House Strength of the “Part of Reasoning” and IQ Statistics

Spread the love

 

Copyright © Hakan E. Kayıoğlu (MENSA member) – 19.11.2010 Rev 0

 

 

PartOfReasoning

 

 

This is the first report of a series of others to come within the scope of an ongoing research project named Project Astrogenius.

Abstract:

A statistical study has been conducted on an unselected sample of 39 highly intelligent adults, using their birth data to test statistically whether the sample group is significantly different from general population with regard to the sample’s mean house strength of the Part of Reasoning as an astrological parameter. Results show that the group of highly intelligent adults differ from general population with respect to this parameter at varying significance levels depending on the choice of the astrological house system. Significance levels have been found to be 0,0053 and 0,0115 for Equal House and Alcabitius House systems respectively. No significant correlation has been found between individual IQ scores and house strength of the Part of Reasoning in intelligent adults.

Introduction:

The Part of Reasoning and Eloquence (or Pars Rationis in Latin) is one of a few hermetic tools of a traditional astrologer when delineating one’s horoscope to specifically investigate what we moderns today call intelligence. Although there is still much controversy about what "intelligence really is, most people – even academics J – would agree that "reasoning must be the essential component of it. Hence the name: The Part of Reasoning! Ancient astrologers seem to have penetrated into the gist of the matter by appropriately incorporating the word reasoningin naming this intelligence-related astrological significator.

Once a particular natal chart (horoscope) is ready, the Part of Reasoning can be calculated from the zodiacal positions, in longtitude, of the Ascendant, Mercury and Mars according to the following formulas:

P.R = Ascendant + Mars – Mercury (for diurnal birth)

P.R = Ascendant + Mercury – Mars (for nocturnal birth)

Significance and relation of this Part to intelligence is explained by Guido Bonatti, a famous medieval Italian astrologer as follows:

Having spoken about the first and second Parts of the Ascendant, we must now speak about its third Part, which is called the Part of Reason and Sense. And since one can not truly be a human without reason and sense, the sages considered whence they could extract a Part of Reason and Sense. And since they saw that Mercury was naturally the significator of each (also of thoughts and speech and thinking), and Mars was the significator of heat and motion, they extracted from these two a Part which they called the Part of Reason and Sense (this can even be called the Part of Thought and Speech) – which is taken in the day from Mercury to Mars, and in the night the reverse; and it is projected from the Ascendant.

And they said that this Part signifies sense and reason; and it even signifies knowledge and thought and thinking and speaking.

Which if this Part were well disposed in someone’s nativity, and it or the Lord of the domicile in which it is, were with the Lord of the Ascendant, or the Lord of the Ascendant were to aspect [the Lord of the Part] in his own dignity, and Mercury were then to aspect the Part and the Lord of the Ascendant or the Lord of the Part by a trine or sextile aspect (or at least from a square with reception), and Mercury were made fortunate and strong, nor impeded, the native will be rational, knowledgeable, speaking, thinking and perceptive.

And if Mars were then to aspect the Ascendant, or its Lord, or the Lord of the Part, the native will be wise, as I said, and he will have an acute mind, easily learning; and those things which he learned, he will retain well, nor will he be forgetful.[1]

As in any hermetic part, apparently there are a number of factors that must be taken into consideration and synthesized when delineating this Part too. But, based on the general approach regarding delineation of hermetic parts, one should always start with an examination of the Part’s placement (disposition) in the chart.

House strength serves as one measure indicating how well a particular planet or Part is posited in a horoscope. So it is one of the useful variables to assess the strength, efficiency and functionality, namely "well-disposition of a Part. As regards hermetic parts, another componential indicator of well disposition is whether the Part receives aspects from its rulers (dispositors). It is better if the rulers themselves are in good condition. In traditional approach, calling a dispositor planet to be in good condition is only possible if certain requirements are met. A planet is said to be in good condition if it is strong by house position, fortunate by sign position, and not impeded (a.k.a afflicted). Therefore:

Generally speaking, a Part such as this is considered to be well disposed if it is strong by house position and/or receives aspect(s) from its ruler(s), which are preferably to be in good condition (i.e strong, fortunate and unimpeded).

House strength of the Part of Reasoning has been selected in this study as a suitable variable, apart from other things, for its simplicity and for the availability of a well-known scoring/ranking system for house strength in astrological tradition.

As far as a particular hermetic/arabic part is concerned, strong placement in a chart is the first condition (but not least, because there are always numerous other factors to consider!) to seek to hope for the said benefits from that Part. Factual evidence presented here as well as astrological practice show that weak placement of the Part of Reasoning in a particular natal chart does not deny high and even very high intelligence if other conditions (factors) mentioned above and elsewhere are properly met, thus counterbalancing the poor placement. For the record, 2 subjects in the sample with IQ’s above 145 have their Parts in weak houses (in the 6th and 12th houses by Alcabitius; it is 4 subjects in case of Equal house system).

In astrology, angular houses are considered strong and are the 1st, 10th, 7th and 4th houses in order of decreasing strength. Any planet or Part is said to be strong enough to effectively function for good or bad when placed in these houses. Succedent houses (i.e houses that are next to the angular houses in counter clockwise direction) are mediocre by strength and are the 11th, 5th, 2nd and 8th houses in decreasing order of strength. Cadent houses are weak and are the 9th, 3rd, 12th and 6th houses in decreasing order of strength.[2]

Of numerous factors stated in the Part of Reasoning above, only one parameter, house strength as one componential measure of well disposition has been taken for the scope of this report. Other factors, including the other components of well-disposition not dealt with here will be the subject of later reports.

Considering the complexity that each individual horoscope may possess, always requiring a specific attention on a case-by-case basis, immense difficulty of the task of relating possibly many astrological significators to intelligence and genius can not be underestimated. Nevertheless, it is the author’s persistent fantasy to someday be able to predict one’s high IQ and potential genius within ±10 IQ points" (if possible, within a little less than this) based on a through analysis of one’s horoscopic significators only. Crazy as it may sound, given enough number of accurate birth data, time and effort, this may be achieved perhaps within one or two decades.

Think of the the mere diagnostic advantages for parents of knowing the infant’s IQ in his/her first days after birth, not to mention the great intellectual satisfaction on the author’s part that comes with ultimately being able to break the astrological codes and hidden patterns behind high cognitive ability!

This article is nothing but a humble first attempt in a long way to go to arrive at what I would like to call astro-psychometrics. Like our predecessors had rightly put it about our art, astrology: Ars longa, vita brevis!

About Data and Sample:

Sample birth data was collected from 39 voluntary people, who are active members of high IQ societies with one exception, via private correspondence by e-mail over a period of four years between late 2006 and November 2010.

One data was dismissed for being an imprecise birth time (reported as between 2 and 4 pm) for a reliable computation of the horoscopic house position of the Part of Reasoning. This data had to be dismissed because the ascendant and the position of the Part of Reasoning, which is derived from the ascendant’s position, are points that are quite sensitive to birth time. For the record, depending on the geographical location and date and time, the position of the ascendant changes about 1 degree in zodiac within 3-5 minutes in time in most cases. Such imprecise birth times are still good for other analyses that are not time-sensitive. An example is sign positions of planets in the tropical zodiac. Because even the fastest celestial body, the Moon, moves about 1 degree in a sign in 2 hours on average. (So don’t be discouraged to send birth data if you do not know your birth time precisely enough!)

Birth time data at hand is either AA or A by accuracy classification in the spirit of Rodden Rating system.[3] Five of the birth times were rectified by the author himself by matching the birth time to facts and life events of the subjects obtained via private correspondence. Difference between the reported birth times and the rectified birth times were found to be 11 seconds for one subject and 8 minutes for another; 1 to 2 minutes for the remaining 3 persons. Although I preferred to use the rectified birth times for these five subjects, in none of them did the astrological house occupied and associated house strength of the Part of Reasoning change. Therefore, findings in this report are not affected at all by this preference. One data was taken as 00:30 a.m without rectification for it was reported as between midnight and 1 a.m

Out of 39 subjects 12 are Mensans and one is from Intertel. All others are members of the higher IQ societies with cut-off levels close to 3 standard deviations such as EpIQ and at or greater than 3 to 6 standard deviations such as CIVIQ, HELLIQ, OLYMPIQ, Sigma IV, Camparchimedes, Mega, Platinum, Omega, Homo Universalis, Glia, ISI-S, Pars, and Giga. So the remaining higher part of the sample covers a representative spectrum of 1/500 to 1/1000000000 by rarity and 143 to 190 by minimal IQ score. [4]

Thinking that subjects might not be willing to provide their IQ score, they were asked instead to report the name of the high IQ society with the highest cut-off of which they were a member. So, IQ’ sin this report (and possibly in others to come), unless otherwise stated, always correspond not to individual IQ scores obtained by the subjects but to the minimum IQ scores which the subjects are required to have demonstrated for admission to the relevant societies. (See: “http://www.iqsociety.org/?page_id=1012” for a complete list of the high IQ societies and minimum IQ (i.e cut-off IQ) required for admission.)

Considering some subjects might have demontrated a higher score and become members of higher-IQ societies since when they initially notified me of their society membership, I have recently checked the members area of the societies that are public or within my reach. I noticed that one subject has upgraded his membership from a 3-sigma society to a 4-sigma one in the meanwhile and I updated my database accordingly. There may be a few more though that I just couldn’t verify either because a public list is not available or the list is accessible by the members only. Thus, the current database used for this report is correct and updated as of 19.11.2010 to the best of my knowledge.

All IQ scores used herein and after in calculations are always based on a population standard deviation of 15. Therefore, if a member of a 4-sigma level society sent birth data to me, it was recorded in my database as 160 (based on a s.d of 15), not 164 which is based on a s.d of 16.

Method and Calculations:

An astrological software, Solar Fire v5 was used for casting the horoscopes and determining the positions of the Part of Reasoning. Date of birth, birth time and place of birth are necessary and sufficient data to cast a horoscope. Modern software often enables the astrologer to access to a list of Hermetic/Arabic parts once the chart is cast by inputting the above-mentioned data.

Alcabitius Houses and Equal Houses along with a 5-degree rule were employed to determine the house positions of the Part of Reasoning. Associated house strength scores for corresponding house positions of the Part were attributed according to Abraham Ibni Ezra’s system given in Table-A below [5]. These choices are typical for astrologers in medieval era; an era, which represents the peak in western predictive astrology according to Robert Zoller, one of the contemporary gurus of medieval astrology.

Another very widely appreciated house division system in traditional astrology even today is the whole sign system. I dismissed this system because previous research and practice by experienced astrologers suggest that it should rather or only be used for topical purposes but not for assessing the house strength. Often a cadent planet or Part becomes angular in that system, causing an unjustifiable rise in the strength score.

Table-A. Astrological Houses and House Strength Scores

 

 

The 5-degree rule, which has a common use in astrological practice, is the rule which requires that a planet or Part be considered to belong to the next house in terms of strength when the planet or Part in question is close to the cusp of the next house within 5 degrees. As an example, let the cusp of the 7th house be 20 degrees Scorpio and the Part of Reasoning is at 17 degrees Scorpio in the 6th house. The Part is safely regarded to be of the 7th house strength for it is close to the cusp of the 7th house within 3 degrees (so within 5 degrees!). Some astrologers have objections and some, as I do, have reservations when the rule is applied for charts calculated for altitudes close to the poles such as Norway and Sweden, where some houses of a particular horoscope generally have either very small or very large width at a given date and time.

True population mean for the house strength was calculated to be equal to 6,5. Calculation is straightforward especially for Equal House system, where each house, starting from the cusp of the ascendant, is equally spaced by 30 degrees. So, for example if the ascendant is at 12 degrees Taurus for a particular chart, then the next house (i.e 2nd house) starts at 12 degrees Gemini, the 3rd house at 12 degrees Cancer and so on. Likelihood of a planet or Part to fall in a particular house by chance in a random chart is always equal to 1/12 as there are 12 houses and the houses are equally spaced always occupying 30 degrees. So, the mean house strength is simply equal to the arithmetic average of the individual house strength scores given in Table-A above.

Mean house strengths of samples are expected to distribute normally if the samples are selected at random and sample size is equal to or greater than 30 according to statistical theory. Standard deviation of the mean house strength for samples with size n can be estimated from the true population standard deviation of individual house strength values when it is known, or from the sample standard deviation of the house strength, s by dividing the latter by the square root of the sample size, n.

Correlation coefficient referred to in this report is Pearson’s r.

A significance level of 0,05 was used as a criterion for testing the null hypothesis as it is widely applied in most scientific work.

Significance Test:

Null hypothesis: There is no significant difference in terms of the mean house strength of the Part of Reasoning between general population and the sample consisting of highly intelligent subjects (two third of the sample having very high intelligence).

Results of statistical significance tests and pertinent data are summarized below in Table-B.

 

Table-B. Summary of Statistical Results

 

 

Interim Conclusions and Discussion:

1) Regardless of the medieval house systems selected for determination of the house position and associated house strength of the Part of Reasoning, the null hypothesis is rejected based on the finding that corresponding significance values in Test-1 and Test-2, both being one-tail tests, are smaller than the criterion  =0,05.

Significance values are found to be 0,012 and 0,0053 for Alcabitius and Equal house systems respectively. Practical meaning of this is as follows: The probability of obtaining a mean house strength of 7,72 and 7,82 or greater for the Part of Reasoning of a randomly selected sample of 39 highly intelligent subjects by mere coincidence when the true population mean is 6,5 is about 0,01 and 0,005 when Alcabitius and Equal House systems are chosen respectively to locate the house occupied by and to determine the associated house strength of the said Part.

2) There is no significant correlation found between the subjects’ individual IQ scores, corresponding herein to minimum IQ required for admission to respective high IQ societies, and the individual house strength of the subjects’ Part of Reasoning. (Minimum correlation required for 39 data pairs to be confident at 95% level is ±0,31.)

Correlation is supressed, even spoiled because IQ data used in calculations are, except for one, not the actual individual IQ scores obtained by the subjects but are minimal admission scores of relevant high IQ societies which the subjects in the sample belong to. For instance, IQ data for all 12 subjects from Mensa were taken as 130 causing a total loss in score variability although in reality those subjects may have scores ranging from 130 to 145. Similarly for the rest of the data, IQ’s for all subjects who belong to a 3-sigma level society were regarded to be 145 and so on.

Absence of a significant correlation on individual basis is neither a surprise, nor does hurt the spirit of the matter from astrological standpoint since the strong placement of the Part of Reasoning in a particular natal chart is never the single most important parameter to consider as far as intelligence is concerned. In other words, strong placement of the Part in one’s chart per se is actually neither a truly necessary nor a sufficient condition for one to be judged as highly intelligent if that person is highly intelligent already for other reasons stated in the text by Bonatti given earlier above. Nonetheless, given the choice, it is always good to have this Part strongly placed in one’s chart to fully benefit from the Part’s significations and to compensate possible other weaknesses regarding the Part in a comparative context.

As a matter of fact, the house strength of the Part as a parameter rather seems to serve to compare the charts of two persons A and B, where A’s Part of Reasoning is quite stronger by house placement than B’s. Other things being equal, which is never truly achieved in horoscopes except for real twins, a traditional astrologer would legitimately declare person A to be more likely intelligent than person B.

Given the constraints stated above (e.g lack of actual IQ performance data and current data used in correlation calculation belonging mostly to very intelligent persons only), it is not possible to say if there would be no correlation had the sample comprised not only the intelligent and very intelligent but all levels of IQ from the true idiot to the extremely intelligent.

What the current finding about correlation implies is simply the following: Either there exists no significant correlation at all over the full range of IQ (this needs to include data about average and mentally retarded people too in order to verify) and this has merely manifested itself in the sample consisting of highly intelligent people, or correlation only does not exist for the intelligent and very intelligent. If the latter is true, this means possible dependency of IQ on the house strength in case of very intelligent subjects disappears and house strength loses its importance so that it is no more a discriminative factor at high levels of intelligence.

Value of the house strength as a comparative tool as well as the true meaning of the preceding paragraphs become more clear when, instead of individual scores, the mean IQ scores and house strengths of the sample and sub-sample are compared (see 3 below).

3) Because n is less than but close to 30 for the sub-sample in Test-3, significance was estimated by assuming the estimated population standard deviation would remain more or less the same as in Test-2 if n were 30 and t score (Student’s t) was calculated instead of z. This was done so in order to see how in that case significance would be affected.

Mean IQ of the sub-sample (i.e very high IQ group) is greater than the mean IQ of the whole sample about 9 IQ points. Increase in the mean IQ by 9 points is accompanied by an appreciable increase in significance (from 0,005 to 0,001) and 0,45 units increase in the mean house strength.

Increase in significance by an increase in the mean IQ indicates that the difference between general population and a sample group consisting of intelligent subjects becomes even more evident when the selected sample consists of the very intelligent subjects only. This means likelihood of finding people with a weakly placed Part decreases at very high levels of intelligence.

The fact that an increase in the mean IQ is accompanied by an increase in the mean house strength may also imply a latent positive correlation between the two. This requires analysis of considerably many more data representing various levels of IQ segments from 130 to 190 to find out. Mean IQ’s for instance in 10 IQ point increments between 130 and 190 may reveal whether there is a significant correlation, if not between individual IQ scores and house strength values, but at least between the mean minimum IQ scores of each segment such as 130, 140, 150 etc. and corresponding mean house strengths.

Mean house strength for the sample and sub-sample is around 8. According to Ibni Ezra’s classification, which in fact is nothing but a useful ranking system, the score of 8 as a measure of strength corresponds to the strength of the 11th house, that which is regarded by astrologers as the strongest and most fortunate/favorable house next to the angular houses. Given the findings, it appears so in broad sense as regards intelligence too! Because, on average very intelligent subjects have at least moderately strong placement of their Part of Reasoning. This is in close agreement with the theory of traditional astrology, stating that a planet or Part should best be strong (in an angular house), or be at least mediocre by strength (in a succedent house) but not be impeded by being in a weak house especially such as in the 6th and 12th houses, which are regarded to be the two weakest houses by all astrologers.

Although I do not want to jump to a quick conclusion, it seems that these findings justify the reasoning, at least in general terms, of traditional astrologers who would consider the strong placement of a Part as important and a first thing to look at when delineating a Part.

Update:

Next update of this report will be when data submissions from intelligent adults reach or exceed 100 with a prospect then to compare existing data also to those of historical geniuses and eminent intellectuals.

Acknowledgements:

This report could not have been prepared without contribution of birth data from generous friends in the high IQ community, none of whom I know personally. Special thanks go to Dr. Evangelos Katsioulis for reserving a place in this website to host my works, to Paul Cooijmans and Brennan Martin, who made my project known in the community by giving a link in their websites.

 

References Notes:

[1]: The Book of Astronomy, Guido Bonatti, transl. Benjamin Dykes, 2007, Cazimi Press, Vol.II, p.1054

[2]: So far as I know, there is general agreement over the ranking of the houses by strength in astrological community except for the weakest house. Maybe majority of astrologers today consider the 12th house as the weakest house as opposed to Ibni Ezra. Scoring and ranking the houses in terms of strength has its own astro-logics and merits in traditional astrology that will not be dealt with here. Personally I do advocate, albeit not very strongly, Ibni Ezra’s choice of the 6th house as the weakest.

[3]: See for Roden Rating system: A href=”http://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Help:RR”

[4]: As a rule, names of the subjects who submitted birth data are kept confidential unless they give consent otherwise in written.

[5]: See for Ibni Ezra http://www.skyscript.co.uk/ezra.html”

2 Yorumlar

  1. Chrome Hearts Ring

    Generally I don’t read post on blogs, however I wish to say that this write-up very pressured me to check out and do so! Your writing style has been surprised me. Thank you, very great article.

Bir Cevap Yazın

Copy Protected by Chetan's WP-Copyprotect.