the-astrology-book

psychology. While astrology is simple in its derivation of archetypes (signs), it is complex
in its ability to derive individual process from these archetypes (planets in sign,
house, and aspect); each piece of psychic structure has concrete meaning yet is infinitely
variable in combination. Because astrology has many shades of meaning, it is
easily compatible with almost any psychological model, almost all of which can be
subsumed into astrological language. For example, Sigmund Freud’s tripartite division
of the mind into id, ego, and superego is roughly paralleled in astrology by the relations
between Mars (id), the Sun (ego), and Saturn (superego). Of course, the many
elements of astrology make it a vastly subtler and potentially sophisticated model for
depicting the structure and dynamics of the psyche.
Another way that astrology differs from conventional personality theories is
that it has no founder. Astrology was not invented, created, or developed by any single
individual or group of individuals, as is the case with other personality theories.
Invariably, a personality theory bears the stamp of its creator; that is, a theory is a selfportrait
of its founder. This can be clearly seen, for example, in Freud’s chart, which
perfectly symbolizes the Oedipus complex that Freud universalized for every human
being. This same principle holds true for the founders of other personality theories.
Each theory, with the exception of astrology, starts off as a projection of one person’s
individual viewpoint and subsequently attracts adherents who resonate with that
viewpoint. In each instance, the peculiarities of the theory can be traced back to the
prejudices, tendencies, issues, and cognitive styles that are clearly reflected in the
horoscope of the founder. Astrology, on the other hand, is a more objective framework
since it does not originate with any one individual (or even one culture), is based on
empirical observation, and has stood the test of time. In this sense, it can be thought
of as a meta-theory that subsumes other models.
Traditional Event-Oriented Astrology
It was not until the advent of humanistic psychology in the 1960s that
astrologers began to think seriously about the chart in terms of growth and transformation.
For those who began studying astrology only recently, it might seem that it
was always this way. But it was not. Although, in his book The Secret of the Golden
Flower, Jung said, “Astrology represents the summation of the psychological knowledge
of antiquity,” the fact is that there was very little in astrology prior to the 1960s
that bore much relationship to what today is considered “psychological.”
Ancient peoples initially perceived the planets as gods who ruled over the various
processes of nature, much as a king ruled over his subjects. The conceived relationship
between celestial and terrestrial events was linear, dualistic, and hierarchical:
a superior power had dominion over an inferior one. While later and deeper forms of
astrological philosophy recognized that macrocosm and microcosm were actually
interpenetrating and thus their relationship was not linear or dualistic, this view
declined with the collapse of the Hellenistic culture in the third century. A simpler
model prevailed during the medieval period and persisted in one form or another right
up to the second half of the twentieth century. Human beings were perceived as fated
recipients of cosmic forces that could be propitiated but not denied.
Psychological Astrology
THE ASTROLOGY BOOK
[551]