Display posts from previous
Sort by

73 by ###
ANOTHER DIVERSION:
Nixx wrote:
Tom wrote: There are psychologists that could better answer that than I can,


The thinking these days about Serial Killers/Psychopaths, more Neuro- Psychiatric than Psychological, focuses more on the relationship between childhood trauma and brain development.

Bundy, in theory, would have lacked ''good enough'' language, touch, surroundings, affection ...due to the neglect and/or ignorance of his primary care givers. Here his 'sister/mother' and grandparents. Consequentially certain parts or functions of the brain, that enables empathy to develop, become stunted.

It's of interest how some of these folks go out and kill others and some don't. But with the right trigger it could easily happen. So the idea is it's sort of an accident waiting to happen. For example if someone laughs at you at the wrong time, etc.

If astrologers want to find this in the chart then they need to find the infancy period and specifically the relationship with the people or lack of responsible for a healthy upbringing.

. . .


Yes, the nurture thing. But there's always the possibility of nature. It's possible that with a birth something very bad - evil - entered the world. In this age of reducing things to influences and concepts we're culturally comfortable with some possibilities are simply ignored. They aren't scientific, and thus not comfortably explained.

74 by james_m
for anyone who would like to read the morin book on houses that tom mentions - http://www.skyscript.co.uk/cabal.html
that is one of the many nice things about skyscript!

why do so many astrologers want to study the lives of really twisted people? i suppose it has to do with wanting to find an answer for the unexplainable while trying to avoid psychology or worse - treating astrology like some type of science, lol..

i think scorpio is on the 4th house cusp for t bundy. one can get to this via a few different house systems, but mostly i like the whole sign/house which has scorpio firmly on the 4th cusp. mars and the moon which has just separated from mars is in the 5th for me.. jupiter in the 4th rules over these planets - and we have mutual reception too, which brings jupiter and mars together whether you get them in the same house or not.. retro venus in scorpio might support the idea that his mom as represented by the taurus midheaven was raped by her own father with this difficult venus ''conjoined'' the 5th and 8th house ruler jupiter.. it makes for good astro story at any rate with that nasty sign scorpio on the 4th house cusp. all sorts of dark stuff could be lurking from the past and feed into bundys early home life as represented by this trio of planets in scorpio - 2 inner planets retro as well..

for me i suppose i would single out a planet that is strong, or weak as having possibly greater bearing on any cluster of planets lumped in a particular house.. that said, i don't think you can take apart charts without looking at the whole and in bundys case the saturn rising in it's fall, in a nocturnal chart with mercury square on an angle speaks of deceptiveness to me. neptune exactly 45 the ascendant too, but this is after all the trad forum, so we have to leave that aside. i was telling another astrologer just yesterday how so much of astrology is like back fill after the fact.. we do it to try to learn more about astrology and i am not so sure someone would make a big deal over the fact that there are 3 planets in the 4th - by my terms - as opposed to some other features of the chart that stand out to me.. i would be leaving the craziness of people like bundy to the trained professionals, but it is fun to contemplate where it is coming from astrologically..

75 by Tom
1) Twisted people. I didn't pick Bundy because he was twisted. I picked Bundy because he has multiple planets in one house. If someone wants to post the chart of someone else with three or more planets in one house, feel free. I noted that I had a challenging chart for discussion. Delineating all these planets in one house is a challenge - whether the native is twisted or not.

2) House systems are always a problem and always will be a problem. I'm not sure I can go along with Kirk's reasoning that is part whole sign and part quadrant in rationale. If someone wishes to tackle this subject with Bundy's 4th house using whole signs, just say so and do it. The thought occurred to me, too. However using all the rules at our disposal, and using Placidus cusps, Bundy has 6 planets in the 4th house. Using Kirk's reasoning he has at least 3 maybe 4. It's still multiple planets.

The 5 degree rule is arbitrary, why not 5.5 degrees? Why not 4.5? I would consider using the Moon in a 5th house delineation myself to account for a potential inaccurate birth time. But there is no way using Placidus cusps Mars can be eliminated as a 4th house planet. So he has 5 instead of 6 if we use Jupiter, 4 instead of 6 if we don't.

Notice that Mars is in mutual reception with Jupiter. I think it would be difficult to use one without the other.

3) Bundy said he felt loved in his early environment and there seemed to be a genuine love for his grandfather even after he found out the true nature of his relationship. There is no evidence of childhood abuse of Ted Bundy. I said that previously. If you want to relate something to his murderous rages that is less than savory, consider this, prior to his execution Bundy blamed his desire to rape and kill on his early and frequent exposure to pornography. He didn't get it from his family, either.

4) The idea that traditional astrologers are only interested in timing of events is hogwash and it is hogwash perpetrated by modern astrologers whose knowledge of traditional astrology is nothing but cliches. See for example Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos, Book III the chapter on the quality of the soul. That should put this particular cliche to rest since this is the sort of things that occupied traditional astrologers since at least the 2nd century AD. Events are part of it. They never were all of it. What traditionalists called character, we call psychology.

5) I refuse to discuss Frawley's remark about the third house here or anywhere. It was a joke. That's his style. I thought it was funny, so I repeated it. Anything else read into that remark is making a mountain out of a molehill. Lighten up.

76 by Nixx
Kirk wrote:
Yes, the nurture thing. But there's always the possibility of nature. It's possible that with a birth something very bad - evil - entered the world. In this age of reducing things to influences and concepts we're culturally comfortable with some possibilities are simply ignored. They aren't scientific, and thus not comfortably explained.
Nature or congenital issues aren?t ignored, but the focus is more on nurture at the moment. You follow the 'evidence' as it emerges with these things. In fact these realities make the issue a little darker, less support for the idea some of these folks can be 'cured' or brought back into society since the organic damage is so profound.

In 2012 you won?t get anybody, intelligent, thinking about some evil force or what have you entering the world. An Evangelical Christian might do or a similarly uneducated fruit basket, or a teenager who watched the Omen last night.

Some interesting cases in the USA now in the light of these finding?s where the murderer is put on trial and the court is informed by the Psychiatrist it is not his ?fault? but more logically his parents who are sitting in the witness gallery. i.e. who should be on trial exactly. Tricky one? Often the parents are developmentally delayed or mentally ill or physically ill and basically couldn?t do what was necessary. So tragedy heaped on tragedy. The person still gets locked up of course but the death penalty has been sought and refused on occasions due to the emerging neurological evidence.

Bundy has IC ruler Mars conjunct Moon, may symbolise an aggressive ?father? more beating than cuddling? Ruler of 10th in the 12th so ?absent? mother? If his brain was examined we may know more as to what may have happened early doors. Bundy?s chart fits in ok at first view with the Neuro-Psychiatry. Both luminaries are in the 4th so the immediate focus is on the early home life, father relationship....(I may be getting ?Psychological ?here so will stop talking to, perhaps, myself)

77 by Nixx
Tom wrote:
3) Bundy said he felt loved in his early environment and there seemed to be a genuine love for his grandfather even after he found out the true nature of his relationship. There is no evidence of childhood abuse of Ted Bundy. I said that previously. If you want to relate something to his murderous rages that is less than savory, consider this, prior to his execution Bundy blamed his desire to rape and kill on his early and frequent exposure to pornography. He didn't get it from his family, either.
Many people have an early and frequent exposure to pornography so there needs to be something more fundamnental as well I would have thought. Bundy is unlikely to have had much insight as to why he did what he did. People rarely do.

Childhood abuse Tom is not getting fed regularly, cuddled, etc this kind of thing. Is this information availiable anywhere about the years 0-3 and who was doing the 'caring' and how ?

78 by Nixx
james_m wrote: i would be leaving the craziness of people like bundy to the trained professionals, but it is fun to contemplate where it is coming from astrologically..
Fun?

Depressing you mean, after all if Bundy had come to see you, assuming the Neuro-Psychiatry nurture idea is not so applicable here then maybe as an Astrologer you could have stopped what followed somehow. Tall order mind.

After all changing the future is the whole point of astrology isn't it, otherwise it's pointless.

79 by Tom
For the third time, there is no evidence that Ted Bundy was abused or deprived emotionally in his childhood upbringing. He claimed as much and since he was likely to be executed, claiming abuse could have been to his benefit. But if there is no evidence, then the all we have is speculation. He did have a huge emotional shock, and I don't recall at what age. I'll guess 12 or so.

No evidence means just that. No one claimed it, no one witnessed it and Bundy denied it. At some point the objective observer has to drop this as a possibility until at least some evidence of abuse surfaces.

Think about this for a minute. His mother gave birth to him when she was about 15. That was scandalous in 1946. Instead of putting him up for adoption or kicking his mother out into the street, her parents raised the child to give him the best upbringing free of shame that they could. Raising him this way may or may not have been the best way to handle the situation, but it was handled that way and no abuse is known. He had a teenage mother, normally this doesn't have a good outcome. But her parents stepped up and did their best. Without something to tell us otherwise, we're going to have to accept his own description of his childhood. He never once blamed them even as he was walking to the electric chair.

As for the pornography I never said that was the reason for his rages. In fact I seriously doubt it. I said that he said it. We're all free to give it what weight we wish.

Now let's do some astrology.

80 by ###
YET ANOTHER DIVERSION:
Nixx wrote:
Kirk wrote:
Yes, the nurture thing. But there's always the possibility of nature. It's possible that with a birth something very bad - evil - entered the world. In this age of reducing things to influences and concepts we're culturally comfortable with some possibilities are simply ignored. They aren't scientific, and thus not comfortably explained.
Nature or congenital issues aren?t ignored, but the focus is more on nurture at the moment. You follow the 'evidence' as it emerges with these things. In fact these realities make the issue a little darker, less support for the idea some of these folks can be 'cured' or brought back into society since the organic damage is so profound.

In 2012 you won?t get anybody, intelligent, thinking about some evil force or what have you entering the world. An Evangelical Christian might do or a similarly uneducated fruit basket, or a teenager who watched the Omen last night.

. . .
You certainly don't seem to know what's been going on out there in the world of psychology for quite a few years now. :shock: Beyond the herd mentality of mainstream academic psychology, anyway.

I'm thinking specifically of James Hilllman and Archetypal Psychology. Hillman brought soul, psyche, back into psychology. His book The Soul's Code: In Search of Character and Calling discusses nature and nurture, with nature being a soul quality we enter the world with (quickly, simplistically and possibly inaccurately stated on my part). The book has a chapter titled 'The Bad Seed' with the opening section 'Called to Kill?' Science doesn't like the idea of a soul that is called to have particular qualities which provoke a person to act in particular ways. But astrologers need to be very open to the possibility. This was the home turf of the early philosopher/astrologers.

Hillman was no fruit basket. Delightfully odd in some respects. :'

81 by Nixx
Kirk wrote:

You certainly don't seem to know what's been going on out there in the world of psychology for quite a few years now. :shock: Beyond the herd mentality of mainstream academic psychology, anyway.

I'm thinking specifically of James Hilllman and Archetypal Psychology. Hillman brought soul, psyche, back into psychology. His book The Soul's Code: In Search of Character and Calling discusses nature and nurture, with nature being a soul quality we enter the world with (quickly, simplistically and possibly inaccurately stated on my part). The book has a chapter titled 'The Bad Seed' with the opening section 'Called to Kill?' Science doesn't like the idea of a soul that is called to have particular qualities which provoke a person to act in particular ways. But astrologers need to be very open to the possibility. This was the home turf of the early philosopher/astrologers.

Hillman was no fruit basket. Delightfully odd in some respects. :'
Blimey I am a real maverick in academic psychology, not many look at Horoscopes, maybe less uninformed stereotyping Kirk!

I know Hillman's work well, he has been a big influence on my Psychological and Astrological thinking, so something may be getting lost here in translation ?

This book came out in 1997. This stuff is mostly since this time. I don't think it fundamentally threatens this Hillman , Greene , Tarnas Archetypal lens. I will have to give it some thought and try and find this book, all in boxes at the moment. They will doubltless have looked at the Neuro-Psychiatric (not Psychology!) material by now themselves.

Are you suggesting Bundy's 'soul'caused him to kill these people? Would Hillman ? If so isn't this woo woo thinking here? It's not really consistent with the Co -Creative Anima Mundi conceptions these 3 and others of this ilk lecture about as far as I can see?

82 by Nixx
james_m wrote:
Tom wrote:
if you like doing astrology and trying to understand it better thru research or wanting to better understand the symbology any way possible, then it is fun regardless who the chart belongs to.. i agree bundy is a depressing type person to focus on, but he does have more then a few planets in his 4th house, so here we are trying to understand that and learn from one another on how others may have some unique perspective to share..
No fun for me James. It just gives another lens on usually already depressing situations. Sometmes, if not often, it just makes the issue even worse, albeit hinting at solutions not found otherwise. Thus the point of the construct seemingly consistent with the Schmidt Hellenistic lens , as I currently understand this.

83 by Nixx

For the third time, there is no evidence that Ted Bundy was abused or deprived emotionally in his childhood upbringing. He claimed as much and since he was likely to be executed, claiming abuse could have been to his benefit. But if there is no evidence, then the all we have is speculation. He did have a huge emotional shock, and I don't recall at what age. I'll guess 12 or so.

No evidence means just that. No one claimed it, no one witnessed it and Bundy denied it. At some point the objective observer has to drop this as a possibility until at least some evidence of abuse surfaces.


People don't remember what happened to them age 0-3. In addition this paradigm in Psychiatry was not around when he was caught so his grandparents would likely not have been examined by the courts Psychiatrist and asked about how they brought him up. They may have felt they did fine, many do in these cases, but only by analysing the care more forensically does this 'abuse' surface. So we can?t, from this distance, say how relevant or not his first few yrs were to his later psychosocial development.

??Ted never accepted Johnny as a father figure, preferring his beloved grandfather. Grandfather Cowell was a man with a violent temper, a man who brooked no dissent. His wife was repeatedly taken to hospitals for shock treatment for depression. Her fears grew until she refused to leave the house, a victim of agoraphobia??.
http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Bundy,_Ted

So grandad is violent and grandma is depressed suggesting Bundy may not have had a lot of quality care whilst his brain was developing so pivotally.

Looking at this chart with pre-1700 conceptions what clues to the later behaviour do you see here. You mentioned ''inner demons'' even ''death' being found in the 4th through associations with the 8th and 12th (sounds like Liz Greene, which may alarm you).

Where is this extreme hatred of women found, they say he hated his mother, how would they have narrated this bizarre molestation of decaying corpses. .Finally this idea of martyrdom in relation to the ?family inheritance? is interesting, although we can suggest he also went to great ends to escape from prison, and not be caught killing initially. I would like to see how Morin?s analogical thinking operates here and seemingly it could get a bit convoluted.

84 by Donna Chang
I like Morin's remarks on the 4th house a lot. Passion=suffering, sounds about right.

Investigators dismissed Bundy's statements about pornography as hokum. He was a psychopath,which means he was a liar and a fabricator, adjusting his stories to suit his audience. He thought the pornography angle would please his Christian evangelist interviewer. Psychopaths come from normal families and deranged ones, some suffer terrible abuse, others none.

Fourth house/tenth house: Bundy sometimes impersonated authority figures to lure women to their literal gravesites. He often returned to the gravesites for further violating. He was terribly insecure about his status in society, inflating his prestige and importance primarily to impress women--the ones he didn't kill.

I can allow the moon in the fifth, explains some of the so-called charm he had, plus he was a real party boy. Mars needs to be in the 4th. He was full of rage but denied it.
!! Read first: forum policies
Recent topics
Post Reply

Return to “Traditional (& Ancient) Techniques”