Do You Believe In Astrology?

Do you believe in astrology, and are you male or female?

  • Yes I believe in astrolgy and am male.

    Votes: 2 3.1%

  • Yes I believe in astrology and am female.

    Votes: 3 4.6%

  • I am undecided about astrology and am male.

    Votes: 7 10.8%

  • I am undecided about astrology and am female.

    Votes: 3 4.6%

  • I do not believe in astrology and am male.

    Votes: 39 60.0%

  • I do not believe in astrology and am female.

    Votes: 11 16.9%
  • Total voters
    65
A

Anonymous

Guest
I am wanting to determine the local belief level in astrology on this board. As well as finding out the relative levels of belief, I'm also kinda curious as to the male/female split in belief. (I chose the General Forteana board to try and get the broadest selection of views from fellow Forteans.)

So, what do you reckon?:)
 
i was a charalatan astrologer for a short and unprofitable time and 99% (of a small sample it has to be said) were for, or wanted by women.
 
I don't believe in astrology in the way it's used by magazines and newspapers etc, but I do think that the gravitational forces of heavenly bodies could influence us in some way. We are mostly water after all, and the moon does a pretty good job on the ocean tides.

Having said that, it's amazing how you study your stars in every publication you come across when you're in love.... :)
 
Astrology is just a clever way to get people to read what they want to read.
As for the idea of interplanetary bodies influencing our bodies, it might be true of the moon (hence a possible link to poltergeist activity) but how Saturn could influence my life is beyond me...

Az
 
Women do tend to read more horoscopes but I think it's more of a social/bonding activity than actually believing them (I hope..)

I personally think it's a lot of old codswallop and get quite upset when people assume the astronomy course I'm starting next week is astrology and prompting lose interest when I tell them...

A friend did an on-line horoscope for me and it was so far-off mark it was almost funny. Horoscopes are much the same as cold-reading, chuck enough facts (especially nice ones ) and some will stick.......
 
Blueswidow said:
Women do tend to read more horoscopes but I think it's more of a social/bonding activity than actually believing them (I hope..)
Click to expand...

I agree (although whenever I read out horoscopes from the paper, just as many blokes seem ask for theirs to be read out). I do tend to read them yet don't really believe in them. I suppose they provide a sense of hope and exciting possibilities in this oft-times miserable world.

I recently found Mystic Meg's predictions for 2001. As none of the success, happiness and romance she promised this leo arrived, do you think I could sue?

:D
 
I love reading horoscopes, but I don't place any faith in them.

Apart from those of Marjorie Orr, astrologer to Swansea's free newspaper "The Swansea Herald of Wales". Her Horoscopes are no longer than 1 sentence and usually contain at least one grammatical clanger, misspelling or bizarrely chosen word to render the whole thing meaningless, but they are uncannily accurate.

As uncannily accurate as one can be within the confines of one semi-comprehensible sentence, anyway.
 
mr chopper said:
<Snip!>

Why do more women read horoscopes than men!!
<Snip!>
Click to expand...
Sorry to be pendantic, but could you ease off the exclaimation marks just a little. I'm just beginning to feel sorry for all the other varied and interesting punctuation marks on offer. That last sentence for instance could be far more easily read had it been ended with a question mark (?).

I'm feeling really mean writing this, but trying to read your posts is actually quite hard. No offence is meant I promice you.

Az

PS. Multiple exclaimation marks are a proven sign of insanity.
 
Blueswidow said:
I personally think it's a lot of old codswallop and get quite upset when people assume the astronomy course I'm starting next week is astrology and prompting lose interest when I tell them...
Click to expand...

Friends have had conversations that go something like...

"What do you do?"
"I'm an astronomer."
"I'm an Aries, what does that make me?"
;)
 
So far it looks like we're predominantly a bunch of male non-believers.

Does anyone know what the typical stats are for the population as a whole? (I had a search some time back, but surprisingly couldn't find anything.)

My suspicion is that belief is overal, fair to middling, and that more women believe than men. (Perhaps the latter isn't true, and that it only seems to be the case because of the astrology columns in women's magazines?)
 
I think Blueswidow put her finger on it when she described
horoscopes as a bonding activity. People in general just love
to be told who and what they are - it's comforting. (As a grouch,
I hate people who think they can tell me anything about myself
a few minutes after meeting but this does tend to be an increasingly
common social strategy to elicit some sort of response.)

I have seen The Stars read out as a canteen ritual and men have
certainly joined in with mock reluctance, allowing their star-signs
to be wrenched from them. But the ritual does allow people to
go on to make personal remarks and express feelings that might
otherwise have been unsaid.

I have seen "serious" astrologers tear apart the whole notion of
newspaper summaries but they are just rolling their own logs.
Yet, I do have to admit that I am a typical Taurean. Honest.

Now cross my palm with serious money and I'll tell you anything
you want to hear. :p
 
Fortis said:
Friends have had conversations that go something like...

"What do you do?"
"I'm an astronomer."
"I'm an Aries, what does that make me?"
;)
Click to expand...
"Gullible..."
;)

Az
 
mr chopper said:
Its a terrible habbit o know but i always do it, i must make a note that it's a pain in the arse, i'm sure your not the only one who hates it, but's it's just you who gets so uptight about little things, you feel the need to complain, i'll try to lay off the dreaded, the evil !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Really, I don't mean it personally. And I like being up-tight about things...

Az
 
mr chopper said:
Its a terrible habbit o know but i always do it, i must make a note that it's a pain in the arse, i'm sure your not the only one who hates it, but's it's just you who gets so uptight about little things, you feel the need to complain, i'll try to lay off the dreaded, the evil !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Really, I don't mean it personally. And I like being up-tight about things...

Az
 
really Aben, you criticize and then double post!!!

As a semi-believer in prediction, mind over matter etc I've got to say that while I don't take newspaper astrology seriously (as it's aimed at too wide an audience and is by definition generic), I know that a lot of store has been set by astrologers and their predictions have been accurate sometimes. When you consider that both Hitler and Raegan relied on astrologers for policy making...

I set more faith in Chinese scopes, most of what I've read about my Birth Year seems to be true, and further reading into specifics (like what elements I was born under etc.) seems to ring true also.

I suppose this is the crux - there are many elements to belief in astrology: personal character profile; each sign claims to have some special talent (taurean strength, capricious luck); the newspaper horoscropes always say luck is just round the corner, but mention no specifics; men don't want to appear superstitious in the company of women, despite being superstitious in other ways (footballers kissing the turf etc); faith in a certain, predefined future - coupled with abdication of responsibility on either the fortune teller or the stars (fate).

I tend to use chinese ones to investigate what characteristics my sign should have and to try and encourage myself to better myself in those directions. As such it's merely a rule of thumb as to what I can and can't get away with, and it also (as they're all animals) helps me to try and 'communicate' in some ways with the natural world.
 
Please! With every other phenomena you have cases where it seems there might be something about it. But with astrology I can remember something about more athletes being born under Mars, but besides that all cases have turned out to be crap when investigated.

I had an astroNOMY teacher in school who was pretty much the astrologers enemy #1. So I've learned a lot about it and have to say it is crap. Utter nonsense, divining has more credibility than this stuff.

Of course whenever my teacher was mentioned in the media, they referred to him as an astrologer. People just don't know the other kind exists.
 
Forty2 said:
I don't believe in astrology in the way it's used by magazines and newspapers etc, but I do think that the gravitational forces of heavenly bodies could influence us in some way. We are mostly water after all, and the moon does a pretty good job on the ocean tides.
Click to expand...

The water example is one commonly used to argue in favour of astrology. Unfortunately the logic doesn't follow because there is nothing special about water other than it is a liquid in abundant quantities on the surface of the earth. If the earth was covered in oceans of ethanol (now there's a thought ;) ) there would still be tides. (Though beach parties would be *very* different.) The key with tides is the scale involved. Effectively tides are due to the difference in the force at point A and the force at point B. Thus the tidal force is greater for extended objects.

People are very small in comparison to oceans, and hence the tidal forces are also significantly smaller. (It is an old physics problem to calculate the tidal force between your head and your feet. I'm not giving too much away to say that it ain't very big. ;) )
 
A thought from DNA...

`Parliamentary democracy. The rules just kind of got there. They don't make any kind of sense except in terms of themselves.
But when you start to exercise those rules, all sorts of processes start to happen and you start to find out all sorts of stuff about
people. In astrology the rules happen to be about stars and planets, but they could be about ducks and drakes for all the
difference it would make. It's just a way of thinking about a problem which lets the shape of that problem begin to emerge. The more rules, the tinier the rules, the more arbitrary they are, the better. It's like throwing a handful of fine graphite dust on a
piece of paper to see where the hidden indentations are. It lets you see the words that were written on the piece of paper above
it that's now been taken away and hidden. The graphite's not important. It's just the means of revealing their indentations. So
you see, astrology's nothing to do with astronomy. It's just to do with people thinking about people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
I've been taught that astrology is based on the positions of constellations and planets in the sky. Also that it was believed that all the stars were in precise, unmoving configurations, and that the planets followed the same predictable paths. Later we found out that stars and galaxies move around a bit, plus the rotational axis of the earth moves a bit over time, gradually throwing constellations into different parts of the sky, mixing things up a bit. So essentially, astrology is crap. This is what I've been taught. And having read many predictions, and having many friends who have have read many predictions, I have no reason to believe it isn't crap.
 
I once briefly flirted with "serious" astrology. I drew up a birth chart for myself, it all seemed uncannily accurate! (oops, sorry Aben Zin). Untill I realized I'd drawn my sisters birthchart instead -same day, totally different personality. It was all just wishfull thinking.
Having said that tho, the 12 signs are a neat little way of dividing people up into stereotypes, and whilst reading all that garbage I did come to appreciate that everyone has strengths and weaknesses and that all of us different types are needed to make up a society.
 
I'm sure I heard a few years ago that scientists found traces of organic matter falling from passing comets/asteroids (I think they were called cyclids, the same material used in genetic engineering) and due to the periodic nature of the comets/etc, the material was deposited at specific times in the calendar.

For example, in May a particular comet would pass and deposit a particular type of OM as it were, and thus effecting the unborn child - in a similar manner to certain diseases having an effect in-vitro, but the ET OM would alter the basic traits of behaivour. For example, giving the child born in May (Gemini) the stereotypical dual-personality.

So, each and every May the "Split Personality" comet would pass near the earth and give each child born in May the traits of a Gemini. Thus continuing, and applying specifically for each other star sign.

Admittedly it sounds unlikely, but I thought it was a rather different slant to something I don't believe in :)
 
Thanks Schnor, I've just dredged something up from the back of my brain (urgh?) I remember some research or other that said people born in certain months were more prone to get certain diseases, or their mothers would get them when pregnant, thus influencing the development of the baby. For instance, stabbing in the dark here, us sagitarians are supposed to be more intelligent and sportier than most, our mothers first trimester (the dodgy bit of the pregnancy) occured at the healthiest time of year. Or am I getting carried away?
 
One of the many questions about astrology that I could never find a good answer to was "what about Pluto?"

As we know Pluto was not part of classical astrology, and was discovered fairly recently, a number of thoughts come to mind.

Has any astrologer looked back at historical documents to see if there is any evidence of character traits that were otherwise unexplained? (other than by invoking the influence of Pluto.)

Why were some astrologers worried when there was discussion recently into if Pluto was or was not a planet? (What a group of astronomers say shouldn't affect the judgment of astrologers, as distance and mass don't appear to influence the strength of the astrological effect.)

How were the astrological properties of Pluto arrived at? The only discussion that I have seen of the issue, seemed to reason along the lines of "Pluto is a strange and mysterious world, therefore it is associated with the strange and mysterious."

Worryingly, I think that as a Scorpio, Pluto (along with Mars) is supposed to be one of my ruling planets, so I should have a personal stake in this.;)
 
Astrology

It's just a load of well- structured Castor and Pollox, if you ask me (which you didn't!).
But that's just the opinion of a Saggitarian with Scorpio rising (and Monkey in Chinese terms)!! :D
 
I tried several times yesterday to reply to Schnor's point but failed, and now I don't have time to redo it!

But I can point out that neither Neptune nor Pluto have completed one orbit since their discovery, so how is anyone to know what 'influences' they might have in various positions?

And Pluto is such a pathetic little scrap of ice that it doesn't deserve the name of planet, IMHO! If we are to include Pluto as having influence, there are lots of asteroids and comets that exert greater gravitational forces on Earth than does Pluto.

Pollux indeed!
 
Schnor, the periods of comets (at least those that cross the Earth's orbit) are measured in years - none of them return at the same time each year.

However, comets are relatively short-lived beasties, which constantly disintegrate, especially when near the sun, and this debris spreads itself around the original orbit, filling an elliptical doughnut shaped volume of space. If the Earth's orbit cuts this 'doughnut', bits of the debris burn up in the atmosphere - this is what causes meteor showers, which do occur at the same time every year. The smallest particles can reach the surface without burning up.

But unless all comets have a radically different makeup from each other, it seems unlikely that this dust is going to induce different personalities in developing embryos. Also, since comets eventually disappear altogether, those which 'influence' the Earth now will not be the same as the set that were dominant in the time of ancient Sumeria, say, so even if astrology worked then it might not now, because the influences will have changed.

But I hadn't heard this idea in connection with astrology before, although it is a basic idea of Panspermia, the idea that life came from space and that evolution is (at least in part) driven by continuing input of material, including genes and viruses, from space; comets are one of the most important sources of this material.
 
Forty2 said:
I don't believe in astrology in the way it's used by magazines and newspapers etc, but I do think that the gravitational forces of heavenly bodies could influence us in some way. We are mostly water after all, and the moon does a pretty good job on the ocean tides.

Having said that, it's amazing how you study your stars in every publication you come across when you're in love.... :)
Click to expand...

I agree with this view. I'm not impressed by the general astrological readings in papers and mags but I think prsonalized readings may have some use. Personally my tarot cards are much more accurate.;)
 
Hmm, I don't believe in it simply because, any of it could count for me. I am a Libra Scorpio (changeover day :( ) but I could hide in any of the signs. It's largely subjective, and plays on your mind. You can find anything in anyone if you think it's there, and that's what astrology does.

blackscary.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top