Star signs

[Rukas]

Does anyone here read or believe in their star signs? I never used to, but my girlfriend does to an extent, and so Ive been paying some attention and I must say that the similarities in ones self and their star sign are there. So my question to you, and what I pose for debate, is whether or not you think star signs are bogus, or a science with some truth to them?

I was pondering on the question myself and the obvious answer is its bogus, how can ones life depend on the arrangement of the stars at ones birth? I mean, it seems almost laughable to believe there may be some scientific backing to uphold these predictions and theories.

But then I was thinking about the butterfly effect and the theory that all matter is related and the scientific fact that every action has an equal reaction, and if you break it down to the most minute scale, or look at it in the most colossal scale, it actually makes sense. IF everything is related and connected then what the stars do at a particular time does actually effect us.

I don’t really think when you were born has any effect though, being born is one minute breath and action in your grand scheme of being, rather I have a theory that the alignment and action of stars while you are a developing fetus may in fact have some effect on what “type” of person you are; thus star signs and the “typical Gemini” statements for example.

It may seem far fetched, but on some incalculable level the stars arrangement, or rather, the earth’s position in relation to the stars, effects the gravitational pull we experience, and what if that gravitational pull or wobble or simply cosmic “touch” has some minute effect on the development of our body and brain as a fetus? Our brain is very fragile, could a couple shifted atoms here or there effect how it functions and thus effect our moods and “types”?

Something different to ponder on for you…

 

[Amara]

I dont have much knowledge of cosmic cause and effect. Yet there is not escaping the fact that much of life is dependant upon the earth's position and rotation and so conceivably the position of the stars at a given point - I suppose then, it is not so much of stretch of the imagination to think that this would have an effect on us as individuals. The trouble I have though, is why or rather how there can only be 12 archetypes when considering the mass of people each seems to have some measure of uniqueness, although that is answerable by the fact that nothing is static or unchanging and even though running on a cycle, particular circumstances may be different although still maintaining an underlying similarity of traits as common influencing factors are present.

 

[spoons]

to go off topic for a mintue; my grandfather ran a construction company and he took note that his employees where reading there horoscopes before each shift and thus acting apon them. later he told them that there horoscopes really ment to a make steady dollar and thus was returned the favour.

our universe has interested me ever since i was a little kid looking forward to move into the country; just so i can see the stars. einstien himself would imagaine, better yet theorize, about our being; even if he had to go beyond what science can prove. i too belive in the butterfly effect as we our all made of atoms, and thus, sadley to some, i have little faith because i truely belive in a theory of probablity (please no religion debate). science itself is only good based on a double coiencedence however.

have to cut this short.
peace

 

[Swollen_Member]

The shit is legit if you ask me. It's not a definite science though. There's this theory that all the stories in the world can be broken down into like 9 or 10 stories. It's possible that everything when brokend down to it's lowest common denomenator, fits somewhere in between numbers 1-10, including birth archtypes.

 

[Jurhum]

no... all bs

 

[Duke]

Im going to be very blunt with this, but i think it's bullshit. The few things that match are outshined by the thousands that don't. But the ones that do stand out. And they are the ones you notice and get you thinking.

The same shiut with the "there is no coincidence" thing.

 

[μακαφελι]

I don't believe things unless there's a logical reason for them to be true. Simply the fact that they may seem to often be accurate doesn't constitute proof or reason to me. Plus I think there's many reasons to disprove it. For one, regardless of how big stars and planets are, their gravitational effect is miniscule compared just to objects in the room around you. Plus, even if the positions somehow affected you at birth, it would eventually become negligible because you'd be passing through all the signs many times during your life, so why would the one at birth or conception have any significance? Even though your brain would be tiny at conception, it would remain small for a long time, I just can't see any one point in time being significant. Also, what if you took another arrangements of stars? Or a different division? Why is the one humans randomly chose the right one? Also, even if they somehow affected your personality, I can't see it ever coming close to outweighing the effect that your genes and your upbringing have.
There's too many contradictions and zero proof (that I've ever heard).

 

[Rukas]

I don't believe things unless there's a logical reason for them to be true. Simply the fact that they may seem to often be accurate doesn't constitute proof or reason to me. Plus I think there's many reasons to disprove it. For one, regardless of how big stars and planets are, their gravitational effect is miniscule compared just to objects in the room around you. Plus, even if the positions somehow affected you at birth, it would eventually become negligible because you'd be passing through all the signs many times during your life, so why would the one at birth or conception have any significance? Even though your brain would be tiny at conception, it would remain small for a long time, I just can't see any one point in time being significant. Also, what if you took another arrangements of stars? Or a different division? Why is the one humans randomly chose the right one? Also, even if they somehow affected your personality, I can't see it ever coming close to outweighing the effect that your genes and your upbringing have.
There's too many contradictions and zero proof (that I've ever heard).

Firstly, I didnt say at birth; I specifically infact made a point of saying I didnt think it happened at birth, but rather while the fetus was developing.

We know that having one gene displaced can cause horrid sideeffects, a few genes and you have different species. So why is it hard to believe that for example, if certain braincells developed slightly to one side due to a different gravitational pull it would effect personality.

And yes I do agree that upbringing has a huge effect on us, thats why it may not always be accurate, but you look at people like Tupac who are so obviously Geminis or whoever.

Im not saying I believe the shit in the paper about this will happen to you this week or any of those phone services, not at all thats all bullshit. Im talking about fundamentally the characteristic of each zodiac, ie, every Taurus I know is stubborn, including my mother, typical Taurus, apparently my girlfriends mom is the same, as is my aunt and others I know.

Im not saying its 100% true or Im right, but to dismiss it as bullshit is a bit short sighted if you ask me, especially knowing how fragile our body is and susceptible to environmental influences during fetal development.

 

[Illuminattile]

His point (and a point I was going to make) still remains; the gravitational pull of stars and planets that are light years away has much less effect on a human body than the gravitational pull of the hospital you're born in, the doctor that delivers you, the trees outside...

As far as 'fundamental characteristics', post up a list of fundamental characteristics for a certain sign and I'll find you people who are the polar opposite.

 

[Swollen_Member]

I feel sad for the people who don't believe.

 

[Illuminattile]

I feel sad for the people who don't believe.

Why? How are we any worse off?

 

[Jokerman]

No one would deny that there’s something preposterous in the idea that the stars can influence human destiny—or even human personality. Yet anyone who has even taken the most casual interest in astrology will have noticed that, contrary to all commonsense, it actually seems to work. If we are sufficiently open-minded to refuse to dismiss it because it ought to be nonsense, we might begin to see an explanation that fits well into the modern “scientific” picture of the universe.

Astrology should be regarded as a descendent of shamanism. No doubt most of its practitioners were, and are, fraudulent, but there are certain people who are naturally gifted in “divination,” whether by the I Ching, Tarot cards or the reading of palms; if such ppl become astrologers, their readings can possess frightening accuracy. If we admit the existence of some sort of second sight, then we are accepting that certain human beings possess unusual powers of intuition—even of intuiting the future.

The case for astrology is stronger than it looks. Forget gravity. It has nothing to do with gravity. Magnetism is a more likely candidate. The earth is a magnet; so are the planets. The Sun and Moon exercise a major influence on Earth’s magnetic field. But so do the planets – although, obviously, to a far lesser extent. Human beings are sensitive to earth forces—indeed, animals navigate by their aid. These earth forces are in turn influenced by the other bodies in the solar system. Ancient man would have become aware of these forces, not by studying the heavens and making arbitrary guesses about the planets (i.e. Mars is red and therefore the planet of war), but by some kind of intuition.

We need to understand that the earth is a living entity in a different kind of way, as our remote ancestors realized. And its forces wax and wane according to those of the heavenly bodies. Human beings are quite unconsciously conditioned by these forces from the moment of birth, as are all living things. But even magnetism doesn’t begin to explain it. The problem is that we’re trying to seek an explanation for it within Newtonian physics, and if we can’t see one, then we assume it’s all nonsense.

But if we predicate a universe that is an entirely integrated system, that is self-aware, interconnected, and purposeful, then the notion that stars and planets have effects on us becomes an obvious thing. Quantum physics is increasingly predicating such a universe. Everything affects everything else. The observer of a phenomenon is intrinsically bound up with the results of what he sees. Your thoughts at this very moment derive from energy transactions between particles born at the dawn of time.

In the standard view of quantum physics—the so-called Copenhagen interpretation, developed by Niels Bohr in the 1920s—there is no material reality, no particles and no events when we are not watching. Every instant, with every conscious act, it seems we may participate in structuring and materializing the physical world.

The crucial exchange that seems to take place between the experimenter’s thoughts and the reality of a particle or photon does not appear to be either a causal or energetic process as we know them. What we have here is an example of a totally new kind of process, a cause and effect relationship that does not take place within the scheme of matter and energy as we know them but takes place completely in the realm of information. If the universe is infinitely connected at some deeper level of reality, the notion that planets and stars affect us is, actually, one of the most boring parts of the implications.

We are involved in an unfolding of mind. In his general theory of relativity Einstein astounded the world when he said that space and time are not separate entities, but are smoothly linked and part of a larger whole he called the space-time continuum. But now we can take this idea a giant step further and say that everything in the universe is part of a continuum. Despite the apparent separateness of things at the explicate level, everything is a seamless extension of everything else.

In a sense, the observer is the observed. The observer is also the measuring device, the experimental results, the laboratory, and the breeze that blows outside the laboratory. In fact, consciousness is a more subtle form of matter, and the basis for any relationship between the two lies not in our own level of reality, but deep in the implicate order. So you see, things are more complicated than they seem.

But I'll stop here since I can go on and on about this. All this applies not only to astrology but also to any occult phenomena that has no standard scientific explanation.

So do planets and stars influence us? Mos Def. But that doesn’t mean newspaper horoscopes have anything to say about it. Most don’t. But some astrologers are using generalizations about one’s “sign” that might have been developed by individuals gifted in intuition, so, some of it might be valid, which is why it sometimes seems accurate. But the whole notion of reading your daily horoscope to find out what you should do or avoid that day strikes me as pointless and misguided, not to mention trivial.

 

[S O F I]

^It was a very good read. I'm interested to see some sources to back up what you wrote, since it doesn't seem like it's just your own opinion.

 

[Flipmo]

I believe to an extent. Especially I'm always told I'm a true Gemini also..

My step-sister's mother-in-law, (Married to the Old GM of the Montreal Canadians, Rejean Houle, smart woman) has done studies in astrology. The things she knows about it, she can look at someone and know what sign they are. It's weird. She couldn't tell my sign though, once I told her I was a gemini, she said alright, I'm gonna take a step-back from you. lol. Something is going around about us guys, ppl always say: ''oookay, I'm gonna take a step-back now''

We're nice people.... lol

 

[Aight Son]

But some astrologers are using generalizations about one?s ?sign? that might have been developed by individuals gifted in intuition, so, some of it might be valid, which is why it sometimes seems accurate. But the whole notion of reading your daily horoscope to find out what you should do or avoid that day strikes me as pointless and misguided, not to mention trivial.

Let me know if this was insightful to you, even if you don?t have anything to add because sometimes I feel like I?m wasting my time writing long things in here.

Recommend any intresting books to read regarding those generalizations, and intutitive individuals? I could google a top 10 list of the sort, but curious to your recomendations.

 

[Jokerman]

Recommend any intresting books to read regarding those generalizations, and intutitive individuals? I could google a top 10 list of the sort, but curious to your recomendations.

I haven’t read astrology books per se. Not that interested in fortunetelling. What I’ve read are books about astrology or divination or ancient magic that accept that something valid is going on and try to examine it. But my point was that there are people gifted in divination, and that some of these ppl working as astrologers had to get some things right that a lot of astrologers are using today.

Some books I’ve found useful are:

The Strange World of the Astrologers, Ellic Howe
Egyptian Magic (1899), E.A.W. Budge
The Myth of the Magus (1968), E. M. Butler
The Theory of Celestial Influence (1971), Rodney Collin
Astrology, Louis MacNiece

Might not be easy to find some of these though. I had to search them out at a University library

 

[Jokerman]

^It was a very good read. I'm interested to see some sources to back up what you wrote, since it doesn't seem like it's just your own opinion.

Well, I just used my knowledge of quantum physics and my study of occult subjects, and I made a correlation. Can't give you any sources on the web because I haven't looked for any. There are many good books, however, on the new physics I would recommend you to read. However, they don't mention astrology.

 

[S O F I]

^I'm pre-occupied with reading as it is. But, I'll PM you about them when I have time.

 

[662187]

i know a girl who when i met her, basically said, your a virgo and i bet you was born around the 2nd ish of sept cuz u have leo charactersitics...i was born on sept 1st...that was pretty fuckin weird

 

[Illuminattile]

i know a girl who when i met her, basically said, your a virgo and i bet you was born around the 2nd ish of sept cuz u have leo charactersitics...i was born on sept 1st...that was pretty fuckin weird

I bet she says that to all the guys...