[MBTI General] is astrology real?

[redsox44344]

I don't believe that it works, though I could be persuaded to think otherwise with a good argument and presentable evidence.

 

[jenocyde]

I wrote what I wrote to make it simple for everyone, but yes, it's much more complicated that. The rising sign is important to know, so you can at least know house positions. I find astrology incredibly accurate.

You can use natal astrology to gain insight into why we are the way we are (like we do with mbti). You can use predictive astrology to guide certain decisions you'll make. It's like having a weather report - you would carry an umbrella if you knew it was going to rain, but you wouldn't stay home, right?

Anyway, the moon has effect on the tides - which is proven. Our bodies are mostly water, so why wouldn't the moon have an effect on us. Or Saturn for that matter? Who is to say with certainty that we live in isolation from everything around us? I believe this universe operates in a way that everything affects everything else. It's not so far fetched.

I think discounting something you know nothing about it a bit silly. It's like saying "I don't understand 'x' theory, so it doesn't exist."

 

[PeaceBaby]

Careful jenocyde, you are walking on dangerous ground - check out the "stimulated world" thread LOL!

Here is my experience, posted in this thread too for whatever that is worth:

Personally, I had two (charts) done in 2005, for fun. First, a chart that was intended to profile my personality; the second, a chart that was to predict my life trends for the years 2005 - 2006 (and outline some longer trends to 2010'ish.)

1.) The psychological or natal chart was, in my opinion, almost as accurate as reading a description of my MBTI type. It described my parents, the type of relationship they shared, my "infp-ness" for lack of a better term, the types of men I am attracted to and some quirks that don't fit the MBTI mold. Length of chart: about 20 pages of typewritten text. Degree of accuracy: ~65-70%. (Bearing in mind of course, the tendency to fit oneself within the words, which I can be as guilty of here as with the MBTI.) Some bits I didn't agree with at all. But, I was surprised at how specific and accurate some of it was. Reading my natal chart was as eye-opening to me as the first time I read a description of my MBTI type.

2.) Re-reading the predictive chart in the "here & now" of 2009, was it accurate? In my analysis, it is written in too vague a way to numerically assess with a percentage. I did "buy into" some of the predicted trends, but really, it deals with generalities, not specifics. It is simply too easy to interpret it the way you want to. And some of it was completely wrong.

Do I think astrology is scientific and proven? No.

Do I accept that there may be forces influencing us beyond current human understanding? Yes.

 

[Virtual ghost]

If you mean correct my answer would be No.


Here is something that I posted some time ago.

Here are the reasons why I think that entire thing is nonsense.



1. If you land on Mars what will you do with the Earth that is flying around the sky?

2. What will you do if you are in orbit around the other planet? Since you are so close that this would mean that the planet could be in few constellations that are behind it, does that mean that you get the multiple bonus?


3. People that are in the different parts of the solar system would see same planet in different constellation. Would that mean that it would be smart to move around the solar system so that you always have the best possible combination?

4. If you go far enough from the plane(s) in wich planets are moving you will get in a sitation that none of the planets are falling into a constellations in wich they should be falling. Does that mean that astrology no longer works for you and the place where you are?


5. If you go out of the solar system you will leave it behind. So one of the possibilitys is that all planets will be in one of the 12 important constellations or in none of them. If they fall in one of 12 of them that should mean that some directions in space will be better for you. If a family member or a friend that goes with you is born in a wrong part of the year that would mean that for him of her the trip would be damnation. (what will probably make you unhappy)


6. Stars are moving all the time so with time the constellations we know will fall apart. What will we do then?

7. Why nobody counts planets around the other stars?

8. If you live in another star system that is very far away would that mean that a person could create new constellations to live and rely on them?

 

[jenocyde]

Oh, see that this is a loaded topic and am backing away slowly...

Much rather would have a beer and play guitar hero. Good luck guys!

 

[Darjur]

I can understand how someone could believe that being born on different times of the year could give birth to people that have developed certain common aspects of psychology.

One could probably go around explaining this, that on certain times of the year, the mother has increased amounts of production of certain hormones which could have a prognosable effect on the fetus.


But I personally can't think of any posible effect on the fetus from the movement of constellations other than different pictures on the night sky.

 

[Venom]

Careful jenocyde, you are walking on dangerous ground - check out the "stimulated world" thread LOL!

Here is my experience, posted in this thread too for whatever that is worth:

Personally, I had two (charts) done in 2005, for fun. First, a chart that was intended to profile my personality; the second, a chart that was to predict my life trends for the years 2005 - 2006 (and outline some longer trends to 2010'ish.)

1.) The psychological or natal chart was, in my opinion, almost as accurate as reading a description of my MBTI type. It described my parents, the type of relationship they shared, my "infp-ness" for lack of a better term, the types of men I am attracted to and some quirks that don't fit the MBTI mold. Length of chart: about 20 pages of typewritten text. Degree of accuracy: ~65-70%. (Bearing in mind of course, the tendency to fit oneself within the words, which I can be as guilty of here as with the MBTI.) Some bits I didn't agree with at all. But, I was surprised at how specific and accurate some of it was. Reading my natal chart was as eye-opening to me as the first time I read a description of my MBTI type.

2.) Re-reading the predictive chart in the "here & now" of 2009, was it accurate? In my analysis, it is written in too vague a way to numerically assess with a percentage. I did "buy into" some of the predicted trends, but really, it deals with generalities, not specifics. It is simply too easy to interpret it the way you want to. And some of it was completely wrong.

Do I think astrology is scientific and proven? No.

Do I accept that there may be forces influencing us beyond current human understanding? Yes.

re: 1.
-so thats nice that you identify with the "natal chart" so well. Now what if there was an ESTJ who was born one bed over from you at the exact same time???? you really think the natal chart would be "so accurate" for both of those types?

re: 2.
- this is an example of not having any standards of "predictions succeeded". you're just vaguely kind of deciding AFTER you've gotten the data (confirmation bias becomes far more likely when evaluating this way). Also, if none of these predictions are very specific, then how is this theory any better than other "vague predictors"? you know those cold reader people? (palm readers, 'psychics', 'mediums' etc)

I still have yet to hear in this thread:

1. standard for falsification (ie is it falsifiable)
2. mechanism (how does it ACTAULLY work)
3. example of prediction and standards of evaluating prediction.

 

[Willfrey]

Any astrologer that says 'the statistics show' have no statistics to stand on.

I shall resubmit the link I did in the previous astrology slapfest:

http://www.imprint.co.uk/pdf/Dean.pdf

It has everything you need. It is an unbiased factual and statistic-backed study on anything from horoscopes to birth charts to the astrologers themselves.

 

[Kalach]

Anyway, the moon has effect on the tides - which is proven. Our bodies are mostly water, so why wouldn't the moon have an effect on us.

Teas, too.

And teas have tannins.

And I quote: "Tannins not only heal burns and stop bleeding, but they also stop infection while they continue to heal the wound internally. The ability of tannins to form a protective layer over the exposed tissue keeps the wound from being infected even more. Tannins are also beneficial when applied to the mucosal lining of the mouth."

They are especially good for hemorrhoids and have anti-diarrhea properties.

He who controls the tannin, controls the universe. Because everyone else is glued to the toilet.

 

[tinkerbell]

re: 1.
-so thats nice that you identify with the "natal chart" so well. Now what if there was an ESTJ who was born one bed over from you at the exact same time???? you really think the natal chart would be "so accurate" for both of those types?

Actually two babies born within a a second of each othere would likely both be the same MBTI type (at a guess), I suspect it is also wider than that but no evidence.

As for falisifable - it's not an English word (I suspect an Americanisim), do you want to explain yourself.

Astrology has been tested by the statistician, which I put a link up for.

Other error that can happen
If a reader makes and error it will be wrong, if they use the wrong time and date the data is wrong, if they are not well taught the interpretation is wrong.

Not eveything is designed for so called scientific experiments (which is partly the point), because science isn't very advanced. So maybe you should have a think about how you would test it to you satisfaction. Actually the Op seemes to have put their money where their mouth is.

If we were to beleive in science - NOTHINg would advance and the world would still be flat. It's only pushing beyond what science can do that we ever discover anything.

I'm not a person who wants to be limited by someone ruler. I'm a bright, intellegent, numerate girl. I learned what it s about, and see that it works more often than it doesn't, which is good enough for me.

Lis

 

[tinkerbell]

Teas, too.

And teas have tannins.


He who controls the tannin, controls the universe. Because everyone else is glued to the toilet.

I'm sure non of us want to be on the toilet too long, but do I really need to rub tea on my bum????



Lis

 

[Kalach]

Red wine is okay too.

I wish to point out a correlation: the British are big tea drinkers, they had an Empire; the French and Spanish are big red wine drinkers, they had empires.

Tannins.

It's mind control.

 

[Snow Turtle]

Astrology for me in on the same field of religion. Most of the stuff can't be falsified because the scientific method can't be applied to it properly. What experiments would you try to do exactly? It'll only become statistics. It's a little like studying psychology really until neuroscience pinpoints every function, which is unlikely...

Mechanisms have been speculated by astrologists for ages. Because it's complex though, some just don't bother with it at all. They just use it. Astrology really is more of an intuition study, rather than a logical study.

PS. The moon having a major effect on the human body isn't completely true. Although I still love the word lunatic
Placebo effect? Basically it's argued that surrounding bodies would have larger gravitation effects on us than these large celestial bodies, therefore it couldn't be a result of gravity. There'd have to be something else.

 

[Darjur]

As for falisifable - it's not an English word (I suspect an Americanisim), do you want to explain yourself.

Not eveything is designed for so called scientific experiments (which is partly the point), because science isn't very advanced. So maybe you should have a think about how you would test it to you satisfaction. Actually the Op seemes to have put their money where their mouth is.

If we were to beleive in science - NOTHINg would advance and the world would still be flat. It's only pushing beyond what science can do that we ever discover anything.

I'm not a person who wants to be limited by someone ruler. I'm a bright, intellegent, numerate girl. I learned what it s about, and see that it works more often than it doesn't, which is good enough for me.

Lis

Falsifiable means that something could be theoretically proven false.

Science is the most advanced thing we have at the current moment.

Society as a whole advances thanks to science, not to lack of it. Let us look at the time period where educated people had been persecuted. Yeah, we get the dark ages, which are the golden age of advancement if I have to say so myself. If there was no science, you'd be living in a cave with a club in one hand shitting yourself that a bear wouldn't come close to you.

Technically, you just got yourself a different ruler.


Sarunas

 

[Costrin]

As for falisifable - it's not an English word (I suspect an Americanisim), do you want to explain yourself.

Yes it is. At least, it would be if you spelled it right (I think you mentioned you had dyslexia, so no offense intended).

Definition is as Darjur said above.

If we were to beleive in science - NOTHINg would advance and the world would still be flat. It's only pushing beyond what science can do that we ever discover anything.

I find this statement very humorous. I guess that computer you use to type that doesn't actually exist? The internet? A figment of imagination. Electricity? Impossible to harness. The food you eat? Caught and prepared individually. Cars, trains, airplanes, boats, etc? Fantasy. *insert almost anything made today*

I guess you're actually dead though, from all those diseases that you didn't get treated because treatments don't exist, so it doesn't really matter anyway. But wait, what are diseases? Clearly it was evil spirits that caused your ailments.

 

[tinkerbell]

I don't know - I know all the other NT's will want to wash my mouth out with soap and water, but as far as I can see, Science, is right up there with religion in terms of schools of thought to narrow the mind.....

And no science is not responcible for new development, they would happen without, it's simply a ruler....

go-ahead, let rip

 

[Kalach]

Well, science is but one method of generating development. There are others. Have I mentioned tannins before? They open new vistas to the mind.

 

[Costrin]

And no science is not responcible for new development, they would happen without, it's simply a ruler....

Mind elaborating on this statement?

 

[Kangirl]

If we were to beleive in science - NOTHINg would advance and the world would still be flat.

Omg. Omg. OMG! OMG!!!!

*hyperventilates*

Costrin, hold meeeeeeeeee.

 

[Costrin]

Omg. Omg. OMG! OMG!!!!

*hyperventilates*

Costrin, hold meeeeeeeeee.

I declare this thread a success.