Sun sign vs Ascending sign

wolfheart

Do any of you relate to your ascending sign more than your sun sign? I've been reading a couple of horoscopes lately and my sun doesn't resonate at all. I feel more like a my Asc opposed to my sun, but I do relate to my sun at times, but it's not as prominent as the asc.
What could this mean?
 

scorpiogirl

Hi from what I learned from reading a some astrology books is that the Rising sign isn't something you 'feel' its how you experience things...if you don't feel like your Sun look at its aspects. Post your chart.
For example I am a scorpio Sun and Rising. But I feel totally like my Moon, my moon is Aquarius and planet Uranus is parallel my Moon...so I do feel more Aquarius and I think my reactions are Aquarius versus Scorpio at times.
 

Minderwiz

This isn't quite as straightforward as it might be. There are differences in view between the modern psychological approach, the traditional approach and the 'Pop' approach.

Traditionally the Ascendant is 'you' - the person for whom the chart was cast, in terms of body, mind and spirit. It signifies your health and body and you as a separate person. The lights, Sun and Moon are important indicators of your vitality and your place in society, usually your career but not exclusively so. By the seventeenth century these three were the major influences in what we would call character or temperament. The other planets will give more detail to the extent that they connect to the 'big three'. Those connections can modify the result but the Ascendant, Moon and Sun dominate.

The psychological approach sees the whole chart as 'you' and therefore has to reduced the significance of the Ascendant as the main significator of 'you' Thus you will come across attempts to define the Ascendant as 'how others see you' However even with this approach the Sun is not the defining planet for character or personality, that is the result of integrating the various factors. The Sun gives an indicator of your 'willpower' or a general significator of 'wellbeing'.

The 'Pop' approach comes from the Sun Sign. That's the only sign that can be predicted for the entire population for a period of the year, where the year itself is indeterminate. Even then it is rather 'flaky' at the edges. According to the newspaper columns, I'm a (Sun Sign) Scorpio. In fact I'm a Libra born in the last six hours of the Sun's transit of the sign. The solar ingresses can vary by several hours or as much as a day from those stated in the newspaper. The columns no nothing about you but the approximate day of your birth. They assume that you were born at Sunrise, and therefore your Sun Sign and Ascendant Sign are the same. It's the only way they can do predictions. The trouble is that this is generalised into a full personality character, without reference to the Moon (Which traditionally can carry more importance than the Sun) or the modifying influences of the other planets.

In both the psychological approach and the Pop approach Signs have been given meanings that they historically have not carried. Scorpio is one of the classic examples of this. So we are not talking like for like. So that Scorpiogirl finds it difficult to identify with that sign but feels more Aquarius like her Moon is not surprising. Traditionally the Moon signifies instinct reactions - the animal or non-rational side of our mind. Though again Aquarius has been 'doctored' to make it fit Uranus.

My point is not so much that the 'horoscopes' are wrong but that they are not the same between approaches and as the horoscope is literally the hour marker or the Ascendant they are only relevant to about 8 percent of the population, who actually have Sun and Ascendant in the same sign and even then they ignore over a third of the character factors plus the modifiers. They may be fun but it's not wise to treat them as more than a basic generalised Astrology.
 

wolfheart

Hi from what I learned from reading a some astrology books is that the Rising sign isn't something you 'feel' its how you experience things...if you don't feel like your Sun look at its aspects. Post your chart.
For example I am a scorpio Sun and Rising. But I feel totally like my Moon, my moon is Aquarius and planet Uranus is parallel my Moon...so I do feel more Aquarius and I think my reactions are Aquarius versus Scorpio at times.

I don't know too much about aspects yet but I am glad to know I am not the only one that feels this way :) I will definitely look more into this though :D Thank you for your input. What is your venus in? Mine is in Aquarius. I love Aqua's! I get along well with them. I'm a Leo.
 

wolfheart

This isn't quite as straightforward as it might be. There are differences in view between the modern psychological approach, the traditional approach and the 'Pop' approach.Traditionally the Ascendant is 'you' - the person for whom the chart was cast, in terms of body, mind and spirit. It signifies your health and body and you as a separate person. The lights, Sun and Moon are important indicators of your vitality and your place in society, usually your career but not exclusively so. By the seventeenth century these three were the major influences in what we would call character or temperament. The other planets will give more detail to the extent that they connect to the 'big three'. Those connections can modify the result but the Ascendant, Moon and Sun dominate.The psychological approach sees the whole chart as 'you' and therefore has to reduced the significance of the Ascendant as the main significator of 'you' Thus you will come across attempts to define the Ascendant as 'how others see you' However even with this approach the Sun is not the defining planet for character or personality, that is the result of integrating the various factors. The Sun gives an indicator of your 'willpower' or a general significator of 'wellbeing'.

Wow, this is actually very interesting. I definitely agree with this. I don't 100% agree with my sun, but it does represent my core in a way. It definitely represents my career and how I pursue things and how I calculate them before acting. So basically, the sun would be who we are behind the scenes? Our Ascendant is our natural attitude and how we act on a day to day basis? This is what I believe for sure.

The 'Pop' approach comes from the Sun Sign. That's the only sign that can be predicted for the entire population for a period of the year, where the year itself is indeterminate. Even then it is rather 'flaky' at the edges. According to the newspaper columns, I'm a (Sun Sign) Scorpio. In fact I'm a Libra born in the last six hours of the Sun's transit of the sign. The solar ingresses can vary by several hours or as much as a day from those stated in the newspaper. The columns no nothing about you but the approximate day of your birth. They assume that you were born at Sunrise, and therefore your Sun Sign and Ascendant Sign are the same. It's the only way they can do predictions. The trouble is that this is generalised into a full personality character, without reference to the Moon (Which traditionally can carry more importance than the Sun) or the modifying influences of the other planets.

Oh wow. Wow. I actually never thought of that. It's true, we are made up of so much more in our chart so how could we possibly limit ourselves to just our sun sign? Which like you said, they predetermine our Ascendant into it being the same as our sun. When I read those horoscopes, I'm just like whaaaat? It's so off but now I know why. I can't believe I didn't understand this before.

In both the psychological approach and the Pop approach Signs have been given meanings that they historically have not carried. Scorpio is one of the classic examples of this. So we are not talking like for like. So that Scorpiogirl finds it difficult to identify with that sign but feels more Aquarius like her Moon is not surprising. Traditionally the Moon signifies instinct reactions - the animal or non-rational side of our mind. Though again Aquarius has been 'doctored' to make it fit Uranus.

I agree with this as well. Certain signs have a lot of stereotype behind them and one of my friends talks about not wanting to date a specific sign because she thinks they're all the same, but they're really not. People are much more complex than what society says about one particular sign. The way we are made up of billions of atoms, we were born with a whole bunch of planets aligned in a particular way :)

My point is not so much that the 'horoscopes' are wrong but that they are not the same between approaches and as the horoscope is literally the hour marker or the Ascendant they are only relevant to about 8 percent of the population, who actually have Sun and Ascendant in the same sign and even then they ignore over a third of the character factors plus the modifiers. They may be fun but it's not wise to treat them as more than a basic generalised Astrology.

Thank you SOOOOOO much! Honestly, you taught me so much and I genuinely appreciate it from the bottom of my heart :) I now understand horoscopes a little better. Maybe one day, there can be someone out there who can make horoscopes more tailored for everyone. It may take a bit of time but it may be fun to see. I'm sure they'd make some good money as well. Thank you again for taking the time and energy out of your day to educate me a bit :D
 

Reverie

I agree with everything that's been said! Minderwiz's paragraph is very interesting.
I used to be into astrology very much, now a little less, but I have some leftover knowledge...

I've always viewed ascendant as you 'true you', the side you show only to yourself and close ones, and the sun sign as the side you show to the world and how you are perceived, kind of like a persona.

My sun is in leo, and my ascendant is in scorpio... with a whole lot of fire in my chart. My true being is definitely scorpio - I can be very shy, calm, and intense, and I think it comes across too, but I still have the pride and perhaps outward flamboyance of leo. I relate to both.

I personally wonder if you possess the qualities of your sun sign, and then the negative aspects of your ascendant more...
 

wolfheart

I agree with everything that's been said! Minderwiz's paragraph is very interesting.
I used to be into astrology very much, now a little less, but I have some leftover knowledge...
I've always viewed ascendant as you 'true you', the side you show only to yourself and close ones, and the sun sign as the side you show to the world and how you are perceived, kind of like a persona.

Ah, yeah. I agree. In professional settings, I notice my sun sign is more dominant but with friends, family, and out of the workplace in general, my ascendant comes out.

My sun is in leo, and my ascendant is in scorpio... with a whole lot of fire in my chart. My true being is definitely scorpio - I can be very shy, calm, and intense, and I think it comes across too, but I still have the pride and perhaps outward flamboyance of leo. I relate to both.

Nice mix :) I think Scorpios are awesome. My fourth house is actually in Scorpio.

I personally wonder if you possess the qualities of your sun sign, and then the negative aspects of your ascendant more...

Hmm.. do you mean just me or in general? My sun is in an earth sign and my asc is in Leo. I'm a pretty loud person in the sense that I'm kind of out there. I have a big personality and am not shy at all, but I do have my moments where I tune everyone out and focus on my work and studies... which is much like my sun. I don't think I possess any negative aspects of my ascendant though :(
 

Minderwiz

I agree with everything that's been said! Minderwiz's paragraph is very interesting.
I used to be into astrology very much, now a little less, but I have some leftover knowledge...

I've always viewed ascendant as you 'true you', the side you show only to yourself and close ones, and the sun sign as the side you show to the world and how you are perceived, kind of like a persona.

The 'quote' I gave about the Ascendant being our outward expression is one that I picked up from a psychological Astrologer, I think it was Tracy Marks,and was quite common a few years ago. Howard Sasportas took a view more akin to yours, in that he sees the Ascendant as colouring the way we view the outside world. In my view both of them are wrong. They are hamstrung by the need to make the chart as a whole reflect the mind, whereas the chart reflects the native, her or himself and the real world which they inhabit, including their parents, siblings, friends, partner, employer, etc. I don't see the chart as reflecting our inner view of the outside world. The tenth house reflects our mother, a real standalone person, not our perception of what she was like.

Both approaches can distinguish between the real and inner world. In the case of the psychological approach the chart is thought to tell us about our perceptions and prejudices of others, but nothing about what they are really like. The traditional approach tells us about what they are really like, but not much about our perception of them.

From my own personal perspective, I'd rather know about what they are really like and try and adjust my prejudices to cater for reality, but then that's just me. I prefer my Astrology to be concerned with the real world not my inner psyche but I readily recognise that there are those who are strongly attracted to the idea of Astrology as a tool of psychological counselling.

wolfheart said:
Nice mix I think Scorpios are awesome. My fourth house is actually in Scorpio.

So is mine, so nice to meet you!!! :) My Sun missed out by 15 minutes of arc :(

wolfheart said:
...... My sun is in an earth sign and my asc is in Leo. I'm a pretty loud person in the sense that I'm kind of out there. I have a big personality and am not shy at all, but I do have my moments where I tune everyone out and focus on my work and studies... which is much like my sun. I don't think I possess any negative aspects of my ascendant though

I also have a Leo Ascendant, as you might have guessed from the fourth house Scorpio but my Sun is in Libra. I don't thing Leo has any negative features, but then I'm prejudiced :) Actually, we both make the point here that the Modern approach sees the signs/houses reflecting different aspects of our personality, a view which was alien to the tradition, which sees the Ascendant as us. Yes it's still possible to look at some facets, such as our logical/rational mind (Mercury) and our instinctive reactions (Moon) or our general fortune and behaviour (manners) they can be gleaned from the balance of planets and especially the Sun and Moon.

My point again, is that we are comparing chalk and cheese with the tradition and the modern approach. It's not a question of one being right and the other being wrong because they both see Astrology in radically different ways. The tradition is essentially event driven, whereas, because of the circumstances surrounding Alan Leo's revival of Astrology, the modern practice is essentially character analysis driven. although Dave (Dadsnook2000) can give chapter and verse on modern variations of event driven Astrology.

One interesting point to end with is how well do we really know ourselves. I've heard professional Astrologers complain that clients don't really give accurate answers to questions, because at some later stage they will contradict answers they gave earlier in a consultation. This is not delberate attempts to be misleading but because we often don't 'join up the dots' about ourselves and interaction with others. That's actually a defence of the psychological approach as it suggests there's parts of us we are unaware of.
 

Ronia

No. The ascendant is actually what we present to the outer world, the mask, if necessary or desired, the facade, the first impressions. The Sun is the core which may or may not be shown on a regular basis and it will depend a lot on its placement by sign and house and on its aspects. The Sun is the engine of the car. While most people can easily point out a car's brand at first sight, it's the model of the engine that actually defines the car's strenghts and weaknesses. I've never met a person who managed to escape their Sun. The Ascendant is much easier to control not only in its masking representation but as mind and body, too. IMO. Which is why most people "carry" their ascendant traits on the outsiee - face and body.
 

dadsnook2000

My two cents opinion

Let me add for the record, that the big three --- the Ascendant, the Sun, the Moon --- play a dominating role in Return and cyclic charts relative to linking the chart-owner to the their attitude, situation, health, vitality, ability to deal with change; in short, with life itself. Any new-to-astrology student would do well to concentrate on these three elements as being of primary importance in any chart studied. Just my opinion. Dave