Any astrologers here?

[Wade]

I don't believe in Astrology.

When I want to know my future, I just study the entrails of chickens... like a rational person.

[Ryocchi]

I do believe in astrology to some extenct, but what people must realize is the half of the things your horoscope, birth chart etc say about you (specially for the future) are possibilities, not a fixed destination.

[Wade]

I took a glance at Matt's post and copied the first sentence I saw:

"Although you take quite a while to make decisions, you usually consider all sides to a question"

That's what charlatans call a "Barnum Statement." It's a term for descriptions of people that contradicts itself, thereby not saying anything at all in essence. If the statement just read "You take quite a while to make decisions," then half (roughly) of people who read it would disagree with it's assertion of their personality. It would be too bold, too specific. But saying "Although you take quite a while to make decisions, you usually consider all sides to a question" is just vague enough to get most people to think, "yeah... that's exactly what I do. Sometimes I do one thing, and other times I do another!"


It's a trick.

[Merc]

I took a glance at Matt's post and copied the first sentence I saw:

"Although you take quite a while to make decisions, you usually consider all sides to a question"

That's what charlatans call a "Barnum Statement." It's a term for descriptions of people that contradicts itself, thereby not saying anything at all in essence. If the statement just read "You take quite a while to make decisions," then half (roughly) of people who read it would disagree with it's assertion of their personality. It would be too bold, too specific. But saying "Although you take quite a while to make decisions, you usually consider all sides to a question" is just vague enough to get most people to think, "yeah... that's exactly what I do. Sometimes I do one thing, and other times I do another!"


It's a trick.

I can see where you are coming from but what's insignificant to one person could be life changing to another. My understanding of astrology is rudimentary at best, but if a specific phrase helps someone see clearer on their own path to self discovery, then it is beneficial.

[Wade]

I can see where you are coming from but what's insignificant to one person could be life changing to another. My understanding of astrology is rudimentary at best, but if a specific phrase helps someone see clearer on their own path to self discovery, then it is beneficial.

I guess what it comes down to is what's more important: That's it's beneficial, or that it's real.

For me, I couldn't get over the whole "it's just a bunch of bullshit that some dude made up " thing. Not trying to be antagonistic (although, it probably looks like that). That's my feelings on the matter of astrology. I understand it's very important to some people though.

[Vigilias]

Not an astrologer but a Wiccan and Spiritualist.

I listen very closely to my instincts which have grown stronger over the years and I trust in Spirit to guide me through the difficult patches.

Astrology fascinates me but I understand it as much as I do Mandarin, never had the time... not true, I never DEVOTED the time to learn about it - that and spread sheets!

Go with whatever works for you - and blessed be!

[SolemnBoy]

I have a question for people who enjoy studying astrology on the forum.

Now, I do believe that even astrologers agree that the horoscopes you encounter in various thirdrate magazines are obviously false. The rotation of the earth has changed significantly ever since astrology's invention (precession) in the second century and several new planets to be accounted for have been discovered.

My question is simply if less dubious sources take the aforementioned occurrences into consideration in their predictions of the future. I mean, in my opinion all astrology sources will be dubious, but that's not relevant here. Does anyone know the answer to this question?

[tavi]

It,d be more dubious to take those things into consideration cos they,ll clearly have to invent new lies so how could they be less dubious, what would qualify them.

[Merc]

I guess what it comes down to is what's more important: That's it's beneficial, or that it's real.

That didn't come across antagonistic at all to me. It's you sharing what you believe. I do have a feeling that we could go round and round and get nowhere, though lol. I just see these things in a different way. If a simple statement helps to validate something we've always felt about ourselves, it can sometimes give us that extra push to keep on moving forward. For some, it can be an a-ha moment. Hell, I can remember pulling star charts years ago when I wasn't sure who I wanted to become. It actually helped me put a lot into perspective and gave me the push I needed to get off my ass and start doing something. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that everything is truthful at all, but if a generic statement resonates with someone in the right way, it can be a good thing.

[Pix]

The rotation of the earth has changed significantly ever since astrology's invention (precession) in the second century and several new planets to be accounted for have been discovered.

My question is simply if less dubious sources take the aforementioned occurrences into consideration in their predictions of the future. I mean, in my opinion all astrology sources will be dubious, but that's not relevant here. Does anyone know the answer to this question?

I've mixed with different astrologers and read some books and know they have different ideas on how and why it works. While some confuse astrology with a physical force like gravity (and that it affects brain chemistry like the moon affects the tides) and believe it comes from the heavenly bodies themselves plenty of others instead believe it's a metaphysical force in which actual placements in the objective universe don't matter directly.

The most common one is an occult idea of "As Above, So Below" and sometimes will even throw in Biblical reasons of God giving signs (including in stars) and so it's actually a sign that we can read either placed there by God/dess or as a reflection of a higher reality. New planets or asteroids get discovered "when it's time" and don't count before. In this case we subconsciously recognize the spiritual properties and name them accordingly without realizing why we do (save maybe astrologers) as it's like a "divine unconscious suddenly made conscious." IIRC, Isaac Newton was this type of astrologer (and believed he'd be more famous for his obsession with the occult/religion rather than contribution to science).

Others believe in more of a Jungian collective unconscious version, that is as a society we think of certain planets and stars a certain way and that REFLECTS a type of psychic energy back at us so that those part of that society become affected (not to be confused with "controlled") by it. That is if Venus had instead been named Phobos then these astrologers believe that the planet would instead influence our fears and phobias rather than our interests in love & beauty, because we'd subconsciously project a different type of psychic energy via the collective unconscious that would affect everyone who takes part in that society to greater or lesser degree (similar to how time in the sun can tan the skin).

In both cases of metaphysics the energy doesn't come from the heavenly bodies but our perception of them, that is it comes from our species reflected back at us.