This took a while and honestly I was expecting it to be a little more difficult than it was. In order to line each system up with the number five, all I did was include introversion and extroversion as independent factors for mbti, remove The Luminaries which are a little too broad anyway, and Big Five is already Five. Let’s begin.
Keep in mind that different systems have different rules, and these are not 1 to 1 correspondences. In fact, I thought they would overlap more, but I was rather surprised they didn’t.
Big 5: The scientific model. I’ve only found silly arguments against it. However, it is a little broad. The 10 Aspects sub-model is far more powerful and interesting to use.
* Extraversion > jupiter > Extroversion
* Agreeableness > venus > Feeling
* Neuroticism > mars* > Sensing
* Conscientious > saturn > Thinking
* Openness > mercury > Intuition
Planets: as interpreted by ancient and medieval astrology. How do we get a score? Measure the condition of a planet using essential and accidental dignities. (Domicile, exaltation, aspects, angularity. Unaspected seems to be negative, certainly asocial.) Zodiac signs are a SECONDARY factor, not a primary one.
As mentioned above, I took out the sun and moon and the outer planets as well. I’m curious if the Sun and Moon might line up with the two higher order factors of the big five, namely Stability and Plasticity. Plasticity sits above Extraversion and Openness, whereas the remaining three fall under Stability. Just guessing off the top of my head, the moon might be associated with plasticity and the sun with stability. There are a handful of reasons for this intuitive supposition which I won’t get into right now.
MBTI: The correspondences are not nearly as exact as they come out with Big 5 and natal astrology. This is not surprising to me anyway, especially since Carl Jung himself notes after explaining the Extroverted Thinking and Feeling types that his perspective is rather skewed because hes a Thinking dom (sorry, everyone who types him as an INFJ, I just don’t see it, never have, and neither does he). That, if Jung was Intuitive dom or a Sensor, he would have inverted the system and called Thinking and Feeling irrational, rather than Sensing and Intuition.
The issue here, is that both Thinking and Intuition line up with Openness (Openness to Ideas = Intuition, Intellect = Thinking), and Sensing works just as well as Conscientiousness if not better. I’ve noticed that introverted Feeling lines up decently with Neuroticism, and I say that as an INTJ with rather troublesome Fi. Extroverted Feeling lines up almost perfectly with Agreeableness.
You see in the previous paragraph that I split trait openness into its sub aspects of openness to ideas, and intellect. It might be worth splitting them all up and diving in with the four functions divided by their two attitudes and seeing what might correspond across these new parameters. But this sort of Correspondence exploration is clearly in its infancy.
I just want to stress that I’ve only run this test for the handful of case studies. Obviously we want to collect a lot more data before drawing any hard conclusions, however the correspondence between Big 5 and a birth chart, something that can’t be Miss tested or mistyped, was surprisingly accurate. I never got anything that completely contradicted my hypothesis, and most of the time a majority of the planets were in the condition that was expected. As far as experimentation goes, despite the extremely small sample size, the results are more than promising and I am excited to collect more data.
*Rabbi Ibn Ezra, medieval Persian theologian and astrologer, controversially considers mars to be feminine. Scientifically (though, facts like these are controversial despite evidence) Neuroticism and Agreeableness are slightly higher in women in average. Further, in an odd correspondence, Jung states Feeling is more common than Thinking in woman, though this franky just sounds like a stereotype to me.