posted December 15, 2011 05:45 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lindisfarne:
Astrology seems like a fate of birth discrimination. In some cases. Since no one chooses when to be born and there is no evidence to support the stereotyping that astrology must do. I've done this stereotyping I conclude every single person on this site has to.

I wouldn't go as far as to say discriminate... prejudge? Something between prejudice and discrimination.

For example in Linda Goodmans book, Love signs. It's full of stereotypes based on perception. I've read astrology books but that has to be my least favorite.

I hope I'm not offending anyone here, do any of you see how astrology can be taken into being a fo
of birth discrimination?

---

I don't see it as discrimination.

Sign discrimination would be saying "x sign is better/more valuable, and y sign is worthless/not as good". I think that most astrologers try to see the positive and negative in every sign. Even though we all have our own astrological biases, I think that we can all admit that even the signs that give us headaches have their good points.

I also don't feel that Linda's book was all about stereotypes. She points out a few times in the book that other planets have to be taken into consideration, and mentions a few times that the ascendant/Moon/other things can modify a chart. She gives a general overview, which some might interpret as generalizing, but to be fair, she DOES point out that there are other things to be considered besides the sun, so it's pretty clear that this is a "101" book and not a more advanced one. My view of the book is that it was meant to be an introduction to astrology--not a be-all, end-all book, but one to 'get you started'.

Also, I have to point out that it was written in **1968**. So, yes, cultural and social beliefs of THAT time period are going to come into play--she lived in that time period, so naturally she might have adopted some beliefs that people held back then: she was a part of her generation, so it's normal for her generation's views on things to show up in her books. Yes, she does appear (to me) to be a social conservative, and some of her views might seem a bit dated to us living in 2011 and beyond, but, at the same time, her attitudes were fairly normal for the time in which she lived. 1968 was over FORTY years ago; things obviously have changed since then, so had she been born later, she might have written her book with a different perspective--from the perspective of someone born in a later generation.

*edit* I just looked up Linda's birthdate, and she was born in 1925. In 1968, she would have been 43 years old, and would have been writing from the perspective of someone of that age.

------------------
*I use the whole sign system*

Personal Planets:
Sun, Mercury: Libra
Venus: Scorpio
Moon: Cancer
Mars: Capricorn

posted December 15, 2011 05:51 AM            

quote:

---

Astrology and these interpretations of heavenly bodies, are basically humanistic traits. Just placed innocently onto planets.

You just said that it was an art powered by intuition. Are you now saying the humanasitic interpretations of planets are not astrology?

---

I'm also going to say that once you get the mechanics of it down, you will be using your intuition to fully understand what the integrated chart means, how the energies represented by the planets were interacting with each other in that cross-section of time.

It's not about taking each aspect/planetary placement by itself and demanding a one-size-fits-all meaning. That's like taking a still from a movie and expecting it to explain the entire movie.

quote:

---

Is it intuitive to say Saturn is a karmic planet? Is that art?

---

posted December 15, 2011 05:53 AM            

A poster mentioned moon opposite Neptune and how that was basically a bad placement "master illusion".
But my boyfriend has that placement. He's nothing as this person described. Im pretty sure most of his cancerplacements oppose Neptune. None of the interpretations fit.

posted December 15, 2011 06:00 AM            

thanks for responding!
When I say it's a form of birth discrimination, I wasn't talking about signs. Horoscopes seem to do that enough. I bet if you cut out the horoscope for say, Libra. Collect it for a week. Cut out the Month and date and the sign. Give it to 3 people to read, I wonder what sign they will say they are based on the vague generalization.

When I said birth discrimination, it's true. maybe it's a severe word. but look at this for example:
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/000964-2.html

So because these people are born with these placements, some people think their assessments are in order, all because someone was born with those aspects? For example the moon opp Neptune. The aspect "master illusion" hiding things from themselves. What? My bf has that, my friend does too. Doesn't describe them at all. they are pretty knoweldable about them selves. That poster is judging her former friend and many other people based on that placement. Ive done it to.

posted December 15, 2011 06:02 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Capriquarius:
[QUOTE]Astrology and these interpretations of heavenly bodies, are basically humanistic traits. Just placed innocently onto planets.

You just said that it was an art powered by intuition. Are you now saying the humanasitic interpretations of planets are not astrology?

---

[/QUOTE]

But how can you, you, youuuu
know all there is to know about the human psyche and behavior based on this new age psychology?

posted December 15, 2011 06:04 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lindisfarne:
@Reg

thanks for responding!
When I say it's a form of birth discrimination, I wasn't talking about signs. Horoscopes seem to do that enough. I bet if you cut out the horoscope for say, Libra. Collect it for a week. Cut out the Month and date and the sign. Give it to 3 people to read, I wonder what sign they will say they are based on the vague generalization.

When I said birth discrimination, it's true. maybe it's a severe word. but look at this for example:
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum24/HTML/000964-2.html

So because these people are born with these placements, some people think their assessments are in order, all because someone was born with those aspects? For example the moon opp Neptune. The aspect "master illusion" hiding things from themselves. What? My bf has that, my friend does too. Doesn't describe them at all. they are pretty knoweldable about them selves. That poster is judging her former friend and many other people based on that placement. Ive done it to.

Someone lying to themselves and others has nothing to do with astrology, isnt it a psychological issue?

---

Well, to be fair, newspaper horoscopes are seldom accurate because they don't take other things into consideration--just suns. So, yes, those should be taken with a grain of salt because they aren't always done with the thoroughness or accuracy that they deserve. That's on the person writing them, though.

Also, never forget that free will comes into play. Astrology represents *potential*. What we do with what we are given is up to us. I have Venus in Scorpio, for example. The negative expression of this would be to be perverse, to use people, to be intentionally cruel and malicious, to be intentionally manipulative. I don't do that because I choose not to, even though the potential for that kind of negativity is there.

------------------
*I use the whole sign system*

Personal Planets:
Sun, Mercury: Libra
Venus: Scorpio
Moon: Cancer
Mars: Capricorn

posted December 15, 2011 06:09 AM            

Being given planets and placements is kind of like being given, say, apples, flour, spices, sugar, and an oven to bake in. You could choose to make apple pie, choose to make turnovers, choose to make a tart, choose to separate the ingredients and make a few different things, could choose to throw everything away and not make anything, etc. You're given the ingredients, and you have a few options as to what to make (after all, you can't make a chocolate cake if you don't have any chocolate, so you'll have to use what you are given), but end outcome is up to you within what you are given, if that makes sense. That is, you can't choose what you are given, such as your birth chart, but only what to make from it.

(leave it to a Cancer moon to come up with something that involves food and cooking!)
------------------
*I use the whole sign system*

Personal Planets:
Sun, Mercury: Libra
Venus: Scorpio
Moon: Cancer
Mars: Capricorn

posted December 15, 2011 06:11 AM            

If astrology was an science we could predict but we could never be completely sure. We make our own choice.

Something build on a science will show things on one another way.

posted December 15, 2011 07:08 AM            

quote:

---

Why is Mars the planet of war? How does Pluto represent death and rebirth? Where do these interpretations come from. I'm really curious do any of you know? Does anyone here know? I

---

Are you asking why the planets were given particular names?

Mars is associated with war because Mars is the god of war in Roman Mythology - the equivalent of Ares in Greek Mythology.

Pluto is associated with death because Pluto is the god of death in Roman Mythology - the equivalent of Hades in Greek Mythology..

As to why certain planets were given certain names.. as far as I understand - it was due to the planet's physical properties (colour, size etc)

I had a pretty long debate with someone about this whole shnazz... If you're interested - read this page:
http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum1/HTML/019834-2.html

Starting with my post where I say:

quote:

---

I'm not sure about that. Neptune is pretty personal to me. It's square my Sun and conjunct my Mars.
I think the outter planets *do* rule their specific signs. Pisceans are much more suited to Neptune, than the traditional ruler - Jupiter.

Also, when you mention planets/asteroids and the order in which they were discovered and named - I don't think the time line is highly significant, because we (humans) are responsible for naming *all* of the planets (based on the names of ancient Roman gods)

---

posted December 15, 2011 07:17 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by iQ:
Beyond this, one can only understand Astrology as much as our positive karmas allow us to understand. It is a 4th Dimensional Subject, not easy to measure in a 3D reality with 3D instrumentation.

---

I did this once. I had a horrible SR and I changed the houses by going to Lisbon. Had serious doubts about changing "karma", but I figured that there must be a reason why I had access to that particular information.

I'm conflicted about something else right now. I tend to believe that it's morally and ethically wrong to look beforehand at babies birth charts. And what if an astrologer were to have a baby and elect a cesarean date the same way we elect surgery dates, thus creating a better birth chart for the child? Is that ok? My gut says it isn't and that it would not be allowed.

On topic, I agree with Iq. The reason I love astrology so much is because you can't define it. I used to say that astrology is mathematics combined with psychology, but I discovered the third element and that is in fact divination, although I don't use it very often, only when it "comes" unrestricted. I'm sure that there are many other elements to it.

posted December 15, 2011 08:11 AM            

I want to start off by thanking you for your post. I think skepticism is a healthy part of cognitive evolution. Progress does not happen by just accepting what other people say, it results from a process of challenge, experience, and conclusion.

In the case of Astrology, there are several issues which arise. Take religion for example, as our species evolves, more people question its importance. A lot of that skepticism comes from the fact that religion is an institution established from a cosmology, which does not seem to match up with modern scientific evidence.

So in the case of astrology, we bump into a similar issue. The roots of astrology reach back into prehistory (we know early humans marked cave walls in relationship to the lunar cycles). Our modern understanding of western astrology is based on people observing the skies and recording whatever events were happening at the time. As astrology developed, it became one of the originating foundations beneath the sciences we observe today.

Part of the difficulty with validating astrology, is the fact that much of the information related to the topic was destroyed while cultures were being conquered. And much of the crusades forced astrology to adhere to Christian cosmology or seek shelter underground. Astrology stayed a taboo topic for a long time and sadly much of our current understanding of its origins are just lost. I think this is important to mention, because it is possible there once was evidence to support some kind of astrological science. In the present, anyone interested in astrology has to be their own paleontologist if they want to discover original information.

The second huge issue is that fact that the science community destroys anyone half-way interested in actually researching the topic. It is seen as a waste of time to prove OR disprove, and anyone who doesn't want their career to end in ridicule, doesn't challenge the majority. This being said, there isn't much funding for people who want to actually conduct scientific research. Much of the modern discoveries are made by hobbyists. So to start, I think it's important to bring up that astrology is not in a very fortunate position for validation. Were the situation different. I think it would be very easy to answer your question definitively.

I hate to pick apart your post and answer specifics, but there were a lot of questions so I think it's probably the easiest way to respond. I apologize if it seems impersonal.

“Astrology seemingly, is based entirely on arbitrary classifications that have no proof to their credibility.”

There have actually been several experiments which prove that some parts of astrology do apply to organisms on Earth. Recently I posted a thread about studies done with litters of puppies. There was also Michel Gauquelin who set out to disprove astrology and ended up discovering something called the “Mars Effect”, which proved that specific professionals in specific professions, tend to have similar planetary patterns in their natal charts. It caused some pretty big upheaval in the scientific community, and several shoddy “counter-experiments” were run, but ultimately his work was just outright ignored, discounted, and swept under the rug.

There are several studies which show 1). Astrology does seem to have some effect and 2). Our grasp of astrology is VERY limited. You really just have to go looking for them, and you often have to dig deeper than what the general scientific consensus agrees on about each study. It's important to also note that the people conducting the pro-astrological outcome experiments are people who have studied the topic. Those who “disprove” or “discredit” these experiments, have no practical knowledge. It would be like a geologist telling a doctor that their discovery was a pseudo-science.

“Is it really a science? Is it something to be blindly believed? Because it all seems like a bunch of theories. It's spun spiritualism.”

I believe the answer to this question is “neither”. Science does not accept astrology (which makes it not a science), though astrology is based on scientific principals. Astrology is also not something which requires belief because it is essentially mathematics using concepts instead of numbers. Those who study it are able to see it working without needing any kind of leap of faith. Astrology is as complex as mathematics or chemistry; sure I could say “I'm a Sagittarius”, but that is as general as saying, “I'm a male”. There are plenty of males with plenty of different personalities. Depending on several physiological and anatomical factors, some men can act similarly. So much so, that our society gives generalized value to people based on physical gender. If we look deeper, we see gender (both physical and psychological) is a VERY flexible topic, based mostly on perception. It is a concept almost identical to a generalized view of astrology, yet it requires no faith from people and can be seen in the deepest parts of human sociology.
When we see a guy acting like a d0uche, we say, “He's just being a guy”. When we see a Cancer crying we say, “Oh, they're just being a Cancer”.

“None of what is known can be proven can it? It's all based on empirical evidence aka perception. You can't prove what it is, because you have nothing to base further evidence upon EXCEPT your perception.”

Unfortunately this statement is true for anything. We humans view reality in a very human way (which is completely understandable). When we first started looking for life out in space, we expected to find life like us. If we look at this planet however, how many of it's native species are even from the animal kingdom? We look at other planets and say, “oh, a human couldn't live there so it's lifeless”, but the truth is, there could be life on the sun, saying the same thing about earth, because it is way too cold and waaaaay too wet.

Our scientific “truths” are based on human concepts and those concepts are based on generally agreed upon, individual perceptions (which are further based on how those individual's brains process their 5 senses). If you are asking, “do the majority of intelligent people consider astrology valuable?” Then that is a statistical answer which I don't have the data for, but there was a time when the smartest person in the world, could stand on the tallest mountain, look around in a 360 degree circle; and there was no way you could argue with them that the world was not a flat disk. Another example could be the fact that we plan our lives based on the hours and minutes of every day. But if you were talking to a person who wasn't born on a planet, their never having seen a star travel across a planet's sky, could prove difficult for explaining the concepts of day, night, years, months, hours, etc..

I guess all I'm saying is, we seem to be a bit pretentious about our “scientific truths”, when there are so many inconceivable factors which remain undiscovered. 20 years after I die, the human understanding of the cosmos will be totally different. Who am I to dictate what is real and what isn't outside of what seems to work for me. All I can do is seek a paradigm which seems to be the most valid and go with it.

“I read about Signs and their ruling planets. And I am thinking, how do we know this is real? Can it be proven? For example, Lets look at Venus.......That I know”

The direct topic of ruling planets and dignities is one of those things that is partially lost. Pythagoras had a popular system which was based on mathematical incrementation and numerology. The Egyptians had their own systems. All we know about some of these things, is that they tend to just work. That isn't such a horrible thing considering it is the same principal which inspired the construction of the LHC and continues our research into gravity. We know particles act specific ways, but we don't know why, so we poke and poke at them until we find an answer. Were people investigating astrology with similar resources, we may have more apparent answers.

There are also the hard to ignore patterns found in the physical forms of the planets. Venus (for example) has an orbit relative to Earth, which moves in a golden ratio related geometric pattern. The golden ratio is a mathematical pattern which commonly shows up in things generally considered beautiful or aesthetically appealing. The Moon's relationship to the earth is scientifically proven to influence not only ocean tides, but menstruation (the ocean being the womb of evolved life, and menstruation being a womb related event are at least notable relationships. Especially considering the Moon represents the archetypal mother/womb, our space of personal safety, emotional needs, and what we need from our environment in order to feel sustained). There are often odd similarities between the physical planets and their archetypes.

Additionally, there is debate over this, but the constellations may have nothing to do with astrology. They were merely in the right place when the earth was acting out the traits of each sign (the seasons). The signs are associated with the “traits” of their season and the things humans were forced to do, in order to deal with the conditions of those seasons. Therefor, Aries represented the beginning of something new, because seeds were planted, animals were screwing, the day was finally the same length as the night, and warmth/life/awakeness was finally starting to win over the cold/death/hibernation. Libra on the other hand was a time when you had to start weighing decisions for the preparation of winter, the nights become the same length as the day and sunsets are more noticeable, it was also time to grab your prettiest wears, your scale, and go out to the marketplace for socialization and sale of goods. It was also a time for meeting new people and forming relationships of mutual benefit for the upcoming winter. So when a planet other than the Sun passed through the same chunk of space (crossed over the constellation) they figured its individual light would effect the Earth similarly to how the Sun did when it was there. It just so happened that it seemed to apply. There are always original reasons for the systems in astrology, some are lost though.

A last thing to consider is that fact that human spirituality was born out of animism. We are a species who once believed everything was alive in its own way. So when we refer to early astrology, we also have to consider the fact that people didn't see the world as a seperate environment in which individuals lived free from the elements. They saw the world as an organism which communicated to them through the tone and events of each day. If you found a stick and then had something great happen, your world was telling you the stick was lucky. If you noticed that every year around a specific time, fruit was abundant, your world was telling you that time was a fertile time. Could it be that astrology is BS because it's based on superstition? Sure. Is it also possible that the superstition was based on something which could have a practical and applicable value today? Totally, in fact modern science is based on that very concept.

“I also couldn't understand sometimes why people differentiate horoscopes and astrology...... playbook with a grain of salt.”

To explain the difference between horoscopes and in-depth astrology, I'll refer to my earlier comment regarding gender. We can look at a person and say, “he's a guy so he acts like this” and depending on several physical factors, we could be varying degrees of right or wrong. We could say the same thing about a person's Sun sign, but without the extra data, the possibility of being accurate is vague. In-depth astrology is to horoscopes, what physiology is to physical gender. You can't just say a guy in a bar always acts like “this”. Depending on his hormone levels alone, he is prone to all sorts of different gender related instincts. In the same way, you can't say a Leo Sun with Jupiter trining, will always act like “this”. There are just too many intricate factors involved for that statement to be correct. You wouldn't randomly walk up to a woman on the street and say, “You're a woman, and this whole week is Black Friday on the shopping network, so I predict you will spend a crap load of money this week”. The same can be said for randomly walking up to a Virgo and saying, “The Moon is transiting through Virgo this week, so you are going to be really emotional”.

“What do you guys think?…. it's a bit why I prefer psychology most often than not.”

Gauquelin, Rudhyar, and Jung were all psychologists who ended up finding great use in astrology. In fact, Freud was very disappointed in Jung for wanting to research it, but Jung turned out to be a much more viable resource for applicable psychology than Freud (IMO). Astrology is a very complex and intricate art, the more you study it, the more you become blown away by its subtleties. You can't however teach an art to others and start with the subtleties. You have to acclimate people with the big concepts until something clicks and they start figuring it out on their own. Most astrological writing is directed toward readers who are not total astrology geeks.

The truth is, astrology is a lot like cooking. You know sugar is sweet, and eggs act as a fluffing or bonding agent, and flour is the cement of most baking, but that data alone doesn't automatically give you the understanding of a proficient chef. You taste a sauce and you think, “Yum!”. A Chef tastes a sauce and deconstructs its flavor. The same happens with astrology. The events in a chart are all ingredients, and cooking times, and humidity, and fuel types. When an astrologer looks at a chart, they deconstruct all the factors into flavors and do their best to communicate how those conditions and ingredients will taste.

Uranus and Mars are both strong, imposing, determined, and severe flavors. Uranus can be additionally reckless, knee-jerk, unrealistic, detached, and will not take no for an answer. Mars can be additionally passionate, aggressive, selfish, arrogant, dominating, and combative. If the two energies were to work together as a conjunction and violence happened, people who understand those energies would say, “well, duh”. But if that person instead spearheaded a charitable organization which helped war veterans learn computer skills and get back into the workforce, an astrologer would be equally unsurprised. Both possibilities exist in that flavor combination, it just depends on the conditions in which Uranus conjunct Mars is found. The whole point in labeling the conjunction as violent (though a poor point in my opinion) is to help people slowly get an understanding of how the flavors mix.

“What do you Guys seriously think? Do any of you have any doubts,.....it disappoints me knowing this”

In my own experience astrology works (and I am pretty damned skeptical), but it isn't something to plan one's life by, it's a tool for better understanding the self. There are many levels of understanding astrology. Contrary to popular belief, there are no answers to be found, just more and more questions HAHa. Also keep in mind that different combinations can make similar patterns, I would generalize Mars conjunct Pluto as “violent” too if I were generalizing. It doesn't then disprove astrology because Uranus conjunct Mars can be poorly generalized with the same meaning.

An example of intricate astrology is my Sun. I have Sag Sun, trine Mars Leo, and Aries ASC making a grand fire trine. The grand trine is however mellowed out severely, because My Sun associates directly with all three water signs. I identify as much with water principals as I do with fire principals. If someone looked at my chart and started spouting off descriptions for a grand fire trine, their description would apply, but something big would feel like it was missing. They would have to take in to consideration the intricacies if they wanted to achieve a more accurate understanding.

posted December 15, 2011 08:21 AM            

You have some good points here Lindi...bare in mind I am still a newbie in astrology (relatively): I don't think I'm good at natal chart, but fairly good at synastry and now I've taken horary charts...

I've always been fascinated by Astrology...there was always something about it. But I can't say that I ever took it seriously. But this past year alone, there were events happening in my life (and I posted something about a job yesterday) that were so spot on that now I'm an unreserved adherent/believer of astrology...and so I think if you see it as neither science, certainly not "new age psychology" but as a "code to be deciphered" then it makes much more sense. For until you understand a code it means nothing to you...Maybe astrologers have deciphered the code of the universe and built a large body of knowledge that is marginalized today...In the old days, kings and queens had their own astrologers and astronomers and astrologers were one and the same person...
As part of the evolution of knowledge, science has rigorously set itself apart from other forms of knowledge and you have astronomers distancing themselves from astrologers today...this happened mostly after the middle ages (if I don't get my periods wrong)

I'll say this, until one understands the basic ideas underlying astrology, then as part of one's part to understand this baffling understanding of the world is certainly normal and it's one's path to knowledge then...
But the accuracy of it all stuns me...But as I mention you have to understanding the underlying principles and basic ideas: now that I've figured out that sagittarius occupies a large swath of my first house and basically determines my house positions more than Scorpio (my ascendant) my monthly horoscopes (I don't care for the dailies or even weeklies) from at the very least Susan Miller and two or three very good ones have become so much more accurate...more importantly, I understand better why I love to travel, love foreign people and cultures, why my boyfriends have always been from different countries, why my best friends and boyfriends have been in fire signs when I'm a capricorn sun/mercury/mars. Don't get me started on Uranus conjunct my ascendant...

Yes, people on this site and others based on their basic (entry level) understanding of astrology make a number of sweeping generalizations such as the rigid interpretation of moon opposition neptune that you refer to and go all gloom...But a good understanding of neptune in a chart will look at it as part of the entire chart not as a single aspect: not all moon opposition neptune is going to be a serial killer or what have you. However, I have neptune in my first house and it touches on several personal planets of mine: boy do I love wearing rose-colored glasses...Once I became aware of that, my propensity to idealize friends made so much more sense and so now I work at being aware of this trait in my...this is where free will comes in. I don't have to have delusional views of people my whole life, I can work on it.

See...I'm not even an expert but an expert would give you a better more wholehearted understanding of the whole thing...

posted December 15, 2011 08:59 AM            

I completely agree with everything you said in your post. It totally mirrors my take on astrology, though I wouldn`t have been able to put it together this eloquently. So thank you for that.

posted December 15, 2011 11:17 AM            

I really don't like it when people say you can't predict things with astrology.

posted December 15, 2011 11:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by athenegoddess:
There are no limits to how good you can get with Astrology, and if one has both practical and spiritual areas thoroughly grasped when it comes to reading the stars, they can have some pretty amazing thoughts.

---

I agree, I believe it is possible to see astrology in a blade of grass. A deep understanding of astrology is like a deep understanding of genetics. Since I was a high school kid, scribbling elemental and planetary combinations in my notebook at home, I secretly wondered if one could get to a point where they could bend reality.

When I hear of new scientific discoveries, my mind often goes to a place of astrological contemplation. I would love to see a study on astrology and genetic sequencing, because they are such similar concepts.

posted December 15, 2011 01:21 PM            

Some of the topics started by the OP suddenly look frivolous when she is so skeptical of Astrology.

Linda Goodman studied tens of thousands of charts and was taught by amazing gurus prior to writing her books and I get a "Troll Alert" when someone speaks dismissively about such well researched and detailed books. I doubt if the OP has read Love Signs word to word.

Also, Skepticism in Astrology is best analyzed in the "Divine Diversities" Forum. There are millions of Astronomy Sites and Forums to criticize, vent or rant against Astrology.

Request Astrology Moderators to do the needful in shifting this thread.

And Xiiro... once again, superb!

posted December 15, 2011 01:50 PM            

whatever astrology is, it is supposedly born into us (talking about birth charts here) but you are all forgetting that both nature AND nurture play a role in who you are and who you become. the society you are raised in, the family you're raised by, the experiences you have, are all going to shape and color what is already there (birth chart) so people with the same placements are never going to play them out the same, because everyone experiences life differently.

posted December 16, 2011 10:05 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by lindisfarne:
I'm a subtle skeptic when it comes to astrology. When I started I was full frontal skeptical. Astrology is fun, and the ideas of it are fascinating but lately I find myself going back to my skepticism.

Astrology seemingly, is based entirely on arbitrary classifications that have no proof to their credibility.

Is it really a science? Is it something to be blindly believed? Because it all seems like a bunch of theories. It's spun spiritualism. None of what is known can be proven can it? It's all based on empirical evidence aka perception.  You can't prove what it is, because you have nothing to base further evidence upon EXCEPT your perception.

For example, in the beginning a few years ago when I decided to not blindly disprove astrology, I read about Signs and their ruling planets. And I am thinking, how do we know this is real? Can it be proven? For example, Lets look at Venus. Venus in astrology is the planet of love, beauty, friendship etc. And Taurus or Libra can't remember, is ruled by Venus. How do we know any of this is a fact? As far as I'm concerned what I do know is that Venus is the second closest planet to the sun. That's pretty much it. Where did these fanatical descriptions of these planets come from? Theorists? or that the constellation Capricorns ruling planet is Saturn. How do we know this? How do we know that Saturn is the planet of karma? Or time? Theorists? Where did these description develop from? How do we know the Moon and the constellation Cancer are linked? I do know that the moon plays significance in the animal kingdom and lunar phases and has some relation to procreation. That I know

So I'm curious here. I don't know where else to post this. How, did these things come to be? Astrology is fun but I find my doubting making its way back. Skepticism I think is called for, not to believe every single thing written especially with astrology. I also couldn't understand sometimes why people differentiate horoscopes and astrology. Because with astrology and I do find this to be a little problematic - the depth, or uniqueness of such placements in ones birth chart again are all theorized, the interpretations made? can literally be applied the the entire human race. That's what alarms and reminds me to go back to taking this theoretical playbook with a grain of salt.

What do you guys think? I feel awfully silly blaming planets etc and their alignment with the stars on behaviors. For example, Uranus conjunct mars = violence? I find that to be interesting but lots of violent people most likely don't have that placement in their charts. Isn't that interesting? It reminds me to not take this stuff so seriously, it's a bit why I prefer psychology most often than not.

What do you Guys seriously think? Do any of you have any doubts, I mean even reading stuff here... can be applied to anyone. Some things can even be applied to me and I don't have such placements etc. I'm not bashing either I'm really open to hearing any input here. I find my tolerance for astrology waning as the weeks go by, it disappoints me knowing this..

---

if you consider the original meaning of "science" -scientia (knowledge) then i guess it could fit with being a science. astrology has been studied for THOUSANDS of years through observational studies as well as very detailed planetary alignments in the sky and its affect on humanity. its not so much a theory but an observation. i mean.. a bit over a hundred years ago you couldnt even become a doctor without being a skilled astrologer. astrology extends to a lot of different cultures too and its interesting to see the correlations they found on the same times of the year and planets.

if you want to tie in science with astrology though, they're have been studies that show the effects the sun's solar flares have on human behavior and its pretty obvious the effects the moon has too. everything from the womans menstrual cycle, tides, i mean it even makes a difference during surgery whether your cut open on a full moon or a new moon due to blood flow.