Solunars by Aldebaran Sidereal Academy

I'm adding this as a note to myself and also of possible interest to the rest of you. It provides possibly useful language for expressing the nature of aspects in psychiatric terms.

See the Wikipedia article on Dr. Henry A. Murray's theories around needs (some of which I found quite valuable in expressing planetary natures psychodynamically): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray%27 ... m_of_needs

Here is a paragraph that I think actually is talking about astrological aspects as they manifest in our psyches. Remember that need in this context means planet. This also portrays the wider way that multiple astrological factors emerge in a person.

Murray differentiated each need [planet] as unique, but recognized commonalities among them, codified at least partially in his categorization system. Behaviors may meet more than one need: for instance, performing a difficult task for your fraternity may meet the needs of both achievement [Jupiter] and affiliation [Venus]. While each need is important in and of itself, he also believed that needs can support or conflict with one another, and can be interrelated. He coined the term 'subsidation of needs' to describe when two or more needs are combined in order to satisfy a more powerful need, and the term 'fusion of needs' to describe when a single action satisfies more than one need. For example, the need for dominance [Mars] may conflict the need with affiliation [Venus] when overly controlling behavior drives away family, romantic partners, and friends. A need may be a purely internal state, but more often it is evoked by a press.

(Press means environmental factors that affect the immediate or chronic level of a need and the behavior it consequently causes.)

As an aside, the wider way Murray thought of needs has served me well in thinking of, say, angularity. He defined need as "a drive that has the potential to prompt a behavior." Working from the premise that all human beings have common needs, but individual needs are stronger or weaker per person (and different needs affiliate or fuse in a particular person), here is another quote:

Individual differences in levels of needs [e.g., angularity] lead to the uniqueness of a person's personality; in other words, specific needs may be more important to some than to others. According to Murray, human needs are psychogenic in origin, function on an unconscious level, and can play a major role in defining personality. Frustration of these psychogenic needs plays a central role in the origin of psychological pain. He also believed that these needs could be measured... Unlike Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Murray's needs are not based on a hierarchy; individuals may be high in one and low in the other, and multiple needs may be affected by a single action.

This is exactly how we see things working through the perspective of astrology!

This seems a centerpiece to Noel Tyl's astrological approach. (planets as needs, planetary aspects as combinations of respective needs, the influence of Dr. Murray, etc.)

I'm 100% on board with these ideas. If we accurately understand needs, we can often correctly extrapolate the actions used to fulfil those needs, as well as often predict the success therewith.

This is the first astrological presentation I have read, commenting specifically about using secondary needs in the fulfilment of primary needs and giving it a (seemingly fitting) name/descriptor.

I forgot to mention on this discussion (well, I was getting ready to leave town) - On the issue of needs theory, one of the upcoming versions of TMSA reportedly will implement my table of ten ranked needs for an individual. This is mostly dependent on settling on a solution for labelling stationary planets, I think (and Mike is probably hoping I'll get clearer on what to do about tight octiles).

As an example (substituting, for the sake of this thread, the names of the needs rather than names of the planets), here is the Donald Trump breakdown (I've offset the top three and bottom three):

97% - Adaptation, Individuation, Power
-----------------------------
90% - Affiliation
83% - Freedom-Renewal
80% - Ambition
30% - Reality-forging
------------------------------
20% - Information
19% - Authenticity-Solitude
1% - Material-Survival


In contrast, here is his successor, Joe Biden:

100% - Freedom-Renewal
99% - Affiliation, Authenticity-Solitude
------------------------------
94% - Material-Survival
92% - Individuation
90% - Power
68% - Reality-forging
66% - Information
--------------------------
37% - Ambition
4% - Adaptation

They're made of the same stuff, just in different proportions.

And just the other day I was thinking to myself, if only we could have astrology sound more "rational", as in less "planets", "aspects", and other jargon, and more... and I couldn't find a world.

But duh, here it is!

This is wonderfully said, it makes so much sense. And a reminder for me to try out Mike's TMSA.

-Ethan

Once I decided that the most important and on target way to talk about the "energies" of a planet was in terms of needs, it opened up whole new dimension of teaching astrology in particular. I'v34 thought about planets (and other astrological factors) in terms of needs for 40 years or so, but only in recent years have made it my primary way of describing this.

It's long been common to say things like, "Everybody has all the planets;" but it really communicates at a HUMAN level to say, "There are certain basic needs everybody has." Everybody needs to connect to other people, to receive and send information, to have power and earn esteem and survive and have freedom and periodic renewal. And so forth. We've all got it. It's just that we don't have it in the same proportions.

Traditional astrology has segregated people more. "Relationships are important to Libras" (implying they aren't important to Aries or anybody else), and so forth. But, first, the needs model expands interpersonal understanding for everyone (astrologer and the consumer of astrology alike) by saying we all have the same needs, but so-and-so had this particular need even stronger and this other one not so much. - Second, it lets students of astrology learn A WHOLE LOT MORE much faster - and with less stuff to memorize - because you only need to know a little bit about a person to actually know a LOT (just by applying your knowledge of people), e.g., what are the hundred things you could say if you knew someone's greatest needs were for power and to be singled out as distinctive from other people? (You don't need it all spelled out in an astrology book.) - And so on.

Think of it in synastry: "When you're with her, your need for freedom and frequent renewal comes much more to the fore. You're MUCH wilder around her, right? Do you guys travel together a lot?" All because one luminary touches the other Uranus - and suddenly you're in a full-on meaningful conversation. People feel what you're saying when it's about their needs.