Your astrological sign doesn't mean **** personality-wise...

Post Reply New Topic

For example, according to your birthdate your moon sign is in fact Taurus, an earth sign.

And Saturn and Uranus are in conjunction in the last 1 and a half degrees of Sagitarius, after having already begun their move into Capricorn, an earth sign, ( and are just doing their backwards and forwards thing before entering the sign definitively). Though the position of Uranus is largely a generational thing the conjunction with Saturn puts more emphasis on it.

Until I know what time you were born I can't say what your Ascendant is.
.

Last edited by ouinon on 07 Dec 2008, 3:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.

My attitude is that all of the universe is connected, in ways beyond our full comprehension, and that the small can sometimes be seen in the big, and vice versa.

I also think that astrological analysis done for oneself can function as a sort of "meditation"/focussing device/structure with which can explore one's own psychological processes free of medical terms or value judgements.
.

Last edited by ouinon on 07 Dec 2008, 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.

IMO, my astrological profile from my birth chart seems to fit me well.

I like to indulge in it at leisure once in a while. People will often ask me to do their charts so I do it, for free that is. Just a hobby, I don't know why people including atheists take it so seriously like it's some kind of a cult or whatever.

Probably why I don't ascribe myself to a theist...

LIKE I SAID, if you have a better classification system do tell me about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroticism_Extraversion_Openness_Personality_Inventory Have a look at the sections on reliability and validity, give me the numbers for the zodiac, then we can compare. If there are no measurements, I'll stick to the opinion that any perceived value of the zodiac to classify personalities comes from the Barnum or Forer effect. At least there is evidence that this effect exists. I have no evidence that the zodiac has any explanatory value, and no reason to expect that the zodiac has any explanatory value.

Last edited by Gromit on 07 Dec 2008, 2:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Well, I don't believe in all this astrological nonsense - we Virgos are far too logical for that...

This makes no sense. Astrology is a load of BS. Why do we need to propose something to replace it? Myers-Brigg is a somewhat better classification system (though still not really scientifically rigorous) if you insist on lumping people into little boxes and categories.

Yes Orwell, I certainly DO insist on such. Lacking the ability to read people I need a way to make predictions about people and their personalities and tempermeants in order to understand them. WHY is categorizing people frowned upon so much? Especially when it works so well??

It is frowned upon because broad categorizations can not apply to everyone within them, and you are being disrespectful to any person you judge by such classifications when you deindividuate them so. It is demeaning. And it doesn't work, so that argument is moot. It has already been demonstrated for you that it really does not work, so stop claiming that it does. Maybe you should just find a way to deal with not always knowing how other people are going to act, like the rest of us. Uncertainty is scary, but it's also reality.

Now, if your silly little astrology works so well... gimme a guess as to my sign. (I'm going to go turn off my birthday listing in my profile right now so you won't be able to tell)

that can be said of any religion, though.

Im unconvinced by statitstics Orwell; DEAL WITH IT PUNK. And NO, I will NOT try to guess your sign or play those stupid guessing games with you-especially since this is the internets and I dont know you in person but you SURE do know how to come across as inflammatory. I could care less if categories are un-PC because while they may not be 100% foolproof, they WORK at least 90% of the time. I cant began to tell you how sick to death I am of all this bullsh1t about how "people are complex" . The complexity of human personality, behaviour, and certainly that of peoples motives is grossly overestimated. I understand that people VERY MUCH WANT to believe that they have free will but the more science learns about the mind and brain the more the evidence against it starts to mount. If we do have free will, Im convinced we Do NOT have nearly as much as we would like or think that we do.

Are you convinced by the fact that almost any astrological sign can be applied to a given person (in this case ToadOfSteel) with essentially equal validity? All of the astrology crap is so vague and general that it could conceivably be used for anyone.


Why not, if it works so well? Afraid to put your beliefs to the test of empirical analysis?


I don't give a s**t about PC. You are being disrespectful to a person you try to judge based on what time of year they were born in. What happened to being "unconvinced by statistics?" Now you're trying to convince me with statistics? But you aren't even using real statistics, you're just pulling numbers out of your ass! Astrology does not work!




An astrology believer talks about "science" and "evidence?" Really? What "scientific evidence" do you have that the apparent position (note: not real position, because the light takes years and years to get to us in some cases) of stars at the time of one's birth influences personality in the slightest?

^Actually, I pulled those numbers out of your Ass! But the bottom line is that You continue to assert astrology is bullsh1t but all you can come up with is a strawman argument!! The last setence that you quoted was a response to your spurious claim that I should just "accept" uncertainty in peoples behaviour. But as I said before, its not the position of the stars that would affect someones personality, its the distance of the SUN relative to the Earth. Lastly, if I knew your birthday and were to tell you the charactestics of the corresponding *sun sign* , regardless of how well such traits describe you, you WOULD tell me that I was wrong in order to invalidate me!

Last edited by Haliphron on 07 Dec 2008, 4:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I would worry that relying on an invalid method that gives me only an illusion of competence would lead me into bigger mistakes than being aware of how little I know.

There is one way in which an invalid method could help you, through a placebo effect. If belief in the method makes you use (possibly without noticing) what intuition you have but normally ignore, you could improve your judgment. The benefit would come from your belief, not the method you believe in. If that is happening, good for you, but please forgive me for not taking your opinion as evidence for the predictive value of astrology.


Predictions don't need to be perfect to be useful. If something gives you a better probability of being right, use it. Just be aware of the limits of the prediction, and the probability of being wrong. If you want perfect prediction before you act, then in most situations you can't act. That is itself a choice with its own consequences.


You can never know any person well enough to predict all actions in all situations. If anything less than perfect knowledge is deindividuating and demeaning, then all judgments of other people are that, because no judgment of people's actions is based on perfect knowledge of all relevant factors. The solution to the dilemma is the same as before. Keep track of how reliable your judgment is, and you allow for individual variations.

I TOTALLY agree with you about that(in bold) Gromit. But when I find out someones sun sign, its not so much that I pass judgement on them as much as I make tentative inferences about how they are likely to see the world and react to me.

Really? I must not have noticed that.


I'm sorry if you consider citing relevant facts to be a strawman argument.


Spurious? Uncertainty exists, get over it. Regardless of the question of free will (and I am a determinist, btw, so I deny free will) we will never be able to understand well enough to make good predictions about people's behavior the way you want to.


Propose a mechanism for this. There is absolutely no reason why something like that would have such a profound influence.


No I wouldn't. I would point out that the traits listed are so generic that they could apply to many people, and also point out some places where opposite characteristics in the same astrological sign are listed, meaning that everyone can relate to the sign in some manner or other.