to those who have Mars strengthened by an accidental fortitude.

I'm a little confused by what you are saying here. Do you mean that we should check the planets that Mars is dispositing (as say, for example, Jupiter in Scorpio) or do you mean (since Mars is at the M.C.) we should check the dispositor of Mars' sign? (That is, if Mars is in Cancer at the M.C., we should check the Moon position.)