Not only that, but not one of the above lists got my sign correctly.
It’s true that there is more than just Sun signs and even the three main signs of someone’s chart. There’s also other planets like Mercury and Mars, the houses, the aspects, etc. that correspond to complete the chart as a whole. I assembled it based on the overall energy a sign emits to where it would appear dominant in a person’s chart and not as a Sun sign itself.
Whether you believe in astrology or not, there is a beauty to it in its complexity and it is rich in symbolism, meaning, and insight. It has a long, ancient history that goes back to hundreds of years in time. Oddly enough, everything in my chart fits me to a T much more so than MBTI ever has. You can take what you want with it, but most people have no idea that it goes beyond the horoscope bullshit and Sun signs and therefore assume things without totally understanding it either.
I don't know if it's due to the forer effect but I always felt Astrology descriptions were pretty accurate of my temperament. I don't think it's necessarilly that "far out" when you think about the nature of the cosmos and how we are governed by certain basic laws of physics i.e. gravity and such. That the alignment and relation of the Earth to other bodies in the solar system would affect our development doesn't strike me as magical thinking. We know our relation to bodies like the Moon and Sun (among others) has various effects on the planet Earth, and as the Earth is essentially a giant living organism with the plants and animals an outgrowth, it doesn't strike me as odd or necessarily pseudoscience. We are essentially made of energy and chemical reactions; I see no good reason why the flow of energy and the chemical reactions might not be affected by and influenced by very particular conditions on the greater cosmic scale.
You actually believe our personalities are shaped by the positions of celestial bodies?
I'm not sure, but I think that, as we are a smaller part of the greater cosmic structure, it's silly to assume we aren't affected by the greater arrangement or makeup of things. Our personalities are likely determined to some extent by chemical makeup/genetics, and probably by "nurture" to some extent as well. Now, if we're talking about the way some distant constellations line up at a given time, I'm not sure it's as exact of a "science" as astrology might suggest or if those distant stellar objects really affect us much, I'm just suggesting that we're not independent of and unaffected by the greater system.
Astrology does not suggest it. It dictates it.
I know. I never said I followed astrology or took it as fact. I'm only saying how I could understand why it arose as a possible explanation for things in the absence of hard science and empirical evidence. I think several bodies of religious thought contain at least some root in truth or in the very least are concerned with an attempt to explain the nature of the universe, but that doesn't mean I think they got it right or that I follow them.
I even mentioned it's possibly the forer effect at play in astrology resonating with people.
I think your position is being fleshed out as we go along, which is fine, but not entirely honest.
Also, what you're asserting is simply not astrology and that's the larger point I'm trying to make.