Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

I was thinking about doing a research in the personalities of people with a chart heavily concentrated in a certain.

Example: I research 100 people with heavy Taurus in their charts (Sun, Moon, and Mars in Taurus at a minimum). I compile information about the personalities of each person. There will likely be several common traits among all the Taurus people that corroborate with Jim's research.

But is there an objective quasi-scientific way to measure someone's personality by observing/reading about them? There are personality tests you can take, but you cannot take personality tests for other people.

This project will probably take a long time, so I want to build a good method of research beforehand. I would like the methodology to be as scientific as possible. How would you suggest I go about this research?

Any suggestions would be deeply appreciated.

Start from: what's the goal, the aim you want to accomplish with this project - defining this as precisely as possible will lead you further toward determining the methodology and the practical details of steps.

I would say my specific goal is this:
What common personality traits, life events, and careers do [sign x]-heavy people share? Life events and careers are easier to track. But how do you measure people's personality traits in a consistent, objective way? That's what's really on my mind.

I don't know if it's still here, or if it was dumped when we moved the site, but Dani and I went over this with you in some depth a few years ago for using famous people to try to study which traits were common for each sun sign.

If you now want to use non-famous people, you might start with the science behind personality tests. Not personality tests, per se, but how the people who write them come up with their lists of personality traits to test against. You might try to find a research librarian for help finding those texts. You're not far from the best libraries in the world if you are still in NYC and they are free for you to use.

Ok this is an edit/delete after reading my earlier post which I typed in bed after too late a night and one coffee!

Are you familiar with the scientific method?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

It sounds like you have an idea about people with a Stellium in that they exhibit noticable character traits unique to the stellium sign.

The first steps involve asking the question and forming a hypothesis.

You would also want to locate and examine all previous work that has allready been done in relative research....ie other peoples articles and books that are in a wide scope of your original premise/hypothesis. (No need to reinvent the wheel, so to speak)

IME helping people find research materials, they are usually starting out with a huge broad pallete, an all encompassing, seemingly ground breaking idea that as wonderful as they sound are just to broad and unrefined to stand up to serious scientific scrutinty.

I would, for the sake of producing data that could with stand the assult of opposing views, refine and refine and refine your thought/hypothetical idea so that as you conduct research, interviews, observations your filter for pure data that has bearing is not muddied down with irrelevancy or contamination.

Sometimes too with scientific research it pays to play the devils advocate and espouse the opposite. Try to disprove and negate and discredit your own question/idea/ hypothesis.

Btw.....I personally think that the children conceived in the beginning of May 2020 (May 5/6) who will be born Feb 10/11 are a pool of Capricorn Stellium with 7 of 9 bodies...Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn and Pluto.

It may be interesting to run some "potential natal charts" for different locations ie.. NYC, Tulsa, Portland, Anchorage, Hong Kong, London ect and Progress the charts incrementally throughout a life time and notice/observe angles and aspects maturing and contemplate the possible life events that may manifest and how the different environments (i.e. home environment-family sctructure, socio economic) feed into the natives innate needs and drives and form the reality those individuals find themselves unfolding into.

I found one of the original posts I made trying to help you with your previous research project.
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=433&p=2881#p2881
Don't know if it would help you with this one or not.

I was suggesting instead of picking out personality traits that interest you and seeing how they matched up with a sun sign or whatever you were planning on studying, pick out people who have the sun sign (or stellium) and see what personality traits they share. If you do it that way, you'll have a base of data you can eventually use for other studies.

Jupiter Sets at Dawn wrote: Fri Jul 17, 2020 8:02 am I found one of the original posts I made trying to help you with your previous research project.
viewtopic.php?f=14&t=433&p=2881#p2881
Don't know if it would help you with this one or not.

I was suggesting instead of picking out personality traits that interest you and seeing how they matched up with a sun sign or whatever you were planning on studying, pick out people who have the sun sign (or stellium) and see what personality traits they share. If you do it that way, you'll have a base of data you can eventually use for other studies.

That's exactly what I'm trying to do, pick out people who have a large stellium and see what personality traits they share. My question is finding a precise way of finding and documenting personality traits (the "seeing what personality traits they share" part). The only method I know is seeing what contemporaries or biographers said of [stellium person x] and somehow documenting personality traits. I wonder if there are better methods out there.

But what if [stellium person x] is a relatively obscure celebrity? Or just a contemporary celebrity? These people are not rigorously analyzed by biographers, for example.

It's not like you can administer a rigorous personality test to them. If you can't find enough information tot i work with on obscure celebrities, I guess you'll have to leave them out. Sorry.

Or maybe you could. Send them a personality quiz along with a STAMPED SELF-ADDRESSED ENVELOPE, and see what happens. Explain why you're asking!! Most will probably throw it out, some may wonder what kind of fresh hell stalker you are. But you might get one or two back. Hopefully not with bad words.

I'm skeptical of this approach (but that's actually an argument for doing your project, since that's the kind of thing we learn from).

The basis of my skepticism is this: The largest character trait vs AA birth data data base in the world is the Gauquelin collection. In 1980, Francois Gauquelin ran for me a proper statistical examination of their character trait data base against all their professional categories, with sign placements of all ten planets and two primary angles. I've given the results of this in the sign interpretation sections.

What comes to mind is: Almost always, quite different traits were statistically high and low for Sun or Moon or Mars in the same constellation. They were recognizable against each other and only occasionally outright contradicted each other, but the presence of, say, Sun in Sagittarius vs. Moon in Sagittarius vs. Mars in Sagittarius was really obvious for every sign. This leads me to believe that lumping them all together will not produce some shared set of traits.

But, of course, I could be wrong about that. You might, instead, find something purer and more basic that bypasses differences of the individual planets.

As an example: Sun in Sagittarius had statistical highs for the traits stubborn, impassioned, and sincere. Moon in Sagittarius had a statistically significant high for the trait powerful and a lesser high for courteous; in contrast to Sun, Moon in Sagittarius was significantly low for "stubborn" (the same exact group of people). Mars in Sagittarius was high for reserved, profound, and precise, low for imaginative, hardworking, and innovation.

Jim Eshelman wrote: Fri Jul 17, 2020 11:40 am ...The basis of my skepticism is this: The largest character trait vs AA birth data data base in the world is the Gauquelin collection. In 1980, Francois Gauquelin ran for me a proper statistical examination of their character trait data base against all their professional categories, with sign placements of all ten planets and two primary angles. I've given the results of this in the sign interpretation sections...

As an example: Sun in Sagittarius had statistical highs for the traits stubborn, impassioned, and sincere. Moon in Sagittarius had a statistically significant high for the trait powerful and a lesser high for courteous; in contrast to Sun, Moon in Sagittarius was significantly low for "stubborn" (the same exact group of people). Mars in Sagittarius was high for reserved, profound, and precise, low for imaginative, hardworking, and innovation.

Is there any downloadable document of the entire Gauquelin collection? I would love to take a look.

What I'm extremely curious about is how Gauquelin compiled character traits in data. Take all the GC Sags I posted about recently as an example: Margaret Mead, Gustave Eiffel, Robert Moses, Chelsea Manning, Beethoven, etc. How would Gauquelin go over all these people and end up arriving with statistical highs for Sag Suns being "stubborn, impassioned, and sincere"? Through what methods did he discover those personality traits?

It's easy to, for example, describe Beethoven as "stubborn, impassioned, and sincere". The myth of Beethoven perpetually scowling and violently crossing out drafts of music is a caricature of such traits. But what about Sags like Eiffel or Mead? How would Gauquelin determine those people as being "stubborn, impassioned, and sincere"?

By Jove wrote: Fri Jul 17, 2020 1:04 pm Is there any downloadable document of the entire Gauquelin collection? I would love to take a look.

No. I've looked for years. That would be awesome. It's locked away in a few mainframes and mini-computers somewhere.

What I'm extremely curious about is how Gauquelin compiled character traits in data.

For all the eminent professional people, he read professional biographical catalogues (such as Twentieth Century Authors) and searched libraries for popular periodicals that discussed them (including the equivalent of People and Sports Illustrated as well as news magazines where relevant). He wrote down every descriptive adjective or phrase about the person. Later, they took these to a thesaurus to see what main headings the descriptive words would appear on. (Individual traits wouldn't have been numerous - not many of each - but folding them into larger headings of words with similar meanings gave testable numbers.)

Usually this worked quite well. There are a few words that get a little weird - I don't trust much of the results under "witty" because it combines too many words that are too diverse. Another quirk: When he was collating words for "powerful," there were few or none among the scientists so he included the phrase "powerful mind" for the scientists under the broader category "powerful" - so that, for that trait, we a typical "powerful" sign profile (e.g., Scorpio Sun highest) but also get Gemini Sun thrown in.

But most of them worked out fine.

If (IF!) you can figure it out, I believe you can get (some of?) the data from C.U.R.A. at http://cura.free.fr/gauq/17archg.html and other pages on that site. It's about half in French and reverts to French often on all pages, and is difficult. But, it appears some of the data are tabulated in PDFs on that site. It's getting it out of the PDFs and into a form that can be imported into other programs and actually used that's a pita.

Or if you have the program JigSaw, there may (or may not) be files that can be imported into that program. I think JigSaw is sold or was sold by the same company as Solar Fire, and may or may not be something that can export Solar Fire files.

In other words, go look, but don't ask me for help figuring it out because the site makes me crazy. Look at those colors! Eww.

Myers-briggs... Give a set of standard questions (see if you can find associations of the personality types to the signs).

My instinct however would be to first find people with a singular angular planet (including vertex, because mine completely altered my view of my chart) and administrator the same test of course.

Soft Alpaca wrote: Sun Jul 19, 2020 8:12 pm Myers-briggs... Give a set of standard questions (see if you can find associations of the personality types to the signs).

My instinct however would be to first find people with a singular angular planet (including vertex, because mine completely altered my view of my chart) and administrator the same test of course.

Problem is if their Myers-Briggs isn't listed, you cannot take the test for them.

Anyway, I found 99 core character traits I could use in my research:
https://fastertomaster.com/planner/star ... er-traits/
350 traits here:
https://www.writerswrite.co.za/a-fabulo ... er-traits/
435 traits here:
http://www.fiction-writers-mentor.com/l ... er-traits/
638 primary personality traits here:
http://ideonomy.mit.edu/essays/traits.html
600 character traits here:
https://liveboldandbloom.com/02/self-aw ... ity-traits

(Yes, these are for fictional characters, but they make a good template for evaluating the personalties of real people.)

It was very valuable to me to look up the etymology (etymology online.com ) of the key words listed for signs and planets and trace the word back as far as possible and then from the root read all the words that were made from the root. Whats the difference between calling someone nice or kind?

Veronica wrote: Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:47 pm It was very valuable to me to look up the etymology (etymology online.com ) of the key words listed for signs and planets and trace the word back as far as possible and then from the root read all the words that were made from the root. Whats the difference between calling someone nice or kind?

Good for you. Exactly! Those words aren't the same at all.

So I gave my research method a cursory test run to see if it worked. Instead of researching people by sun signs, I researched people with the Sun closely conjunct certain fixed stars. The reason for this research had nothing to do with the project discussed in this thread, but I thought it would be useful for this project nonetheless.

A few caveats: I had very little time to work with before my schooling starts again soon, so I could only research the most iconic people born under a certain star. I narrowed my research on artists, scientists, and widely acclaimed actors as opposed to athletes and other celebrities. My findings so far are nowhere near exhaustive, just a test drive, but they may be useful.

Situla (Kappa Aquarii), ~February 28
Comprises of two stars, one of them being an orange giant star that has used up its fuel. The other star is fainter and has an angular separation from its partner. The most iconic people under these stars tend to be larger-than-life innovators with intense emotions and ardent convictions. Their characters are as extravagant and temperamental as their work is prodigious, often boisterous and charismatic, tending towards idealism and devotion. Their interests and talents are especially wide-ranging, but they can be belligerent and demanding on friends and partners.

Brian Jones - great innovator, natural academic intelligence, rebellious, versatile, outsider, emotional, indulged in drugs, unpredictable, flamboyant, promiscuous, charismatic, insecure, selfish, vengeful, manipulative.
Bugsy Siegal - charismatic, violent, bullying, notorious gangster, long criminal record, courageous, extravagant, mercurial.
Frank Gehry - cantankerous, experimental, singular, boisterous, fun, exciting, sophisticated, “funky”, prodigal, revitalizing.
Linus Pauling - naive, long peace activism, enthusiastic, dynamic, communicative, lively, intense, controversial, imaginative, provocative, risk-taking, steadfast, stubborn, cheerful, visionary, free-spirited, eclectic, wide-ranging skills and interests.
Moina Mathers - unconventional, kind, charming, intelligent, selfless, artistic, devoted, inner strength, mystical, celibate, perverted?, spiritual.
Ernest Renan - docile, diligent, painstaking, thorough, faith in verifiable truths, restrained, skepticism, idealistic, elitist, fastidious, critical, disenchanted, yet remaining optimistic, liberal.

Dzaneb al samkat (Omega Piscium), ~March 21
Comprises of a subgiant yellow-white dwarf star, which currently accompanies the sun during sunrise and sunset of the Spring Equinox. The most iconic people under these stars come in two types; they can be enigmatic and private yet affable, discreet, and diligent instead of forbidding, or they can be incendiary, flamboyant, and chaotic. Some of them may even have the chameleon-like versatility to embody both aspects of their character. Regardless, they are sensual and fecund, going through multiple marriages and siring many children.

Modest Mussorsky - in youth: fastidious, polite, elegant, aristocratic, alcoholic, bohemian, rebellious, strikingly novel, psychologically astute, from critics: unrefined style, complacent.
Jair Bolsenaro - polarizing (right-wing populist), younger: quiet, discreet, conservative, older: aggressive, confrontational, authoritarian, many marriages.
Gary Oldman - chameleon-like versatility, intense, diligent, affable (contrasts to roles), generous, private, libertarian, alcoholic (recovered), many marriages.
Rosy O'Donnell - outspoken, incendiary, charitable, struggled with depression, enigmatic.
Timothy Dalton - (portrayed a more serious, more human, more emotionally deep Bond.)
Slovoj Zizek - frequent marriages, eccentric, erratic, flamboyant, chaotic, provocative.

Denebakrab (Mu Scorpii), ~December 8
Comprises of two bright stars dancing together in an eclipsing binary system, also known as the “eyes of the lion” among the Khoekhoe. The most iconic people under these stars tend to be singular loners, the creative types going their own way to create self-sufficient styles original even by artist standards. They’re wanderers, sometimes stereotypically bohemian, but have a darker aspect to their character that is intense and lascivious if not perverse, with little regard to moral conventions. If one is forced, one can pigeonhole them into a choleric-melancholic temperament, with bipolar or borderline traits not uncommon. They’re driven and outgoing, even domineering and abrasive, with a robust sense of humor and prankster tendencies.

Jean Sibelius - polarizing (love/hate the music), very singular style, interest in nature, indulgent in smoke and drink, music having a strange and unique power, manic-depressive, wildness and melancholia, music patiently, lived to tenacious old age.
Jim Morrison - eccentric, spiritual, wild child, voracious reader, prankster, rebellious, loner, indulged in drugs, bohemian, lascivious, Dionysian, promiscuous, risk taking, philosophical, possible borderline, reclusive, escapist.
James Thurber - idiosyncratic worldview, tragicomical humor, meticulous, hard-working, singular drawing style, awkwardly self-conscious, friendly, likable, sometimes bitter, sometimes misanthropic.
Camille Claudel - paranoid (schizophrenic), virile, vehement contrasts present in her work, iron will, caustic, domineering, fiery, eccentric, provocative, savage mockery, independent, flirtatious, obsessed with her work, violent temper.
Sinead O’Conner - teenage delinquency, individualistic, provocative, bold, controversial, bipolar?, devout faith, iconoclastic, activist-minded.
David Carradine - very indulgent in drugs, disturbed the peace, long crime record, diverse films, sexually deviant, tempestuous, eccentric, wanderer.
Ann Coulter - trolly, abrasive, ideological (or just opportunistic and cynical?).
Nicki Minaj - discourteous, imaginative, versatile (created multiple characters), singular style, quarrelsome, attention-seeking, energetic (one character), stormy (another character), demonic (another character).