Do you believe in astrology? What is your sign.
- Thread starter Sassylassie
- Start date
I must say i havn't seen anything that has forced me to beleive yet, Can you prove me wrong let me see what you come up with i'm pisces.
When you read the daily sun signs in the paper, also
read your rising sign.
Gemini Rising. Scorpio Sun, Moon, Saturn, Venus.
Mars and Jupiter in Libra.
Sign sign, everywhere a sign,
breaking up the scenery
losing my mind,
Do this
Don't do that...
Can't you read the Sign ???
read your rising sign.
Gemini Rising. Scorpio Sun, Moon, Saturn, Venus.
Mars and Jupiter in Libra.
Sign sign, everywhere a sign,
breaking up the scenery
losing my mind,
Do this
Don't do that...
Can't you read the Sign ???
Can i read the sign? Ok explain...
As for reading the papers i don't, as i feel news papers hold inacurrate information!
As for reading the papers i don't, as i feel news papers hold inacurrate information!
Inaccuracy in newspapers is no reason to avoid them.
Check out optical illusions.
Our own lying eyes deceive us.
The burden is on us to interpret.
Check out optical illusions.
Our own lying eyes deceive us.
The burden is on us to interpret.
If we choose to carry the burden then we only have ourselves to blame. our eyes will see what we choose them to see, nobody can force an illusion upon them!
Dexter Sinister said:
This is a common argument against astrology. But serious astrologers DO take the precession of the equinox into account. There is the tropical zodiac (used by a great majority of astrologers) and the sidereal zodiac. It is the sidereal zodiac who bases itself on the constellations. The tropical commonly used zodiac doesn't change because it is based on the yearly revolution of the Earth around the sun... Based on the solstice and the equinox.
This certainly doesn't prove the validity of astrology but it's an important point to understand to go on with an honest debate.
I'm a gemini with scorpio rising.
Sun sign columns in the papers rarely do any form of justice to astrology because the sun's zodiacal postion is only one of many many factors to interpret while looking at a natal chart.
While science dissects the universe in order to try to understand it, astrology goes the other way around. It TRIES to grasp the cosmos as a whole and study its effects on our human existence. Science divises itself into a whole series of sub-categories meaning it often fails to connect the dots in order to discover higher patterns of meaning. Astrology sees the cosmos as filled with meaning and inter-connectedness and TRIES to understand parts of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity
When statistical studies are done to research correlations between human existence and astronomical data, there are practically never any conclusive results, despite a few very interesting exceptions. (check out Charles Gauquelin). Where it gets interesting is when tests are done to study the capacity of astrologers to "understand" the celestial picture. It's as if astrology was a language and that you need to understand it in order to use it succesfully.
Sun sign columns in the papers rarely do any form of justice to astrology because the sun's zodiacal postion is only one of many many factors to interpret while looking at a natal chart.
While science dissects the universe in order to try to understand it, astrology goes the other way around. It TRIES to grasp the cosmos as a whole and study its effects on our human existence. Science divises itself into a whole series of sub-categories meaning it often fails to connect the dots in order to discover higher patterns of meaning. Astrology sees the cosmos as filled with meaning and inter-connectedness and TRIES to understand parts of it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity
When statistical studies are done to research correlations between human existence and astronomical data, there are practically never any conclusive results, despite a few very interesting exceptions. (check out Charles Gauquelin). Where it gets interesting is when tests are done to study the capacity of astrologers to "understand" the celestial picture. It's as if astrology was a language and that you need to understand it in order to use it succesfully.
What's to debate, honestly or otherwise? Astrology is simply wrong.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html
Many astrologers DO use asteroids and other celestial objects in their interpretations. But obviously, astrologers will be much more concerned with objects that our WITHIN our solar system. As soon as you get out of our solar system, stars and galaxies will be of much more interest than extra-solar planets. The galactic core (around the 26th degree of Sagittarius) is a very important factor for many astrologers.
Astrology is much more concerned with meaning than causality, which is why Jung's concept of synchronicity is so important to this discussion.
Of course astrology is often used by crooks and sad naive people who can't bear the weight of their own free will. But that is not an argument against astrology's validity.
The most important thing to remember is that decent astrology is not about predicting the future, it's about understanding the past and the present, giving us an idea where we stand in the cosmic scheme of things. Astrology can be used as a tool to create a dynamic and personal future while taking into account larger and meaningful realities such as the solar system and our galaxy.
Astrology is much more concerned with meaning than causality, which is why Jung's concept of synchronicity is so important to this discussion.
Of course astrology is often used by crooks and sad naive people who can't bear the weight of their own free will. But that is not an argument against astrology's validity.
The most important thing to remember is that decent astrology is not about predicting the future, it's about understanding the past and the present, giving us an idea where we stand in the cosmic scheme of things. Astrology can be used as a tool to create a dynamic and personal future while taking into account larger and meaningful realities such as the solar system and our galaxy.
Jung's concept of synchronicity is nonsense, in this discussion or any other, he just didn't comprehend what's called the law of large numbers and the frequency with which highly improbable events actually happen. Gauquelin's work was discredited long ago for bias in his data selection. The arguments against astrology's validity are as I originally stated them:
What you're talking about, using it as a tool to create a dynamic and personal future and so on, is just more New Age bs. Astrology has singularly failed to prove its claims; there's nothing there. It's just the same old tricks mediums and psychics use: cold reading, the Forer effect, confirmation bias, selective thinking, and all the rest of it. You're deluding yourself if you think there's anything more than that in it.
Astrology is utterly ridiculous and is debunked rightfully so. It should be buried along with religion as more superstitious malarkey. What do the postions of the stars have anything to do with fate? You people do realise that when you look at a star that is where it was hundreds, thousands or even millions of years ago depending upon their distance from our solar system? Christ on a stick but some of those stars no longer exist even though you can see them because the light from their destruction has not yet reached our human eyes. So how can you base fate on the position of a star that you see which currently no longer exists? That is the essence of absurdity. Please people, get lives.
Re: RE: Do you believe in astrology? What is your sign.
Not at all. The cosmos is intimately connected with human existence. Every element heavier than lithium, for instance, which is only the third element in the periodic table, had to be cooked up in thermonuclear reactions inside stars that blew up and scattered them around the galactic neighborhood, to be incorporated into a subsequent generation of star and planet formation. The cosmos appears to be about 13.7 billion years old, the earth's around 5 billion years old, so the sun is at least a second generation, possibly a third or fourth generation, star. Without previous generations of stars to make the heavy elements and spread them around, the chemistry of the cosmos, with only hydrogen, helium, and lithium to work with, would be too impoverished to sustain life.
That's the basic connection, not the mystical flummery you appear to believe in. Reality as science reveals it is far more complex, rich, and interesting than anything any mystic ever dreamed up.
s_lone said:
Not at all. The cosmos is intimately connected with human existence. Every element heavier than lithium, for instance, which is only the third element in the periodic table, had to be cooked up in thermonuclear reactions inside stars that blew up and scattered them around the galactic neighborhood, to be incorporated into a subsequent generation of star and planet formation. The cosmos appears to be about 13.7 billion years old, the earth's around 5 billion years old, so the sun is at least a second generation, possibly a third or fourth generation, star. Without previous generations of stars to make the heavy elements and spread them around, the chemistry of the cosmos, with only hydrogen, helium, and lithium to work with, would be too impoverished to sustain life.
That's the basic connection, not the mystical flummery you appear to believe in. Reality as science reveals it is far more complex, rich, and interesting than anything any mystic ever dreamed up.
RE: Do you believe in ast
It is pointless to address this with logic. We have people who were likely taught superistion from childhood. Makes it easy to move from one superstition to another. The move to logic will be more difficult.
Astrology is superstition. Use it's belief as a marker to know when you are dealing with an illogical superstitious person. That is the only minimal benefit it has.
It is pointless to address this with logic. We have people who were likely taught superistion from childhood. Makes it easy to move from one superstition to another. The move to logic will be more difficult.
Astrology is superstition. Use it's belief as a marker to know when you are dealing with an illogical superstitious person. That is the only minimal benefit it has.