Results for Susan's horoscope on the "system"

1. Moon/Cancer 14 points
2. Mercury/Gemini/Virgo 12 points
3. Venus/Taurus/Libra 11 points
4. Mars/Aries/Scorpio 10 1/2 points
5. Sun/Leo 10 points
6. Uranus/Aquarius 8 points
Jupiter/Sagittarius 8 points
8. Saturn/Capricorn 7 points
9. Pluto/Scorpio 6 1/2
10. Neptune/Pisces 6 points

Somewhat dissappointing as Neptune comes in last. Despite being trine to the Sun within 12 minutes of arc; but it has few other strong aspects.

If I gave it one or two points for being the strongest aspecting planet to the Sun, Neptune would rise in the rankings though.

Interestingly, both Sherry and Susan (especially Susan) have more Mars strength in their chart than they predicted. Maybe women don't see much Mars in themselves, or don't want to admit to it.

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-23 23:44 ]</font>

On 2002-03-23 07:10, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

On 2002-03-23 01:16, Stonewall Patton wrote:

Marc, it looks like you married Vince Lamb!

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Stonewall, I may owe you one, but I don't owe you that much!

Virgil, I know you only tease me because you like me. The feeling is mutual, which is why you won't get mad if I ask if the River Pike is the kind of place where men are men, women are (too) few, and sheep are nervous. :razz:

:lol:

I did some further tweaking of the system. It was needed after all; it was a "spare of the moment" thing. So we add 1 or 2 points for the closest planet aspecting the Sun (depending on how close), and 1 point for the closest planet aspecting the Moon. Plus the Ascendant really merits 3 points; the Sun 3 in a man's chart, and the Moon 3 in a woman's.

So after this, Susan's scores are:

1. Moon/Cancer 14
2. Mercury/Gemini/Virgo 13
3. Venus/Taurus/Libra 12
4. Mars/Aries/Scorpio 10 1/2
5. Sun/Leo 10
6. Jupiter/Sagittarius 9
7. Uranus/Aquarius 8
Neptune/Pisces 8
9. Saturn/Capricorn 7
10. Pluto/Scorpio 6 1/2

I also rescored Stonewall's chart according to the updated system, with this result:

1. Uranus/Aquarius 25 points
2. Pluto/Scorpio 19 1/2
3. Saturn/Capricorn 17
Jupiter/Sagittarius 17
5. Neptune/Pisces 15
6. Mars/Aries/Scorpio 12 1/2
7. Mercury/Gemini/Virgo 12
8. Sun/Leo 8
9. Moon/Cancer 7
10. Venus/Taurus/Libra 5

For Sherry now I get:

1. Moon/Cancer 24 points
2. Venus/Taurus/Libra 14 points
3. Neptune/Pisces 13 points
4. Jupiter/Sagittarius 9 points
Sun/Leo 9 points
6. Pluto/Scorpio 7 1/2
7. Uranus/Aquarius 7
Mercury/Gemini/Virgo 7
9. Mars/Aries/Scorpio 6 1/2
10. Saturn/Capricorn 4

Further tweaking may be necessary to separate Taurus and Libra, Gemini and Virgo.

On 2002-03-24 00:32, Eric A Meece wrote:

I also rescored Stonewall's chart according to the updated system, with this result:

1. Uranus/Aquarius 25 points
2. Pluto/Scorpio 19 1/2
3. Saturn/Capricorn 17
Jupiter/Sagittarius 17
5. Neptune/Pisces 15
6. Mars/Aries/Scorpio 12 1/2
7. Mercury/Gemini/Virgo 12
8. Sun/Leo 8
9. Moon/Cancer 7
10. Venus/Taurus/Libra 5

Eric, I am going to have to go back and study your methodology in the morning. But now this really is not matching up with my original "prediction." In fact I know this cannot fit me, if we trust the meanings. Mars is strong in me and Neptune is weak. Now you have Neptune ranking higher than Mars and I know that does not fit me. Additionally, surely Saturn is not higher than Mars and Jupiter for me. I'll look at it in the morning.

On 2002-03-24 00:29, Vince Lamb '59 wrote:

On 2002-03-23 07:10, Virgil K. Saari wrote:

On 2002-03-23 01:16, Stonewall Patton wrote:

Marc, it looks like you married Vince Lamb!

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Stonewall, I may owe you one, but I don't owe you that much!

Vince, I was having an easier time picturing you as Mr. Lamb and Marc as Mrs. Lamb. But he already claimed the masculine role for himself!

Virgil, I know you only tease me because you like me. The feeling is mutual, which is why you won't get mad if I ask if the River Pike is the kind of place where men are men, women are (too) few, and sheep are nervous. :razz:

:lol:

They filmed that one episode of Monty Python up on the River Pike:

I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay,
I sleep all night and I work all day.
I chop my wood, and eat my lunch, and like to pick wild flowers.
I put on women's clothing and hang around in bars.

On 2002-03-24 00:29, Vince Lamb '59 wrote:
Virgil, I know you only tease me because you like me. The feeling is mutual, which is why you won't get mad if I ask if the River Pike is the kind of place where men are men, women are (too) few, and sheep are nervous.

There are too few sheep in the town of Pike to matter. And there are more women than men, though at times the Odocoileus Virginianii do seem to be a bit flight prone. Not that there is anything wrong with that. HTH

Both men and women seem to look for cervine closeness at certain times of the year in a Fatal Attraction sort of way. There has arisen a perfume and cologne industry purveying to their needs. All seem mostly intent on luring a male for some reason. But, then this is part of the Blue Zone. Not that there is anything wrong with that. HTH

Eric,

I took a look at your new scoring system and I am not sure that I fully grasp it because I am still uncertain as to the meaning of much of this terminology. But it looks like you may have gone ahead and factored in signs and that may be part of the problem (if there is a problem). Bear in mind that I ranked the planets alone according to their alleged meanings without even considering signs. Indeed I am a Capricorn with Pisces Rising and this in no way describes me. It in fact sounds like Marc Lamb and there is no indication that Marc is even a Capricorn much less a Capricorn with Pisces Rising. The surprising thing you found in my chart is that the influence of other planets outweighs the standard (and non-applicable to me) influence of Capricorn with Pisces Rising, and does so in near precisely the order of precedence which they hypothetically should, consistent with their meanings. Since the initial ranking dealt with planets alone, the chart should be assessed with respect to planets alone.

I guess the problem may be that you tried this and it did not work so cleanly for Susan and Sherry. Then perhaps my experience was indeed a striking coincidence. Or perhaps there should be some sort of standard test which the individual could take in advance to rank his/her planets. This would eliminate much of the subjectivity and possible error in people's initial rankings.

I'll think about it some more. But the main thing to me is the planets since I do not represent my sign. I have not thought through how to rank the signs (exclusive of the planets) from my chart but perhaps that would be worth a try. I'll get back to you.

Thanks for your comments SP.

Yes, Saturn and Neptune are higher in this scoring system because you are a Capricorn with Pisces rising. Without assigning points to the signs, both would be lower in the rankings.

I haven't heard from Sherry and Susan yet, but it appears their results match pretty well, but not as well as your original planets' rankings.

Of course, every typing system is going to be imperfect. I'm sure we both aren't completely typical of INTP.

It could be as you mentioned earlier that, because Jupiter is so prominent in your chart (as the handle planet with all the others on the other side of the zodiac, and angular), that for you it is the ruler of Pisces; and thus it and not Neptune should get those 6 "points."

Also, it depends on how well each person knows themselves and the planets! I'll bet if you study Saturn more, you'll find it indeed does relate to you. Remember your hero Patton had Capricorn Moon, and also like you had Saturn rising. Perhaps Uranus and Pluto are the source of some of what you attribute to Mars.

On the other hand, you have so many aspects that I have been a bit careless and left a few of your weak ones out. Just now I found another one, Mars semi-sextile Chiron, very close, so it can't be omitted! Give Mars another point.

Maybe we'll get more results from a few others. In any case I don't see how a ranking system can only include planetary aspects, and not the other factors, so I had to revise it.

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-24 22:25 ]</font>

On 2002-03-24 22:05, Eric A Meece wrote:

On the other hand, you have so many aspects that I have been a bit careless and left a few of your weak ones out. Just now I found another one, Mars semi-sextile Chiron, very close, so it can't be omitted! Give Mars another point.

Geez, you keep finding new things. Do I have an unusually large number of aspects? If I do, then perhaps the reason that Susan's and Sherry's are out of synch is because they have too small a sample. This is assuming of course that there should be a correlation in the first place.

Are there actually people who have no aspects at all?

Some further things to consider Stonewall, as to why you must have a relationship to Saturn if there is anything to this stuff!

True, if we take away your sun sign and Ascending Saturn in Pisces, things match up as you expected. But in reality we really can't omit those factors, even though Uranus, Pluto and Jupiter may be at least if not more important.

Consider the odds: only one in 36 people has one of the 10 planets within one degree of the Ascendant. You do.

Only one person in 144 has any planet within 15 minutes of arc of the Ascendant. You do.

That planet is Saturn in Pisces. On the Ascendant, it is supposed to be uniquely associated with you and your personality.

Only one in 1440 people has Saturn within 15 minutes of the Ascendant. The chances of Saturn being on the Asc. within 15 minutes IN PISCES are less than one in 16,000. Pisces is in fact one of the two rarest Ascendants because of astronomical factors (the other is Aries).

So why would everything else fit for you, but this major factor not fit? I suggest it is something to look at!

Here are some other descriptions of Saturn from a book called Astrology for Regular People, page 53-55.

"Saturn showed no weakness and maintained that he could endure any hardship. If one of his players was injured or had personal problems, Saturn showed little sympathy..."

Sounds like your hero. Maybe you too?

"(Later) Saturn lightened up a bit. Though he was still a disciplinarian, Saturn let the rules slip here and there..."

"Saturn disciplines us and toughens our egos. Saturn throws challenges, tests and obstacles before us to help us grow... Saturn teaches endurance and self-reliance... Saturn is very strong-willed. Saturn not only preserves but perfects what exists. Saturn creates change and transformation, which implies the element of Fire. Saturn represents pragmatic will...characterized by earth and fire. Saturn uses fire to forge the earth"

(remember in my book chapter I sent you, Capricorn is also earth and fire)

I'll email you a description of Saturn in Pisces by Grant Lewi

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-24 23:10 ]</font>

On 2002-03-24 23:04, Eric A Meece wrote:

Only one in 1440 people has Saturn within 15 minutes of the Ascendant. The chances of Saturn being on the Asc. within 15 minutes IN PISCES are less than one in 16,000. Pisces is in fact one of the two rarest Ascendants because of astronomical factors (the other is Aries).

I guess you could push it even further. How many of those (the one in 16000) are Capricorns (ruled by Saturn, of course)? One in 12? So I guess we might be up to about one in 192,000. But as rare as it may be, it does not mean a thing if the person in question does not exhibit what it represents. That is what I am trying to see and I will continue to peruse your descriptions.

Here are some other descriptions of Saturn from a book called Astrology for Regular People, page 53-55.

"Saturn showed no weakness and maintained that he could endure any hardship. If one of his players was injured or had personal problems, Saturn showed little sympathy..."

Well, sorta.... But even if this is closer to me, it might be further from the average Capricorn.

"(Later) Saturn lightened up a bit. Though he was still a disciplinarian, Saturn let the rules slip here and there..."

"Disciplinarian" is too strong and I pay little heed to rules that are illogical or arbitrary. But in general, I look for people who live by a code which regulates their behavior and I try to steer clear of those who do not. So this sort of fits. It is certainly closer than most of the Capricorn material.

"Saturn disciplines us and toughens our egos. Saturn throws challenges, tests and obstacles before us to help us grow... Saturn teaches endurance and self-reliance... Saturn is very strong-willed. Saturn not only preserves but perfects what exists. Saturn creates change and transformation, which implies the element of Fire. Saturn represents pragmatic will...characterized by earth and fire. Saturn uses fire to forge the earth"

That fits. But does it fit every Capricorn?

(remember in my book chapter I sent you, Capricorn is also earth and fire)

I'll email you a description of Saturn in Pisces by Grant Lewi

Thanks. I'll look forward to it.

Not "every Capricorn" is going to have Saturn rising, so no what they say will not fit every Capricorn. The Sun sign is only one factor and may not even be the most important. As we've seen, in your chart Uranus is the most important factor, and Jupiter in Gemini is all-important too. On the other hand, probably Capricorns will have Saturn characteristics more often than others. I don't know evidence to that effect, other than my own knowledge of famous Capricorns and those I know. The way you represent Capricorn will be your own unique flavor though, according to your chart, and how you live your life-- not to mention as I've said, your generation.

On 2002-03-24 23:50, Eric A Meece wrote:

Not "every Capricorn" is going to have Saturn rising, so no what they say will not fit every Capricorn. The Sun sign is only one factor and may not even be the most important. As we've seen, in your chart Uranus is the most important factor, and Jupiter in Gemini is all-important too. On the other hand, probably Capricorns will have Saturn characteristics more often than others. I don't know evidence to that effect, other than my own knowledge of famous Capricorns and those I know. The way you represent Capricorn will be your own unique flavor though, according to your chart, and how you live your life-- not to mention as I've said, your generation.

Thanks, Eric. I guess I am getting thrown off by the fact that the Sun sign is the thing always used in horoscopes, etc. I just assumed that it was the single most important factor. You will have to tell me what factors are most important and I will see if anything makes sense.

If I interpret you correctly above, I can disregard Capricorn (Sun sign) for the time being and concentrate on the fact that Saturn is on the Ascendant. Does it matter what sign the ascendant is or just that Saturn is on it?

The Sun sign and Ascendant sign do matter. "Horoscopes" in the newspaper (which are not horoscopes at all) overemphasize the sun sign because you can't know the birthdates and times of all your readers.

In my new scoring system I give 3 points to the Sun sign if you are male; and 3 to the Ascendant; so they still matter IMO. In your chart "Saturn in Pisces" on the Asc. sums up both Saturn/Capricorn and Neptune/Pisces, which you have felt don't fit you as well as the planets in your top tier.

"Which factors are most important" varies with each chart. Some say now that planets on the angles (Ascendant, Midheaven, Descendant, Nadir) is the most important factor. Close aspects are also felt to be very important factors these days.

I wouldn't say Sherry and Susan don't have enough aspects. They have plenty. Whatever you have is what you have anyway.

I'm hoping to hear from Ally Bear too!

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-25 08:24 ]</font>

Eric:

I found an interesting point system last night here:

http://www.astrologyclub.org/article...eton_intro.htm

The trouble is that I am not certain whether to grade by house or by sign. There are some interesting similarities by house. Fewer by sign. Unfortunately, I suspect that they want it done by sign.

Wow, Stonewall...you practically LIVE here these days! :smile:

Eric, thanks for the analysis. That is a mystery why Neptune would have so little influence, and yet it is trine to my sun sign, and I identify with Neptune characterstics. How do you explain this anamoly (sp?)?

Also, how exactly do you come up with the percentages? What exactly is being measured--and how does the self-ranking of the planets enter into all this?



_________________
Labels tell you where the box is coming from and where it is headed and are quite helpful. They do not tell you what's inside though they might indicate "fragile", "handle with care", "this is not a Bill", "magnetic medium", etc.--VIRGIL K. SAARI

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Susan Brombacher on 2002-03-25 17:30 ]</font>

stonewall, i find it very interesting that you have the planet saturn so close to your ascendant as i have the exact same configuration in mine with a capricorn rising (with saturn directly on the ascendant), a taurus sun and a moon in pisces. just out of curiosity, did you have any difficulties at birth? i have always heard that persons with saturn in close conjunction to their ascendant often have difficult births as i myself was born a month late and with the umbilical cord wrapped around my neck, almost killing me in the process.

On 2002-03-25 19:22, enjolras wrote:

stonewall, i find it very interesting that you have the planet saturn so close to your ascendant as i have the exact same configuration in mine with a capricorn rising (with saturn directly on the ascendant), a taurus sun and a moon in pisces. just out of curiosity, did you have any difficulties at birth? i have always heard that persons with saturn in close conjunction to their ascendant often have difficult births as i myself was born a month late and with the umbilical cord wrapped around my neck, almost killing me in the process.

Enjolras, long time no see (although you may have been on threads I have not had a chance to read lately). I never had the sense that my birth was easy but I am not sure that it was extraordinarily difficult. At least I do not recall any stories on a par with yours. And I was born early by a week or two. HTH.

I don't know what this has to do with anything, but I was 2 weeks late and labor had to be induced. (that would have made me a Gemini)

Guess even back then I was shy and had to be coaxed out of my cocoon! :lol:

I too was late, by 10 days. If I had arrived on time, I would have been a mid-Cancer, rather than almost on the cusp. But then I wouldn't have been born during a solar eclipse.

My dad has told me two stories about my birth: one, that I was born w/jaundice & was so wrinkled & yellow that my parents wanted to send me back for a Gerber baby. Two, that he never realized that he was of illegitamate parentage until my mom was in labor w/me.

Interesting find Stonewall. That is my astrology club of which I just became president. I know the author, but I didn't know she had a point system.

Susan, you might check to see how the rankings on the point system square with your own estimate. The point was, if a chart fits, people can tell pretty much what it will be like in advance, unless they are self-deluded or just don't know themselves. Of course, to some extent you already knew.

Point systems could be useful, but none will be perfect. I could keep tweaking it ad infinitum; there are so many factors. so I won't any more. Stonewall and I lumped all the "strong" aspects together and gave them two points, and weak ones one point. But obviously, in some charts a few aspects stand out and are probably deserving of three or more points. That would be the case with your Sun trine Neptune, and also your Moon trine Venus. Whatever the point system says, these two aspects are the defining ones in your chart.

I just cast madscientist Robert's chart; he too has two aspects that stand out from the rest. We'll see if he picks up on them, and how well his planetary lists matches the point system.

so far an interesting pattern has developed in which women underestimate their Mars strength and men (well just Stonewall so far) overestimate it. We'll see if that holds up, but it would be logical since, as everyone knows, men are from Mars, and women are not!

Stonewall:

In Eleanor's point system, signs and houses are equally important. As far as I can see, according to her point system, you have no fire signs (perhaps you overcompensate here). Jupiter is a singleton by sign quadrant AND house quadrant. If Saturn is considered right on the ascendant angle, then Jupiter is also a hemisphere singleton. Jupiter definitely stands out in your chart anyway you look at it. Fixed signs get the most points in her system, but overall elements and modes look pretty balanced except the missing fire. You have more yin than yang.

I decided to run the point system by myself just to see how it fits me. Of course I already know what planets are strong; but which ones will really score on this point system?

Estimating the strength of the planets in me, I wrote (signs included but not mentioned below):
1. Uranus
2. Neptune
3. Moon
4. Mercury
5. Venus
6. Sun
7. Pluto
8. Mars
9. Saturn
10. Jupiter

The point system:
1. Moon 20
2. Sun 15
3. Mercury 14
Neptune 14
5. Uranus 13
Venus 13
7. Mars 12
8. Pluto 9
9. Saturn 7
10. Jupiter 6

Even for me the point system isn't perfect; though fairly close. And I knew almost entirely what my chart would be like before seeing it.

Interestingly on some of the tests online, Leo has come out higher than I thought; #2 on the last one I took.

On Eleanor's system though (at astrologyclub.org/articles), Jupiter and Saturn would be stronger in my chart because they are singletons. I wouldn't put too much stock in that system as indicating strength of planets; it indicates psychological patterns.
Eric

_________________
Keep the Spirit Alive,
Eric Meece

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Eric A Meece on 2002-03-26 02:09 ]</font>

On 2002-03-26 00:45, Eric A Meece wrote:

Stonewall:

In Eleanor's point system, signs and houses are equally important. As far as I can see, according to her point system, you have no fire signs (perhaps you overcompensate here). Jupiter is a singleton by sign quadrant AND house quadrant. If Saturn is considered right on the ascendant angle, then Jupiter is also a hemisphere singleton. Jupiter definitely stands out in your chart anyway you look at it. Fixed signs get the most points in her system, but overall elements and modes look pretty balanced except the missing fire. You have more yin than yang.

Eric, it was not clear in the instructions whether to score elements, etc. according to house sign or actual sign. In fact, I tried to glean the answer from the example given of Clinton's chart, however his chart is exactly 6 signs off and thus the house elements and sign elements remain the same.

I first went by the bare diagrams and used house signs. The elements came out as follows:

N = Fire = 5
T = Air = 5
F = Water = 3
S = Earth = 0

This accorded very well with my temperament and I was impressed. Indeed it conveys the same sense as my high ranking signs in all those earlier quizzes. Those tests gave something of the following order:

1) Fire = N
2) Air = T
3) Water = F
4) Earth = S

A very nice match on multiple grounds.

However there was some indication in Clinton's sample scores that actual signs were being used instead of house signs. When I scored actual signs, I got a result bearing no relation to me or to any of my earlier quiz results or to anything else I have seen. Fire was completely absent and it was heavy on Water (F) and Earth (S). Wrong answer!

The house signs also produced a "house orientation" much like who I am. It was something like this:

Universal = 10
Social = 2
Personal = 1

That sounds pretty much exactly like me. However then I ran the "sign orientation" and got this:

Universal = 6
Social = 6
Personal = 1

Social scored as high as Universal. That is nothing like me.

I hope that another male (Robert) has similar luck with picking his planets. Because if his does not reasonably match, then I do not see much basis for believing that the "stars" say anything at all about me. On the other hand, if he has similar luck, then there may be a portion of this which is valid but certainly not the total package offered today by astrologists. I just plainly am not how much of this is trying to protray me.