View Single Post
Minderwiz's Avatar
Minderwiz  Minderwiz is offline
Student of Astrology
 
Join Date: 20 Apr 2002
Location: Wigan, UK
Posts: 7,888
Minderwiz 

I agree that it's a sweeping generalisation. The trouble is that Astrology texts are full of such generalisations - short key word or key note descriptions, that are based in that phrase beloved of economists on the premise of Ceteris Paribus - all other things are equal.

Of course all other things are not equal, that's why we cast charts and look at the planets in terms of the houses they lie in, the signs they are in and the aspects they make (if any).

What's more that is nothing new. You'll find similar generalisations about either signs or configurations in texts dating back to the very foundation of the horoscope. It's virtually impossible to write a text on Astrology if you try and cater for every possible set of planetary dispositions that might occur with the one that you are focusing on.

Is there any truth in it? Well firstly from a traditional point of view, we'd be talking about people with Scorpio on the Ascendant, not the sign that the Sun is in. That puts it angular and it also makes Mars the Ascendant ruler. The planet that signifies you.

Scorpio is also a fixed sign - it is associated with a lack of change and staying power.

But above all Scorpio is Mars' natural house. It's a nocturnal sign and Mars is a nocturnal planet. Look to Mars being the dominant, not the sign.

I repeat though, The assumptions that underly the statement, rarely if ever hold in practice and if you simply have the Sun in Scorpio, then you are unlikely to be the sort of person described here, unless Mars is a dominant planet in your chart.

I have Scorpio angular (on the IC) and it's squared by its ruler, Mars. I have all four cardinal points in Fixed Signs, so yes I don't like change and I don't like changing or adapting myself.
Top   #6