Xeno
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2023
- Messages
- 127

Principles of Interpretation Outside Classical Frameworks
Author
So, we have explored the theoretical foundations of postmodern astrology and created a model of human perception to understand how cosmic rhythms influence our lives. Now it's time to move on to the most interesting part – interpreting astrological charts within our new system.However, before we delve deeper into the principles of interpretation, it's important to analyze one of the key features of classical astrology: its striking ability to convincingly explain events *post factum*.
The Phenomenon of Retrospective Convincingness in Classical Astrology
Classical astrology has an extensive set of tools for interpreting the influences of celestial bodies. Consider the variety of aspects – angular relationships between planets: conjunction, sextile, trine, square, opposition, and these are just the main ones! And the orbs? Some schools in prognostics use strict orbs of 1-3 degrees, while others allow 10 degrees or even more.
Let's take a conservative estimate of 3 degrees per aspect. With five main aspects, each with an orb of 6 degrees (3 degrees on either side), we get 30 degrees of coverage per planet. Considering 10 planets in the heliocentric system of classical astrology, the probability that any planet forms an aspect with another is (30/360) * 10, or approximately 83%!
And this is without considering the multitude of minor, so-called "karmic" aspects. Quintiles, semi-sextiles, quincunxes, semi-squares – each of them, albeit with a smaller orb (about 1-2 degrees), contributes, further saturating the sky with "significant" interactions.
Add to this virtual points: the lunar nodes, the Black Moon, lots, the points of the ascendant and MC, as well as asteroids used by some astrologers. As a result, at any given moment, the celestial sphere is literally overflowing with aspects, points, and potentially significant influences.
So far, we've only talked about transits in prognostics. But there are other prognostic methods: symbolic directions, progressions (annual, monthly, weekly), solar returns...And the analysis of the natal chart? Here, orbs usually range from 6-10 degrees. In addition to aspects, there are signs, houses, rulers, concepts of planetary strength and weakness... Can you imagine the scope for interpretation that opens up? Having such an extensive system at its disposal, an astrologer can almost always find indications in the natal chart for certain character traits, talents, or life events that are already known.
But how objective and truly predictive are these indications?Even when using the "golden rule" of three indications, given the huge number of possible aspects, points, and methods, finding three or more "confirmations" of an already occurred event or a known character trait is not particularly difficult. Classical astrology is incredibly strong in retrospect. It will always find an explanation, select the necessary aspects that seem to "clearly indicate" this or that phenomenon.
But if the sky is constantly teeming with "significant" aspects, why isn't our life a continuous chain of fateful events?
Why is it mostly quite measured and predictable, while, following classical astrological logic, it should be full of upheavals?
That's why, despite the abundance of "indications" in the natal chart, astrologer cannot predict what a child will grow up to be or what profession they will choose – classics will provide "indications" for all possible options.ё
Example of a Classical Astrological Chart

Is it worth considering the value of a theory that excels at explaining events after they have occurred and describing character after it has formed, while simultaneously encountering challenges with accurate prediction. This is somewhat akin to a meteorologist who always forecasts a chance of rain, and then, depending on the weather, remarks, 'See, I said it was possible.' This pattern raises questions about the nature of the predictive ability of such a theory.As a result, we are faced with a situation where a system built on mythological foundations becomes increasingly complex, adding new objects and methods. We must ask ourselves: how valuable is the explanatory power of astrology if its strength also seems to be its weakness?**
Skeptic
(With irony) Weakness? Rather, complete inconsistency! How can one seriously take a system that can explain absolutely everything, no matter what?
Astrologer
(Thoughtfully, but with a hint of disagreement) I cannot fully agree with the assertion of the complete meaninglessness of classical astrology. You are right, the number of parameters and methods is indeed large, and retrospectively, almost any event can be interpreted. In this sense, explanatory power is certainly present, and this is undeniable. But could this not indicate that to some extent "everything works," it's just that the complexity of the system makes it practically impossible to accurately determine which particular combination of aspects, houses, rulers, and so on will be decisive in a specific case? It's like trying to predict fate by looking at the pattern of the starry sky – each star is in its place, but only a few form recognizable constellations. Perhaps the problem lies not in astrology itself, but in the limitations of our current ability to interpret it. We see only individual threads of fate, but we are unable to grasp the entire fabric of the tapestry. But this does not mean that the tapestry itself does not exist...
Postmodern Approach to Interpretation: Focus on Objectivity
In contrast to classical astrology, postmodern astrology deliberately limits the number of variables, relying exclusively on objectively existing phenomena.We have only three main aspects at our disposal – conjunction, square, and opposition. The basic orb is only 1 degree, although it can dynamically expand in certain situations.We consider 10 celestial bodies in geocentric perspective and 9 in heliocentric. As sources of direct influence, we analyze planets up to and including Uranus, since it is still visible to the naked eye and its cycle is comparable to the duration of human life.
We consider Neptune and Pluto as an additional contextual layer, reflecting a person's resonance with social trends and global events.A significant difference from the classics also lies in the interpretation of planets. In postmodern astrology, a planet indicates only those areas with which its time cycle directly correlates (see the chapter "Planets and Time"), excluding arbitrary connections based on rulership.In the chapter "Model of Human Perception," we began to consider the interpretation of planets in signs and houses.
Technically, this is a synthesis process. Consider, for example, the aspect of an approaching square between Mercury in the sign of Taurus in the 7th house and Saturn in the sign of Leo in the 11th house.
All the necessary information is already presented in the previous chapters – we only need to perform the synthesis.
Last edited: