Re: What's more accurate house system? I'm not sure how the whole sign system can be said to "make sense" as a way of describing the diurnal motion of the planets. I am sure that if it makes sense, it must make sense to everyone. The idea that you adopt anything that "feels good" to you is to degrade astrology from a science to New Age fluffiness. Last edited by david starling; at AM. I've honestly wondered about this for a long time myself. I use Sidereal Placidus housesystem, because if I don't, my ascendant would be Cancer, which doesnt fit me at all.
When I use Sidereal astrology, my Rising sign is Gemini. My houses are also totally different from when I use Placidus, and when I use whole sign system. The differences are actually pretty overwhelming. I'm still not sure which one of these two are more correct tho. Originally Posted by humblingstar. I don't think the house systems are really all that different, honestly. It's not like a 6th house sun goes to a 10th house sun. It's just somewhere around the 5th, 6th, or 7th.
Which are all houses that lead into each other. The 1st, 2nd, and 3rd house are all very different but they all have to do with the self. So if you have a planet that's jumping places in the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd just know that it's affecting the selfish part of your life and that's it. Don't stress about it. My Saturn is in the 3rd house in placidus, 4th house in equal, and 5th house is vedic.
Saturn in those houses all mean different things, but essentially, saturn is restricting the value to the self area of my life I think the houses blend together. Anyone of them fit for me. My Saturn aspects my Sun, Moon, and Mercury which very much reflects having Saturn in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th. Moon and 4th are kind of the same thing. I find that the same themes in my chart come up no matter what astrology interpretation. The themes that are random are probably just not important I've used chinese, sidereal, western, placidus, equal, whole sign Yes they're all a little different, but who cares.
Each astrology is a different piece of the puzzle and you gotta put them together to get the best info. Sidereal is like destiny, western is more psychology, chinese is just something else and the house systems — I'm not sure what each of them mean LOL They're just different ways of figuring out you. A great thing about different house systems is that the planets that don't change houses even after trying out different systems definitely mean that they should be where they are. That's a piece to figuring out that one main theme of your chart.
I think the key to different systems is to try and figure out what the chart is trying to tell you about who you are. And you can definitely find it when looking at all the different forms of astrology.
Divisions of the Diurnal Arc
The things that change or you can't understand are probably not that important because the things that are important probably don't change. Or maybe it's saying that your personality can be either of those things; it's just up to you to decide. I think it's weird that people try to understand themselves and then try to fit or mold a chart to fit their personality when actually the chart is supposed to help them understand themselves. Astrology is loose and fluid just like your personality. Last edited by AppLeo; at AM. I've always had many doubts about which house system would be appropriate, since my chart does change in ways that seem very significant to me on a personal level.
Planets moving houses, from Pluto in the 9th to the 10th and Neptune from the 12th to the 11th. I've found both placements truthful to a certain extent, e. These two influences moving seem very important, since I am Pisces dominant and Neptune's position and meaning is necessary for the comprehension of my chart, at least in my eyes. Same goes for Pluto, shifting from the 9th to the 10th, it fits my ambitious nature, although this might just be because of Pluto being conjunct to my MC.
I'd like it if there were a fixed standard for what system to use or at least an indicator. Originally Posted by airy. Originally Posted by david starling. I'm thinking of them as descriptions of "alternative Life-paths". Maybe you're still undecided as to which path to take. In terms of life paths I'm very much stranded at the time. I looked into astrology to seek out strengths and weaknesses within myself that may have gone undetected.
That's why I thought having a clear picture of what my chart would be like, as to planets in their houses, so that I can further understand myself. However, if there's anything I've learned of astrology to this date is that hardly anything is set in stone.
Astrologers use what fits them best, but it's difficult for me, since I try to seek a method that is "true", even if that's not entirely possible because Astrology is different for everyone. Fact is, regarding horoscopic astrology an accurate time of birth is essential because the time of birth determines the houses i. My birth time is pretty accurate, it's on my birth certificate as AM.
I previously thought it was AM although I was mistaken. I wish it was different though, I've got a pretty annoying stellium in the 12th that I would like to pretend didn't exist, lol. Use an alternative house system. Oh, may I ask what you might recommend? When I hear alternative house system I hear whole houses or equal. Placidus is the most common for me. I'm assuming you use Placidus That's the default on astro.
I use Placidus and have checked out Equal house, but that's about it. I suppose you suggest I try all the different ones astro. This is interesting, since it shifts my planets once more. Pluto from 9th to 10th this seems to happen in any system that is not Placiuds.
All times are GMT. The time now is PM. Contact Us - AstrologyWeekly. Boards' structure and all posts are property of AstrologyWeekly. No part of the messages sent on these boards may be copied without their owners' explicit consent. User Name. Remember Me? Have you read the FAQ? The Gemini sub-age has three sub-age decans, and the key decan for astrological purposes is Aquarius. The Aquarius sub-age decan and overflow — — marks the culmination of heightened astrological focus as both Cancer and Aquarius strongly promote astrology and these signs are overlapping.
This was the strongest astrological time for horoscopic astrology since the invention of Hellenistic astrology in the 1 st century BC in a Scorpio sub-age — 8 BC and Cancer sub-age decan and overflow. It appears that the shift away from whole sign houses to quadrant house systems most likely occurred once this heightened influence involving both Cancer and Aquarius came to an end in AD.
Towards the end of the Cancer sub-age overflow — sits a Cancer hotspot — specifically the Cancer micro-age and overflow — representing the final sting-in-the-tail by Cancer. Cancer is the sign that rules houses, and therefore is the sign that rules astrological houses. Hellenistic astrology developed under a Cancer sub-age decan and overflow — — 68 BC , and the most important development that Hellenistic astrologers introduced to horoscopic astrology was the astrological houses including the ascendant.
It seems just as appropriate that another significant development affecting astrological houses occurred under the next strongest influence of Cancer following is formative stage, even if it was a major mistake. Later astrologers might have been aware of the old whole sign houses. Guido Bonatti died c. Bonatti takes the lead from Ptolemy that the border of each house sits 5 degrees before the cusps? While some modern astrologers do make house cusps rubbery, this approach is in stark contrast to most modern astrologers who take house cusps literally as distinct house borders. This strongly suggests that the modern approach to houses has cut corners.
The big question remains — was the replacement of whole sign houses by quadrant house beneficial, detrimental or neutral to astrology? The difference between Hellenistic astrology and modern 20 th century psychological astrology is massive — swathes of techniques or approaches have disappeared.
Discarded techniques may be valid yet still disappear due to the Law of Diminishing Returns borrowed from economics. Basically the Law of Diminishing Returns imply that each succeeding event of a similar type produces less output. For example, the first ice-cream is delicious, but if the person keeps eating ice creams, each succeeding ice-cream brings less pleasure. Applied astrologically, there are just so many astrological techniques available, it is not warranted using all available techniques, but selecting a sub-group that produces the best results. So a valid astrological technique still may get jettisoned, even though it has validity and integrity, just because the return on the time invested is insufficient.
Astro-Geometry, Astrology article by Alova
Did this apply to the jettisoning of whole sign houses? Did the new quadrant based houses produce better results? Or, did the new quadrant based houses replace whole sign houses due to fashion or bias by those involved? The only way to really test this, is to test it.
Are quadrant based houses more accurate compared to whole sign houses? Testing astrology can be difficult, which is why no astrological test to date has convinced academics that there is any validity for astrology. This is where individual astrologers need to undertake their own research. Any competent astrologer that takes on testing astrology shifts into the proficient astrologer sphere. I have undertaken a number of tests, and while these tests cannot disprove the validity of quadrant house systems, these tests have proved to me the validity of the whole sign house system.
The main test I employed was applied to Donald Trump, as with a 29 degrees Leo ascendant, all his planets, Sun and Moon change house depending which house approach is taken. My analysis of Donald Trump repeatedly confirms that the most appropriate house structure that should be applied to his horoscope is the whole sign house system.
Equal house system (Hindu astrology)
Any proficient astrologer can use the same test. Each new lunar month and full moon confirms the validity and integrity of the whole sign house system in the case of Donald Trump. The study, practise and evolution of astrology parted ways with science and academia some centuries ago, and as a consequence, astrology reflects pre-Scientific Revolution science.
While the Scientific Revolution brought the empirical-based Scientific Method, astrology remains basically with a more ancient method — which I call the Astrological Method. What is the Astrological Method? It is the method whereby each generation of astrologers adopt new techniques, evolve existing techniques and discard other techniques. However, due to the pre-scientific style of the Astrological Method, there is no guarantee that each change is positive or correct.
However, on the other side of the equation, astrologers are not universally stupid, so most changes should be either correct, or relatively correct. Where else in astrology is there so much contention? Neil Spencer expressed the situation as follows:. Few things in astrology cause as much argument as the meaning of the houses and how their division is calculated. The only solution to this house conundrum will be when enough proficient astrologers undertake their own assessment or tests, but this will only occur through astrologers not merely accepting the status quo, but by questioning the status quo.
The biggest problem with research is bias. If you have a bias that a specific house system is superior to other house systems, this will detract from your research integrity, because you will look for evidence to support your bias, and avoid results that detract from your bias. To really understand astrology, it is necessary to stand under astrology and let it show you what is true or real, and what is not.
A research astrologer should always be looking for the truth, no matter what the truth may be, and not confirmation of their own perspective. Another point worth mentioning about whole sign houses is that due to the fact most astrologers have only experienced quadrant houses, many astrologers incorrectly think that whole sign houses make the ascendant disappear. In whole sign houses, the ascendant point is the strongest point in the horoscope. This is reflected in Hellenistic astrology by their alternate quadrant house system focussed upon the ascendant to determine which planets are strong in the horoscope i.
My second encounter with whole sign house system occurred in the late s when I was asked to write the weekly horoscope column for the local newspaper. I quickly realised that my immediate problem was how to determine which house was being activated because a transiting planet could be in one of two houses for each Sun sign or ascendant.
I realised that the only solution was to use the whole sign house system which I was already using as a novice Vedic astrologer.
Finally upon the arrival of the internet and online astrology discussion groups, I was able to check with other horoscope columnists, and they all used whole sign houses. Whole sign house are more ubiquitous than most contemporary astrologers may realise. In conclusion, the most long term contentious area in western horoscopic astrology is the astrological houses, and the only other contention that has risen to perhaps approach such a high level of controversy is the outer planets.
Since the revival of traditional astrology, there have been claims that the outer planets, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, are not rulers of Aquarius, Pisces and Scorpio respectively. This controversy may have been more noticeable over the recent past compared to the house controversy. Where there is smoke there is usually fire, so if the astrological community has had a long-term disagreement about houses, this is probably the smoke suggesting something is not right.
I hear many astrologers claim that their house system of choice works for them, so why bother. Many insights gain from a western horoscope are not related to houses anyway, as is the case with transits and progressions.
Astrology: An Introduction
Therefore a western astrologer could feel very comfortable utilizing a quadrant house system. But this does not make it correct or true. My contention is that those competent astrologers, that have the ability to be proficient astrologers, should focus upon researching houses and develop their own unique tests. For example, if there is a way of testing if Pluto is in the 1 st house, this could be used with Donald Trump, as he has Pluto in the 1 st whole sign house, but in the 12 th Placidus house.
Trump noticeably has a glass jaw, but astrologers seem unable to relate a glass jaw with someone who has their Pluto in the 1 st or 12 th houses? Is it obvious or is his glass jaw hidden from view? Another approach is to examine the ruling planet. In many cases, the ruling planet will change house, and so this opens up the possibility of qualitative analysis over which of the two ruling house possibilities seems the most appropriate. At the most simplest level, if you are interested in the house debate, always construct a horoscope using whole sign houses to compare with the house system you normally use.
The more tests the merrier. You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account.
Supported House Systems
Notify me of new comments via email. Notify me of new posts via email. This site uses Akismet to reduce spam.