Astrology and Us

[nightning]

Dude. For example. I am an I. IRL, I don't talk much, I have one or two friends ata time, I like a lot of alone time. However, if the subject is interesting to me, I become very animated and I can talk for hours. This is true of most Is, no? How that bears out astrologically is that I have Mercury on my ascendant, which would indicate a person who is communicative. But I also have a 12th house Sun which would indicate a person who is solitary and retiring, also that I'm attracted to the occult meaning literally things that are hidden. Ok, so you read that I'm very communicative and then you read that I am retiring and solitary. Now you're going to tell me these two things cannot be true because they are contradictory. They contradict each other AND they are true -- they describe me perfectly if you combine them.

MBTI talks about our shadow functions, inferior functions, how different people provoke different reactions within the same type (in other words, INFJ and ISTP get along differently and provoke different reactions in each other than INFJ and ENTP).

So according to what you're saying contradictions are perfectly valid AND useful. I'm saying they are in no way useful. Sure you've covered all bases in saying if you roll a normal 6 sided dice, you'll sometimes get a 1,2,3,4,5 or 6. But how's that useful in any way? Anybody can tell you that.

Just for your interest, I don't believe in ordering of these inferior and shadow functions. But that's neither here nor there... how does it relate to astrology?

You said
But it's not okay to say a theory is true despite all the evidence against such theory.

You have not read all the evidence. You have only read the work of people who are not astrologers.

Here's a link you may find interesting.
Planet Waves: Holographic Astrology by Eric Francis

You want me to dissect the essay? Is that it?

Finished reading it.

They've provided no evidence that indicates astrology is real. Sure they tried to throw in fancy terminology and theories... Einstein's theory of relativity, hologram effect, chaos theories, etc. But there's no prove of how astrology relates to any of these things.

Allow me to give examples.
"Astrologers do not just use 'real time', but also use models of time and different images of time to assess the qualities of the past, the present and the future. Often these different methods of examining time provide startlingly similar information, but have the advantage of giving a diversity of viewpoints."
How? Explain how space-time relates to astrology charts. What different methods? Does not say.

Astrology as holograph
This only works under the assumption that synchronicity works. contrary to what the author says, Jung and others has never demonstrated such exists... the archetypes? It's unfalsifiable theories. Nobody has been able to show the collective unconscious exists. Archetypes as we know it are mostly socially learned. That's what science has shown.

Space-time
"In astrology, space has never existed without time, and vice versa. Astrology also uses space as time, tracking large and small cycles with the movements of celestial bodies."
Doesn't matter what astrologists believe in. Tracking movement of planets is one thing, relating it to people and personality is another. Where is the link? Not there unless you can demonstrate synchronicity. Any evidence you can provide to show that it exists? The link of personality to planetary movements?

Mass-energy conversion ( might as well use the correct term, if you want to make it sound scientific)
"Astrology has always viewed 'matter' -- that is, planets -- as energetic forces, recognizing that the patterns of their material movements represent, depict or cause movements of energy or events in the 'physical' world. Whatever the causative element is, the connection between the energy of a seemingly dead or unconscious thing, a planet, and events or experiences in the field of consciousness, is a fact implicit in astrology. Relativity has shown us that matter contains unexpectedly large amounts of energy (E=MC2), which may account for why relatively small planets can be seen to have such tremendous impact. They contain enormous energy, and are in motion."
Again, your view point is irrelevant. Only what you demonstrate matters. (As according to our previously agreed upon definition on what works and what doesn't). "Relatively small planets?" Why these relative small planets? Why take planets when you can take stars? They're much bigger... shouldn't they have more influence? Or does distance have more to do with things?

Take physics? Force of attraction is proportional to mass and inversely proportional to distance squared? Forces of the planets are a person is TINY due to the distance involved. Besides how does attraction have anything to do with personality? Again, the link is not explained. Energy must be directed to cause an effect. How is this directed to influence behavior?

Particle-wave conversion
"But Astrology has always recognized this, treating planets at different times as particles (for example, in the natal chart) and as wave forms (in transit or progression). But they are the same planet."

Again, it's not how you treat them... it's what you do with them that matters. What is astrology doing with these planet as particles or waves? Doesn't say.

Chaos theory
"Planetary movements are a complex pattern of nature. Either the movements of the planets are meaningless, or they possess some intelligent order and are thus meaningful in the realm of consciousness. There is no middle ground."
Error in logic. Movement of any object follows the laws of physics. I think we can all agree to that. But do the laws follow some intelligent order? And this intelligence is conscious? You don't have proof for that. It does not follow if A is false that B is correct when B does not encompasses all of which is not A. Also why can't patterns randomly occur? A pattern can be anything... even if a group of particles are evenly distributed within some space. And that's what entropy does. Entropy = randomness?

Fractals (its use of in astrology)
"Astrology uses fractalization in a variety of ways, for example, in the technique known as progressions, in which the 39th year of life is studied by looking at the astrology of the 39th day. This is based on the idea that life is made of patterns, and that the patterns can be understood."
Use of mathematical procedures does not make the basic premise true. Sure life can make patterns and you can understand these patterns, but the link between patterns to personality needs to be proven.

"Because astrology has worked in and with spacetime since its inception, it is a multidimensional art. Astrology takes a more complex view of time, the fourth dimension, than the simple one-strand chronological view taken by society and its train schedules. Astrology works in more sophisticated, nonlinear patterns of time, plotting large numbers of events using sophisticated methods of documentation and analysis. As well, astrology uses fractal patterns of time (in the analysis of progressions and patterns of fragments of the outer-planet orbits, for example), and also studies the course of history, searching for patterns and noting correlations between celestial events and world events and world climate. Hence, the study of astrology gives us a picture of time that is beyond linear time, providing a more accurate, and documentable, picture of the fourth dimension."
I don't care how you plot them pretty graphs... I care about the results. How does your chart relate to personality? No linkage provided.

"Astrology works in the field of consciousness -- a field that has been remarkably left abandoned my science, which, depending, as it does on linear and empirical methods of thought, is ill-equipped work in the emotional, often irrational human realm."
Irrelevant info. HOW does planets relate to consciousness. Planets are conscious? Where's the link? Saying empirical methods cannot deal with irrational emotions is turn astrology into unfalsifiable pseudoscience. Throw me "because god exists" argument turns me off.

"Could it be that all of these properties of the cosmos, and of astrology, point to another, larger reality? Could we be plotting patterns in higher dimensions that will form a picture, like dots in a two-dimensional field can be connected to form an image? And what are the implications for counseling and solving problems, and creating visions, in the field of consciousness and experience, the topographic ocean we call life?"
Plotting patterns is one thing, relating it to people and specifically personality is another. Again, where is this proof you're showing me? I don't see it.

 

[Tiltyred]

There isn't any proof.

You efforts on behalf of your own point of view are impressive, I'll say that.

I haven't changed my mind nor you yours, so maybe we should agree to disagree.

 

["?"]

You folks never cease to amaze me. To dismiss astrology is to dismiss cognitive functions, ergo MBTI, Keirsey, etc…. It all derives from astrology, archetype, the occult, etc…. Jung based his work on all of the above.

 

[yenom]

Type in Forer Effect and MBTI in Google.

actually the whole foundation of psychology is based on the forer effect. You can be anything you believe you are. So this arguement is not valid.

 

[Lauren Ashley]

^Then the Forer Effect as a dismissal of psychological astrology is also invalid.

This is getting so ridiculous.

 

[entropie]

I got cancer in Mars + virgo in Venus

god damnit

 

[nightning]

You folks never cease to amaze me. To dismiss astrology is to dismiss cognitive functions, ergo MBTI, Keirsey, etc…. It all derives from astrology, archetype, the occult, etc…. Jung based his work on all of the above.

Agreed that jung's theories are unfalsifiable and thus isn't science. There's no way to prove or disprove whether these cognitive functions actually exists... however that's in somewhat a different realm than correlation of planetary movements to personality. As I said before, there are different types of pseudoscience. One is a model, the other is attempts to provide an explanation. A model taken too far becomes the other. The category system of MBTI stands on its own regardless of whether cognitive functions exists or not. Astrology and zodiacs do not stand on their own. The correlation between planet movements and personality types must be there for it to work. MBTI lets people categorize themselves. Its only assumption is that people can be divided into types. And they created some arbitrary divisions based on their theories. Do you see the difference between the two?

Also work based upon pseudoscience does not mean its all garbage. Modern medicine has its roots in pseudoscience... Witch doctors gotten some things right... like willow bark tea that contains ASA. What about acupuncture? and other chinese medicine? They're not tested in the same way as our modern western medicine... but you'll think after testing them on thousands of people over the years they're at least unlikely to kill you and may actually be effective.

actually the whole foundation of psychology is based on the forer effect. You can be anything you believe you are. So this arguement is not valid.

Psychology isn't based on the forer effect... it's actually based on philosophy...

 

[entropie]

There's no way to prove or disprove whether these cognitive functions actually exists...

I came to understand the functions as a definition to an existing system, namely human personality. That means what the functions try to describe is derived from human interaction, obersevation and empirical data.

The function system itself just wants to give a textbook definition of what is obvious to every one in daily life and daily human interaction.

Just wanted to point that out, because I think the sentence "There is no way to prove the functions" is an error in Semantics.

 

[nightning]

I came to understand the functions as a definition to an existing system, namely human personality. That means what the functions try to describe is derived from human interaction, obersevation and empirical data.

The function system itself just wants to give a textbook definition of what is obvious to every one in daily life and daily human interaction.

Just wanted to point that out, because I think the sentence "There is no way to prove the functions" is an error in Semantics.

I don't see it that way at all. It's one thing to show patterns exists and its another to explain why the patterns exist. Yes cognitive functions provides a framework for examining human personalities... however you can't show whether they're for real or not. No different than Freud's ideas of the ego, superego and id.

Allow me to throw in an example from way out there. People in the past tried to explain why solar or lunar eclipses happens... or why the volcano erupts. They attribute it to the anger of the gods. What about the Celt's who've built the stonehenge? They understood planetary movements very well... it was the perfect calendar... but that does mean they understood WHY the stars moved the way they did. They worshiped gods who've affected the seasons and the stars.

 

[entropie]

Alright then I get you're reasoning. I just lacked the step in between from reality over perception to definition.

You are of course right with what you say, you furthermore give room for a lot more speculations.

I try to stick to basic typology by my means of perceptions, I am not a good brain doctor. My INFJ on the other hand she has extended knowledge of deeper psychology and she is very intrested in finding out new things that make other things tick. Sadly she doesnt speak english.

My opinion on astrology, to stick to the OP, well... I expect that someday an intresting fact will be revealed, which will show a close connection between human biochemistry and the nature it evolved in. It wouldnt surprise me, if it will form a working system of how little things could even affect personality.

But at the present moment, I lack sufficient evidence for such beliefs and astrology presents no satisfieing model to change that.

 

["?"]

Agreed that jung's theories are unfalsifiable and thus isn't science. There's no way to prove or disprove whether these cognitive functions actually exists... however that's in somewhat a different realm than correlation of planetary movements to personality. As I said before, there are different types of pseudoscience. One is a model, the other is attempts to provide an explanation. A model taken too far becomes the other. The category system of MBTI stands on its own regardless of whether cognitive functions exists or not.

How funny and completely inaccurate. How can you make such an assertion when Myers-Briggs created MBTI after Jung’s work? She uses the cognitive functions ergo it’s not a stand alone system and is in direct correlation with Jung. I stand corrected, it’s not in correlation since his came first, the whole basic principle of her system cannot survive without Jung’s theory. Why would you even attempt to make such an argument?

Astrology and zodiacs do not stand on their own. The correlation between planet movements and personality types must be there for it to work. MBTI lets people categorize themselves. Its only assumption is that people can be divided into types. And they created some arbitrary divisions based on their theories. Do you see the difference between the two?

Again, MBTI as alluded to earlier depends on Jung’s work being accurate and the cognitive functions being in existence. Otherwise what else would the four letter codes represent? As for allowing people to categorize themselves, you seem to being making the argument that type is not innate contrary to Myers-Briggs’ assertion, and that we can change our type as we choose. Therefore the type tests are meaningless since based on your argument we can merely look at a description and decide that is what we prefer today. You are either arguing the illusion of both systems, but you can’t separate them.

 

[redacted]

You folks never cease to amaze me. To dismiss astrology is to dismiss cognitive functions, ergo MBTI, Keirsey, etc…. It all derives from astrology, archetype, the occult, etc…. Jung based his work on all of the above.

The big difference, which for some reason no one is seeing, is this --

IN MBTI, YOU GET TO CHOOSE YOUR TYPE BASED ON YOUR LIFE.

You can't choose in astrology. It would be like me saying everyone born in January is ESTP! I seriously can't see how anyone can defend against this argument.

 

[nightning]

How funny and completely inaccurate. How can you make such an assertion when Myers-Briggs created MBTI after Jung’s work? She uses the cognitive functions ergo it’s not a stand alone system and is in direct correlation with Jung. I stand corrected, it’s not in correlation since his came first, the whole basic principle of her system cannot survive without Jung’s theory. Why would you even attempt to make such an argument?

Because I apply models. That's what I use them for. In the end, if the only working model I have that can be used to describe patterns I've seen in a useful manner has theories that may be complete BS, I'll still use it because I have nothing else to go on. Clearly the model has flaws, but it still has a purpose.

What are the principles? Division of people into 16 personality types? I've complained on this forum many times about the inadequacies of the 16 types in understanding behaviour. However I still use it as a basic framework because it's nonetheless a starting point.

It's no different than some of the imagery metaphors I use when I try to puzzle something out. Is there a basis for using that specific imagery? No, but it's helpful and so I use it.

Again, MBTI as alluded to earlier depends on Jung’s work being accurate and the cognitive functions being in existence. Otherwise what else would the four letter codes represent? As for allowing people to categorize themselves, you seem to being making the argument that type is not innate contrary to Myers-Briggs’ assertion, and that we can change our type as we choose. Therefore the type tests are meaningless since based on your argument we can merely look at a description and decide that is what we prefer today. You are either arguing the illusion of both systems, but you can’t separate them.

Let's try this again... the type labels in my mind is useful because people identify with them and it divides up differences in personality into pieces that are easily handled. It's no different than us arbitrary labelling the rainbow as 7 distinct colors when in reality wavelengths of light is a continuum. This division can be use regardless of whether Jung's work is accurate or not.

 

[yenom]

Psychology isn't based on the forer effect... it's actually based on philosophy...

Forrer Effect, you are what you choose to believe.

I expect that someday an intresting fact will be revealed, which will show a close connection between human biochemistry and the nature it evolved in.

Thats deep dude.

 

[nightning]

Forrer Effect, you are what you choose to believe.

Please take a look at the history of psychology then get back to me.

 

[Tiltyred]

Folks who understand astrology, may I point out that you are trying to get a Scorpio, Aquarius rising, Aquarius moon to change its mind? Eh ... FIXED FIXED and FIXED. Unless you enjoy slamming your head against the wall, save your breath to cool your soup.

 

["?"]

Because I apply models. That's what I use them for. In the end, if the only working model I have that can be used to describe patterns I've seen in a useful manner has theories that may be complete BS, I'll still use it because I have nothing else to go on. Clearly the model has flaws, but it still has a purpose.

What are the principles? Division of people into 16 personality types? I've complained on this forum many times about the inadequacies of the 16 types in understanding behaviour. However I still use it as a basic framework because it's nonetheless a starting point.

It's no different than some of the imagery metaphors I use when I try to puzzle something out. Is there a basis for using that specific imagery? No, but it's helpful and so I use it.


Let's try this again... the type labels in my mind is useful because people identify with them and it divides up differences in personality into pieces that are easily handled. It's no different than us arbitrary labelling the rainbow as 7 distinct colors when in reality wavelengths of light is a continuum. This division can be use regardless of whether Jung's work is accurate or not.

So what you are saying is that based on your own subjective opinion that are in contrast to facts, you are basing your judgement that astrology is inferior to MBTI. That's fine, but it's still untrue based on facts.

 

[Jack Flak]

So what you are saying is that based on your own subjective opinion that are in contrast to facts, you are basing your judgement that astrology is inferior to MBTI. That's fine, but it's still untrue based on facts.

Well...MBTI and what not are based on what you actually do, whereas astrology is not, and is based on when you were born. It seems to me that predicting character traits and behavior based on character traits and behavior is more logical.

 

[ajblaise]

Every time I read about astrology, and hear about blue moons and scorpions and happy stars and what not, I cringe.

I'm know some people really believe in the accuracy of astrology, but I'm sure anyone could create any vague arbitrary system and get people to perceive it as accurate.

 

["?"]

Well...MBTI and what not are based on what you actually do, whereas astrology is not, and is based on when you were born. It seems to me that predicting character traits and behavior based on character traits and behavior is more logical.

However you are predicting traits from a series of questions. The only difference is you get to choose whether you are correct or not. Based on many years of posting on the forums, it's quite apparent that most get it wrong initially.