Modern Or Dual Rulership Doctrine

Purpose

This document defines the pre-constitutional doctrine layer for the modern_or_dual_rulership family within Moira's dispositorship subsystem.

It exists because dispositorship becomes substantially more inclusive once outer-planet rulership or dual-rulership systems are admitted, but that inclusivity also introduces a more fragile graph topology than the narrow Phase 1 traditional model.

Before Moira implements this family, it must state clearly:

• whether outer planets are admitted only as subjects, or also as rulers
• whether modern rulership replaces traditional rulership or coexists with it
• whether "dual rulership" means parallel doctrines or one combined doctrine
• how mixed traditional/modern results are named and kept separate

This document is therefore pre-constitutional work for a deferred doctrine family. It is not an API contract and not yet a backend standard.

Foundational Thesis

modern_or_dual_rulership is a distinct dispositorship family, not a minor variant of traditional domicile dispositorship.

Why:

• it changes the sign-rulership topology of the graph
• it usually changes the participating subject set
• it changes which chains terminate where
• it can alter whether a chart has a final dispositor, a cycle, or no final dispositorship at all

Moira must therefore treat this family as doctrine-bearing, not as a cosmetic extension.

What This Family Covers

This family includes doctrines such as:

• modern domicile rulership
• hybrid domicile rulership
• dual-rulership systems

Typical examples in contemporary astrology include assigning:

• Uranus to Aquarius
• Neptune to Pisces
• Pluto to Scorpio

But Moira must not assume that all modern practitioners use the same system, or that all hybrid systems mean the same thing.

Why Outer-Planet Admission Is Not Enough

There are at least three materially different possibilities:

1. admit outer planets as subjects only
2. admit outer planets as subjects and rulers under a modern doctrine
3. admit outer planets into a hybrid or dual-rulership doctrine

These are not equivalent.

For example:

• including Uranus in a chart while Saturn still rules Aquarius is one system
• including Uranus and making Uranus the ruler of Aquarius is another
• including both Saturn and Uranus in a dual-rulership doctrine is a third

Therefore:

• subject admission must remain distinct from rulership doctrine
• "include outers" must not silently imply "modern rulership"

Core Doctrinal Questions

1. Replacement vs Coexistence

This answers:

• does modern rulership replace the traditional ruler
• or does the sign carry both a traditional and modern ruler

The distinction is decisive.

If modern rulership replaces traditional rulership, the graph is single-valued.

If both coexist, then Moira must decide whether it is doing:

• two separate doctrine runs in parallel
• or one explicit dual-rulership doctrine with its own graph semantics

Those are different computational acts.

2. Dual Rulership Meaning

This answers:

• what "dual" means in practice

Possible meanings include:

• a comparative bundle over two separate doctrines
• one doctrine that allows two rulers per sign
• one doctrine that prioritizes one ruler and preserves the other as secondary

Moira should not use the phrase "dual rulership" unless one of those meanings is fixed explicitly.

3. Subject Scope

This answers:

• which bodies may participate as dispositorship subjects

Possible future scopes include:

• classical plus Uranus, Neptune, Pluto
• a broader modern planetary subject set
• a mixed set with selected points

This must still remain independent from the rulership rule itself.

4. Termination Semantics

This answers:

• how final dispositors and cycles are recognized once outer-planet rulership is active

Moira should preserve the same termination ontology unless a doctrine requires otherwise:

• final_dispositor
• terminal_cycle
• unresolved

But the distribution of those results may change radically when the rulership graph changes.

Recommended Constitutional Stance

Moira should not implement one vague "modernized dispositorship" mode.

Instead, it should admit named sub-doctrines within this family, such as:

• modern_domicile
• hybrid_domicile
• later, perhaps additional named dual-rulership doctrines

Each sub-doctrine should:

• declare its subject policy
• declare its rulership policy
• declare whether rulership is single or dual-valued
• preserve a visible policy receipt in every result

Comparative Implication

This family is especially well suited to the comparative-bundle layer.

Why:

• traditional and modern outputs may differ sharply
• the same chart may show radically different final dispositors under each doctrine
• callers often need to compare rather than collapse the results

So Moira should treat comparative presentation as a first-class companion to this family, rather than forcing users to infer differences manually.

What Must Be Avoided

Moira should avoid:

• ambient outer-planet admission
• hidden replacement of Saturn/Jupiter/Mars by Uranus/Neptune/Pluto
• calling a result "dual" when it is really a silent blend
• one merged graph that hides which doctrine produced which edge

These would make the subsystem more inclusive in appearance but less exact in truth.

Deferred Implementation Recommendation

This family should remain deferred until Moira freezes at least one explicit sub-doctrine under it.

The cleanest first candidate would likely be:

• modern_domicile

implemented as:

• a named single-doctrine profile
• explicitly paired with the comparative-bundle layer so it can be compared against traditional domicile dispositorship

Only after that should Moira consider a truly dual-rulership doctrine.

Final Recommendation

Moira should treat modern_or_dual_rulership as a legitimate long-term dispositorship family, but only if it is implemented through explicit named sub-doctrines.

It should preserve:

• separation of subject scope and rulership doctrine
• explicit declaration of replacement vs coexistence
• compatibility with comparative bundles
• the existing termination ontology

It should avoid:

• silent modernization
• hidden dual-rulership blending
• ambiguous graph identity

The family is appropriate for Moira, but only as a governed expansion of doctrine, not as a broad permissive switch.