Astrology

[Syvelocin]

Keep in mind: the title is ASTROLOGY. Magazine horoscopes are vague and proven bullshit.

I'll talk about my own opinions and experiences in this post, as I own those words, but to get the hard facts I have some interesting references here: Why it is unacceptable to dismiss astrology as rubbish (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm) (seriously read this), Why Astrology Works (http://www.geocosmic.org/articles/whyworks.shtml) (give the rest of the website a look-through as well), and if you're curious to see for yourself, Birth Chart Calculator (http://alabe.com/freechart/).

From the first link: main arguments against astrology.

1. It's just plain common sense! (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#sense)
2. The Signs of the Zodiac (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#zodiac) are wrong!
3. No one knows how astrology works! (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#mechanism)
4. Scientific tests (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#flawedtests) show astrology doesn't work.
5. Where's the scientific evidence (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#scievidence) for astrology?
6. Astrology is at odds with scientific knowledge (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#history) & modern philosophy.
7. Astrologers defend astrology to protect their vested interests. (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#vested)
8. Astrology is not a science. (http://www.astrologer.com/tests/basisofastrology.htm#science)

I honestly used to be on the doubter side of this topic. I'm the doubter for all the common debates as well, theism, the paranormal, etc. My attitude was pretty much that I found it entertaining, but of course the concept of birth date dictating personality is silly right? Then someone showed me my birth chart, and my mind was absolutely blown by how accurate it was. Since then, my personal evidence has only grown. I can't call myself a "believer," but I think it's truly interesting, sparks a good amount of introspection, and I can't honestly write it off to coincidence. I'm intrigued by all matters of personality, what affects and composes it, and systems like Myers Briggs, Enneagram, and yes, even astrology. I'm a rather intelligent person—the only thing I'm not modest about—and whenever I bring up astrology as anything other than pure codswallop, I'm immediately seen as an idiot when the same people had never bothered to even try researching the topic before spitting on me.

If astrology is pure coincidence, then it's one massive, miraculous one. I've yet to meet someone that didn't fit even their sun sign (and sun sign is actually only a small part of the equation). I've met people who had more inconsistencies between their personality and their signs, but I've never met, say, an outright, true Leo who was typed as a Virgo. The only real ambivalence I've seen is in people born on cusps. The signs are specific enough, unlike horoscopes, that I think this level of coincidence is quite insane (and testing has been done, by many but one notable test was done by Carl Jung, where he compared birth charts of many different married couples' compatibility that put the odds of his findings at 62 million to one) They're distinct personalities and aren't as vague as predicting "financial change" or whatever the newspapers say. There are times I've read even a post from a VT member and been able to accurately guess their sun sign with a 100% track record so far (though the times this happens, the evidence is quite strong. Like all the Virgos I see over in the OCD forum lol).

I'm an INFP (http://www.16personalities.com/infp-personality) and a type 4 (http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/typefour.asp#.U5hvyfldV8E) with a 5 wing (http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/typefive.asp#.U5hv5fldV8E). That I knew way before my birth chart. The links will be a bit too in-depth, I really don't expect anyone to read them, but I provided them as otherwise this post would become a wall of text to write it all out here. I'm also a rising Virgo (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/virgo-rising.html), solar Taurus (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/taurus-sun-sign-personality.html), lunar Virgo (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/virgo-moon.html), and also relevant in the comparison between my personality type and my birth chart is my Mercury in Gemini (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/mercury-in-gemini.html). There's of course a lot more to my chart, but I think those four signs are more than enough to show that my chart matches INFP 4w5 quite well.

I'd love to hear other people's opinions and reasons for and against it. Hopefully though, people will go research the topic. It isn't fair to the scientists who devote their lives to this field to laugh at them before listening.

[JamesSuperBoy]

I agree people should research the topic but so often I think they need to believe in it first.

[Camazotz]

If astrology is pure coincidence, then it's one massive, miraculous one. I've yet to meet someone that didn't fit even their sun sign (and sun sign is actually only a small part of the equation). I've met people who had more inconsistencies between their personality and their signs, but I've never met, say, an outright, true Leo who was typed as a Virgo. The only real ambivalence I've seen is in people born on cusps. The signs are specific enough, unlike horoscopes, that I think this level of coincidence is quite insane (and testing has been done, by many but one notable test was done by Carl Jung, where he compared birth charts of many different married couples' compatibility that put the odds of his findings at 62 million to one) They're distinct personalities and aren't as vague as predicting "financial change" or whatever the newspapers say. There are times I've read even a post from a VT member and been able to accurately guess their sun sign with a 100% track record so far (though the times this happens, the evidence is quite strong. Like all the Virgos I see over in the OCD forum lol).

I'd love to hear other people's opinions and reasons for and against it. Hopefully though, people will go research the topic. It isn't fair to the scientists who devote their lives to this field to laugh at them before listening.

Problem is that they're not scientists; they're pseudo-scientists because astrology is not a scientific field, like they admit in your first link. There hasn't been a scientific experiment that found a causal relationship between cosmological locations and personality. Personality is mostly determined by genetics.

Your sources have many of the red flags (logical fallacies) as well...

As I wrote above, I believe it is unwise and premature to use the current model of the four fundamental interactions (fundamental forces) as a basis to rule out possibilities for several reasons. First, within this model, quantum mechanics and gravity are not yet reconciled. Scientists are still struggling to develop a theory of Quantum Gravity and as a result a Grand Unified Field Theory. In addition, several discoveries within quantum physics suggests that this could in the future become a fertile area for research into a possible mechanism.

Appeal to ignorance

Before moralising about the evils of astrology, Dawkins needs to keep his own avid disciples in order. Former Enron CEO, Jeffrey Skilling convicted of multiple federal felony charges relating to the Texan energy giant's financial collapse claimed to have been inspired by Dawkins' book The Selfish Gene. (Dawkins 2007) His selfish policy caused great harm. Every year he fired the bottom 5% of his team in a humiliating way. Twenty thousand staff were impacted by the bankruptcy which included at least one suicide. Millions in California were affected by Enron's forced rolling black-outs which lead to exponential price rises for energy and contributed to the state's energy crisis. (Egan 2005) So ironically when Dawkins' social darwinism was applied in the real world it resulted in 'mass extinction' - damage of a different magnitude to that of the worst example of an astrologer!

Ad hominem

If you have read this far, you will now know there are no grounds to dismiss astrology as complete rubbish from a scientific point of view. If you still believe astrology to be rubbish, ask yourself your belief is based on astrological knowledge and actual experience. Or is it blind faith inspired by feelings? Or were you won-over by an illusionist's trick? Or were you informed by a second-hand opinion that appears authoritative, but is based on an outdated or prejudiced view of astrology? Astrologers are the best authorities on their special subject.

Circular reasoning (astrology is real only if you believe it is)

3Dp2Zqk8vHw

-1nsEtjqPg8

[Gamma Male]

I still think astrology is complete and utter rubbish, but I'll bite.

I'm a highly intelligent(No, I'm not just being arrogant) and extremely openminded. I grew up in a Christian baptist household and yet at the age of 10 I stopped believing in God and stopped eating meat, without any outside source influencing me to do so, simply because I thought those were the right things to do. I'm not very disciplined or a good worker without some sort of structured environment. I tried learning guitar on my own once and failed miserably because I got distracted and decided I had better things to do. I'm an INTJ. I paint and draw occasionally, though I'm not all that good. When I grow up I'd like to become a physicist or perhaps some sort of research engineer.


Edit: I did the chart wheel thingy. It was all very vague and mostly positive, and could've applied to anyone.
http://alabe.com/cgi-bin/chart/astrobot.cgi?INPUT1=Donald+Buchanan+Jr&INPUT2=n03mch0m5k7%40gmail.com&MONTH=01&DAY=07&YEAR=2000&HOUR=12&MINUTE=00&AMPM=PM&TOWN=Corsicana&COUNTRY=USA&STATE=TX&INPUT9=&Submit=Submit
Without looking at my birthday, what sign would you think I am?

[Miserabilia]

Keep in mind: the title is ASTROLOGY. Magazine horoscopes are vague and proven bullshit.


Um what? Like it or not, magazine horoscopes are astrology..


I honestly used to be on the doubter side of this topic. I'm the doubter for all the common debates as well, theism, the paranormal, etc. My attitude was pretty much that I found it entertaining, but of course the concept of birth date dictating personality is silly right? Then someone showed me my birth chart, and my mind was absolutely blown by how accurate it was. [1] Since then, my personal evidence has only grown. I can't call myself a "believer," but I think it's truly interesting, sparks a good amount of introspection, and I can't honestly write it off to coincidence. [2] I'm intrigued by all matters of personality, what affects and composes it, and systems like Myers Briggs, Enneagram, and yes, even astrology. I'm a rather intelligent person—the only thing I'm not modest about—and whenever I bring up astrology as anything other than pure codswallop, I'm immediately seen as an idiot when the same people had never bothered to even try researching the topic before spitting on me. [3]


[1]: This is mostly subjective but go on.
[2]: Then you are a beleiver.
[3]: Yes, it is one of those things that are immediatly written off as nonsense but there is reasoning behind this.


If astrology is pure coincidence, then it's one massive, miraculous one. [1] I've yet to meet someone that didn't fit even their sun sign (and sun sign is actually only a small part of the equation). [2]I've met people who had more inconsistencies between their personality and their signs, but I've never met, say, an outright, true Leo who was typed as a Virgo. The only real ambivalence I've seen is in people born on cusps. The signs are specific enough, unlike horoscopes, that I think this level of coincidence is quite insane (and testing has been done, by many but one notable test was done by Carl Jung, where he compared birth charts of many different married couples' compatibility that put the odds of his findings at 62 million to one) [3]They're distinct personalities and aren't as vague as predicting "financial change" or whatever the newspapers say. There are times I've read even a post from a VT member and been able to accurately guess their sun sign with a 100% track record so far (though the times this happens, the evidence is quite strong. Like all the Virgos I see over in the OCD forum lol). [4]


[1]: Why should it be a coincidence? THere could be anything behind it, for example, maybe some people with certain personality traits have sex at generaly the same time period, which causes their children born later to share those traits. THat would be a pretty good reasonable explanation, yet I've seen no research to that side of it.

[2]: Really? Because usualy I only half fit it, not completely; furthermore, I can fit myself half into any sun sign. I could have the exact same personality and be a different sun sign and still see a pattern, because that's how these things are made up of.

[3]: I aggree that it is interesting but all it would show is a correlation. There's little to no research to the why and how of it, which is why it's not appealing at al to me; to me knowledge is about asking questions, not finding simple answers to big things.

[4]: Cool. I'd personaly enjoy seeing an official research that demonstrates people being able to tell with acuracy a persons sun sign only by finding out about them or listening to them.






I'm an INFP (http://www.16personalities.com/infp-personality) and a type 4 (http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/typefour.asp#.U5hvyfldV8E) with a 5 wing (http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/typefive.asp#.U5hv5fldV8E). That I knew way before my birth chart. The links will be a bit too in-depth, I really don't expect anyone to read them, but I provided them as otherwise this post would become a wall of text to write it all out here. I'm also a rising Virgo (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/virgo-rising.html), solar Taurus (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/taurus-sun-sign-personality.html), lunar Virgo (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/virgo-moon.html), and also relevant in the comparison between my personality type and my birth chart is my Mercury in Gemini (http://www.alwaysastrology.com/mercury-in-gemini.html). There's of course a lot more to my chart, but I think those four signs are more than enough to show that my chart matches INFP 4w5 quite well.
[1]

I'd love to hear other people's opinions and reasons for and against it. Hopefully though, people will go research the topic. It isn't fair to the scientists who devote their lives to this field to laugh at them before listening.
[2]


[1]: Again, I could identify myself onto almost each of those things.

[2]: Yes but are they serious scientists? Why do you think they aren't publishing these amazing results and correlations?
Why aren't there plenty of peer review studies, if there are scientists spending lifetimes researching it?
This either shows the scientific community not accepting them, even though they have hard evidence and facts (which seems unlikely),
or they are choosing to remain, where they in fact mostly are;
in pseudoscience.
This is the main reason I'm so sceptic on it, besides there being no actual explanation on why these correlations would exist.

[Camazotz]

Um what? Like it or not, magazine horoscopes are astronomy.

No, horoscopes are not astronomy. If you meant astrology, then yes, I agree. Their argument is "we're the real astrologists because it's based on 'science'. Horoscopes are fake but we're real."

[Miserabilia]

No, horoscopes are not astronomy. If you meant astrology, then yes, I agree. Their argument is "we're the real astrologists because it's based on 'science'. Horoscopes are fake but we're real."

Woops sorry yes I did mean astrology. Words are way to similar but I do know the differnce. I'll correct it now xD
And yes that is their argument :rolleyes:

[Vlerchan]

I'm intrigued by all matters of personality, what affects and composes it, and systems like Myers Briggs, Enneagram, and yes, even astrology.
There's an obvious difference between Myer-Briggs (which is great and really interesting - ENTP represent: Ne > Ti > Ni > Te > Se > Si > Fe > Fi) and the Enneagram system (type 5 here - which I know seems contradictory to ENTP: I'm not sure either) and astrology: Myer-Briggs and the Enneagram system both attempt to align your personality after analysis whilst astrology tries to predict it on the basis of your birthday. I can imagine both the former systems working because they have a means of logically deducing ones personality, but that's entirely different as to what astrologists try to do.

I'm also really only responding to this topic to say it's cool to see someone else around who seems to have as big an interest in personality formation as me: so yeah, it's cool.

[Miserabilia]

Astrology is all made up. Stars are giant burning balls of hydrogen and helium gas. the only power they have at a distance is gravitational pull on other stars.

Stars do not determine your destiny, there is no such thing. You're responsible for your decisions and choices, you made them, not the stars.

This is what I thought too, astrology makes these claims about stars and the sun and the moon influencing daily life but it says nothing of how it would do so. Untill it does I'm not that intrigued by it, even though I think alot of personality type things are interesting.

[Karkat]

Honestly? I've given astrology another chance pretty much every time it shows up, but it's NEVER accurate enough for me. It seems like it's not me. I can see myself in the qualities, sure, but I wouldn't say they're major per se. I feel that the qualities listed are...Weaknesses. I can overcome it. It's not a strength, it's a personality deficit. I think that's what bothers me the most.

I've always been interested in astrology vaguely, toying around with it, always seeing if it was worth a shot, but it's never caught my interest enough to delve into. I just kind of end up rolling my eyes or getting bored by the end. I feel like I'm reading someone else's report. Like, OOPS, YOU GOT THE WRONG ONE, MY BAD.

Not to mention that I'm nothing like anyone I know who was born around the same time I am, and absolutely nothing like those I know who 'share my sign'.

I mean, I've always given it chances, I even filled out the birth chart or whatever, but it just doesn't work for me.

Like Donald, I'm curious- can you guess my sign just by reading this/my other posts?

[tovaris]

astrolagy today definatly does not work for there are 13 signes in the zodiak today, rather than 12
;)

[BuryYourFlame]

Problems testing astrological practice under strict scientific methods:

Isolating the huge number of variables involving human behaviour and astrology is an immense challenge.
Replicating the unique conditions is almost impossible. For example, each human being is unique and identical planetary positions are never repeated within recorded human history.
The Experimenter Effect is potentially stronger than in a chemistry experiment as the human experimenter is part of an experiment involving human behaviour. So the criteria used, the data selected, the format and the results are particularly open to reflecting the conscious and unconscious bias of the experimenter rather than providing objective data.
These are the main problems that I have with it. It is because of these factors that astrology becomes unscientific. There is no possible way, as admitted by the article, that astrology can be tested scientifically. This is unlike the examples given such as the finding of a black swan and "rocks" falling to Earth because these can obviously both be falsified or verified to a very high degree of certainty. This is also true with magnets, it was known that they worked but the conditions for testing how they worked were always present, the pre-requisite conditions for testing astrology (again, as admitted by the article) are never present.

As such, it seems to fall beyond the reach of science and so it's really a matter of Occam's Razor and there is no need to believe in astrology.

[Gamma Male]

Here's something I received in a star chart thingy.

Some of it applies to nearly everyone.
"You tend to get angry when you see other people slacking off and not working as hard as you, but receiving equal recognition." Or something like that.
Well no fucking dur! Of course!


Some of it was just plain wrong.
"You're not interested in abstract ideas. You like focusing on results and things that can be put into action."
Not true. I have an extensive interest in metaphysics and philosophy, and plan to become a physicist when I grow up.

It's just ridiculous that people fall for this.