This kind of astrology is satisfying in many ways. I think that we can say that humanistic and psychological astrology is a most useful development, and I do not want what I am about to say to be considered in any way a detraction from its merits. The issue that I am discussing here is not whether this kind of astrology is good, bad or indifferent, but rather how it fits into the issues that I am addressing here. It has been proposed by many psychological astrologers that the only reason why one can discuss fate at all in a birth chart is because a birth chart indicates psychological predispositions, and these in turn influence the way we see things and how we react to them. The chart indicates fate only insofar as fate is the result of either perception or behavior.
Character is destiny.
According to this model, nothing can possibly be indicated by the birth chart that doesn t have its origins in the individual s behavior as influenced by the individual s perceptions and experience. For example, a traditional textbook might say that Saturn conjunct the Moon in the Fourth House indicates a difficult early life and the likelihood of a parent who was not very nurturing. A humanistic text might not disagree with the quality of the effect but would emphasize that the cause of the psychological effects of the astrological combination was the individual s experience of early life, not necessarily the reality of that early life. According to this model, the chart does not describe objective reality as much as it describes the individual s experience. And for the record, I want to say that there is a great deal of merit in this viewpoint.