|
I made a reply but my internet cut out for the night and I just went to sleep. Basically...have a go at seeing how many attributes another star sign gets right...but try to make it an opposite sign. It will hopefully show you the 'colours', the modes essentially of astrology.
Aries/Libra, Taurus/Scorpio, Gemini/Sagittarius, Cancer/Capricorn, Leo/Aquarius, Virgo/Pisces
These are really different signs. But look I really look like I rolled over and accepted all of the strident criticism offered here, but I really didn't, I just got tired. The problem here is that, like Mischy said, an astrology website will show you the astrological personalities divided into 12 sectors. The two problems in it actually being relevant to personality are like I said, firstly the genetics and circumstance of the person; and secondly the fact that they are providing you with a general template of your sun sign.
Like I said before, if you were to get a reading for your week, or day, or hour of birth, it would be increasingly accurate to your true leanings. But if you want to discard it after a small scratch on the surface, then look it's your choice. I hope I at least convinced some people to have a little more open-mindedness when talking about astrology.
|
On January 03 2009 13:22 Frits wrote:
Please don't call what HamerD does here psychological, it's pretty insulting
No it is completely psychological! I am REALLY interested in personalities and especially their relations to each other. My only problem with hardcore psychology is that it's often too mechanical and not focused enough on standard interpersonal issues. I really like psychology though, I dabble. And of course, like philosophy, psychology is something of which you can pick up a relatively useful, if not comprehensive, practical understanding if you just pay attention to the way people act. Body language for example...you can pick up knowledge about it and use that knowledge, even if you are just scratching the surface
On January 03 2009 13:22 Frits wrote:
The thing is, I haven't seen a valid counterargument so far as to:
-how every prediction of personality based on month seems to apply to everyone (with no difference in significance)
Well, like I said it doesn't purport to be exactly nailing them. I find that my one nails me exactly, and that my parents are nailed and my granny nailed lol. But that's just me. Some of my friends wouldn't find every box ticked. However, with readings that take their birth date and hour into account, I find they don't really argue, just sit there contemplating.
On January 03 2009 13:22 Frits wrote:
-What the precise mechanism is that influences the development of character, what occurrence in nature could possibly lead you to believe in these patterns you guys talk about in the first place actually.
The patterns are usually related to equilibrium, and how various things balance out each other. Like the swinging chain between liberality and control in governments...or the balance of electrons with protons. Star signs have their opposites and they all balance each other out...it's evidenced by the fact that you usually have a complete split of personalities regarding tendency to go out much, to have lots of friends, to be sympathetic, to be charitable, to be isolatory, to be argumentative etc.
I mean I personally found all these patterns and looked for psychology explanations, and could find no hard facts about influences on peoples' preponderances to do those things. Then I saw that astrology claimed to be entirely about that, and once I started comparing everyone I knew to their patterns and seeing that they all interacted the way they were supposed to and had all the attributes they were supposed to, I just thought there must be something in it. So far, I might have already said, I'm about 50% for guessing the star sign of people close to me or even just colleagues at work...which is pretty insane seeing as it should be like 7.5%.
On January 03 2009 13:22 Frits wrote:
Besides, why do you people think you have any clue or insight on personality development? I spend countless hours of serious study on the subject for a serious school and you guys come in and propose some theory without any evidence, that discredits my field of study, what did you expect.
It doesn't discredit your field of study. Carl Jung was friends with Sigmund Freud. It's just about keeping an open mind to things that psychology doesn't have all of the answers for.
On January 03 2009 13:22 Frits wrote:
It also doesn't help that half of the time when HamerD tries to explain something he sound like a schizo, some of his sentences are completely incomprehensible.
They are incomprehensible because you are Dutch and I would assume English isn't your first language anyway. And btw your English is fantastic. Why can't you ask me to rephrase something you don't understand?
|
I apologize for not reading this thread, but I just want to forward a quick question.
HamerD, do you believe that the influence of the stars and planets or w/e have some sort of ethereal effect/non-physical, or do you think it's like gravity; some intangible force but still in the physical realm, but not yet enumerated by science?
|
On January 04 2009 02:55 Physician wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 11:08 IdrA wrote: its not directly beneficial, just very comforting to our brains... so no, its not a good thing. the fact that his idiocy has an explanation does not make it ok. - lol, when I was your age I'd probably voiced a similar opinion, but I these days I ask myself more questions about the validity of my own opinions and beliefs.. I myself may not believe in the slightest the predictions of an astrology reading, but my curiosity might tempt to to find how it was arrived at and my values might deter me me from sanctioning him for his beliefs. - did you know that without magical thinking learning would not be possible? spend some time with children and even if you do not study child development you can reach this conclusion on your own; without magical thinking many of our discoveries in science would never have happened; without magical thinking poetry and literature will be sooo dull.. - take just one of many examples, that of Sir Issac Newton who studied both astrology and alchemy, to the point that many today suspect that the inspiration for his laws of light and theory of gravity came from his alchemical work... http://www.alchemylab.com/isaac_newton.htmhttp://www.phys.uu.nl/~vgent/astrology/newton.htm- how is it that he, who has left a contribution to mankind that you or I will never be able to match (unless of course you ever reach #1 keSPA rank, then maybe) who obviously was our intellectual superior in mathematics, physics and sciences does not share your harsh words for that which falls under the realm of magical thinking? - my point is, that which is idiotic to us, might be so exclusively due to our ignorance.. which is why in this case learning is wiser than arguing.. or as Sir Issac Newton once said to Sir Halley, a contemporary whom he argued often, “Sir Halley, I have studied the matter, you have not!” - a small essay for you from someone you might frown upon (chosen with this intention): http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deepak-chopra/the-nuisance-of-magical-t_b_39887.html
did you read those articles about newton? not a word about how alchemy or astrology led to his scientific discoveries, just that they were pasttimes. some modern biologists believe in christianity wholeheartedly, creation and everything. they simply keep their faith and their profession seperate and ignore the logical inconsistencies. a religious person or a mystical person accomplishing something is not a positive comment on religion or mysticism unless they caused the accomplishment to happen.
and "hes smarter than you he must know somethin you dont" argument is also invalid due to the reasoning i explained in my first post. even now, and especially in the past, there are things humans dont know. we dont like not knowing stuff and when science is not sufficiently advanced to explain it we turn to the next best thing, in this case magical thinking. in many cases that magical thinking then develops into science over time. that does not mean magical thinking was the cause of that science to develop, in fact in most cases it actually slows the development because people adhere to the 'established' thinking, fighting the new science. people would seek to figure the world out whether we had magical thinking or not, its the way our brains are wired. i think you're confusing magical thinking with the search for knowledge, it is merely a byproduct of it.
and that last article is pretty laughable. "oh noes without magical thinking these great religious leaders would not have reached such spiritual depths~ the horrors~ oh hey this one scientific guy liked it too that makes it valid" k nifty
please explain about the child learning. i dont know about the topic, but i dont see how magical thinking is responsible for it.
|
Physician
United States4146 Posts
#idra + Show Spoiler +
u said -
"that does not mean magical thinking was the cause of that science to develop"
I didn't claim that, I said this -
- did you know that without magical thinking learning would not be possible? ..without magical thinking many of our discoveries in science would never have happened; without magical thinking poetry and literature will be sooo dull.
you said -
"hes smarter than you he must know somethin you dont" argument is also invalid
I said -
how is it that he, who... does not share your harsh words for that which falls under the realm of magical thinking?
~ it was not argument, it was a question, with the hope it would lead you to read more, learn some and be less harsh; the historical anecdote were Newton's words, and repeated here to emphasize the question, after all how much do you really know about astrology, magical thinking, childhood development? etc.. u get the idea, I am sure.
~ I will give my original advice again: in this case learning is wiser than arguing, and on that note, I will proceed to follow my own advice, and bow out ; )
~ as for your request - please explain about the child learning. i dont know about the topic
I'll try this week, I will send you some info to read or post it here (if the op doesn't mind since we gone way off his initial topic)
|
On January 04 2009 10:29 HeadBangaa wrote:
I apologize for not reading this thread, but I just want to forward a quick question.
HamerD, do you believe that the influence of the stars and planets or w/e have some sort of ethereal effect/non-physical, or do you think it's like gravity; some intangible force but still in the physical realm, but not yet enumerated by science?
no, I don't think either to be honest. I think the positions of any things in the solar system depict a pattern that reoccurs in all 'random' collections of events...and that the relationship between the planets and our lives is that they subscribe to the same patterns. I don't think they have any specific effect on us. Just like the ancient Chinese and the Mayans back what 3000 years ago.
I believe, as do many, that the answer lies in cracking a 'code' to chaos and discovering whether the word 'random' can actually be applied to science.
|
what does your date of birth have to do with your personality? I mean, one moment you're inside your mother's womb, and the other you're in your mother's arms all covered in blood and crying.
how does the date on which this happens connect my personality to the patterns in nature which you're talking about?
and about the stars. THEY ARE FUCKING STARS. Quoted from Wikipedia: A star is a massive, luminous ball of plasma that is held together by its own gravity.
You base your beliefs on the PATTERNS in which the stars are spread around space. you have one glob of plasma here, one glob of plasma there and we see a fucking lion.
Through this pattern that we call Leo we can see that some people have the true personality of a leader.
so in conclusion:
somehow on the day on which your mother gave birth to you, you were somehow linked to a few stars. somehow, these stars gave you a part of your personality. somehow, people can "read" these stars and assign the personality traits they "read" to a person.
SOMEHOW this all makes perfect sense to you
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2009 09:15 .MistiK wrote:
what does your date of birth have to do with your personality? I mean, one moment you're inside your mother's womb, and the other you're in your mother's arms all covered in blood and crying.
how does the date on which this happens connect my personality to the patterns in nature which you're talking about?
and about the stars. THEY ARE FUCKING STARS. Quoted from Wikipedia: A star is a massive, luminous ball of plasma that is held together by its own gravity.
You base your beliefs on the PATTERNS in which the stars are spread around space. you have one glob of plasma here, one glob of plasma there and we see a fucking lion.
Through this pattern that we call Leo we can see that some people have the true personality of a leader.
so in conclusion:
somehow on the day on which your mother gave birth to you, you were somehow linked to a few stars. somehow, these stars gave you a part of your personality. somehow, people can "read" these stars and assign the personality traits they "read" to a person.
SOMEHOW this all makes perfect sense to you
Why dont you try reading before you post mkay...
|
On January 05 2009 09:22 Mischy wrote:
Why dont you try reading before you post mkay...
I don't understand what you mean mkay...
|
Well .MistiK, to answer as simply as possible...the post that you made was completely pointless  If you read one post above yours, a response is already given regarding your asinine and completely useless statements ^_^
Here it is if you dont want to bother moving your finger slightly to scroll up:
+ Show Spoiler +On January 05 2009 06:22 HamerD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 10:29 HeadBangaa wrote:
I apologize for not reading this thread, but I just want to forward a quick question.
HamerD, do you believe that the influence of the stars and planets or w/e have some sort of ethereal effect/non-physical, or do you think it's like gravity; some intangible force but still in the physical realm, but not yet enumerated by science? no, I don't think either to be honest. I think the positions of any things in the solar system depict a pattern that reoccurs in all 'random' collections of events...and that the relationship between the planets and our lives is that they subscribe to the same patterns. I don't think they have any specific effect on us. Just like the ancient Chinese and the Mayans back what 3000 years ago. I believe, as do many, that the answer lies in cracking a 'code' to chaos and discovering whether the word 'random' can actually be applied to science. HamerD, do you believe that the influence of the stars and planets or w/e have some sort of ethereal effect/non-physical, or do you think it's like gravity; some intangible force but still in the physical realm, but not yet enumerated by science?no, I don't think either to be honest...I don't think they have any specific effect on us.
I believe, as do many, that the answer lies in cracking a 'code' to chaos and discovering whether the word 'random' can actually be applied to science.-response already given to your post.
|
Doesn't this post seem to contradict that:
On January 03 2009 10:19 HamerD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 10:10 Frits wrote:
HamerD my birthday is august 6 can you please do an astrology reading. Im curious what you'll predict. Leo means you are naturally a leader, creative and broad-minded. Also it means that, because you are a lion who keeps his pride in strict control, bossy, condescending, pompous and occasionally vituperative. http://www.astrology-online.com/leo.htm
|
On January 04 2009 10:29 HeadBangaa wrote:
I apologize for not reading this thread, but I just want to forward a quick question.
HamerD, do you believe that the influence of the stars and planets or w/e have some sort of ethereal effect/non-physical, or do you think it's like gravity; some intangible force but still in the physical realm, but not yet enumerated by science?
Good thing I read at least the last page before posting the exact same thing.
|
On January 03 2009 10:16 HamerD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2009 10:11 Lucktar wrote:On January 03 2009 09:48 HamerD wrote:On January 03 2009 09:38 Lucktar wrote:
The thing is, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you can explain away data that doesn't fit your model by stating "you don't know yourself' or 'you are repressed,' of course it's going to seem plausible. If your belief system allows you to dismiss anything that challenges those beliefs, then it's unassailable, but hardly rational. Look it's hard to argue this with people. There's no real point IN arguing. Either you can see that astrology makes sense to your personality and relations or it's just a bunch of gobble de gook. Like I say there's like a maximum of 10% incorrect about all the sun signs of my family...either that's me being insanely, irrationally whimsical and fantastical, or correct. As far as I am concerned, the latter is proven by the fact that it's useful in dealing with relationships and myself! I have examined these theories have concluded that there is no significant correlation whatsoever. Believe in astrology if you want to, but please don't pretend that it's rational, because it isn't. Fair enough. For me and everyone I am involved with it is rational, obviously. But yes maybe I am the one in a million for whom it just happens to be the fact that everyone even remotely connected to me exhibits traits very similar to their signs. Thanks for at least looking . But it is rational for me. I have evidence, I have theory, I have belief. You don't have evidence, you don't have belief. Both rational.
This is an incredibly unreliable way to test theory. You've already contaminated your own experiment... which only had one subject to begin with. If you read what you're 'supposed' to be, based on astrology, then don't you think you'll be influenced to act that way? You need to have been described as these characteristics by other people, who are unaware of astrology, and before you were aware of astrology, in order for this to be effective at all.
You also can't say "it hasn't been disproved, therefore it's true." That's an appeal to ignorance, and it's a pretty obvious fallacy.
Your kind of reasoning is weak, and pathetic. You might as well start believing in phrenology, another dangerously stupid pseudoscience. It's just wishful thinking for people who want a shortcut to understanding the world.
|
On January 05 2009 06:22 HamerD wrote:Show nested quote +On January 04 2009 10:29 HeadBangaa wrote:
I apologize for not reading this thread, but I just want to forward a quick question.
HamerD, do you believe that the influence of the stars and planets or w/e have some sort of ethereal effect/non-physical, or do you think it's like gravity; some intangible force but still in the physical realm, but not yet enumerated by science? no, I don't think either to be honest. I think the positions of any things in the solar system depict a pattern that reoccurs in all 'random' collections of events...and that the relationship between the planets and our lives is that they subscribe to the same patterns. I don't think they have any specific effect on us. Just like the ancient Chinese and the Mayans back what 3000 years ago. I believe, as do many, that the answer lies in cracking a 'code' to chaos and discovering whether the word 'random' can actually be applied to science.
I'm not sure if I understand your reasoning. You're saying that everything works according to these patterns, and obviously that these patterns are retraceable back to personality for one thing, but also in all other things.
The problem with connecting patterns to personality is the following: Randomness occurs if you take all personalities together and look at the months these people are born in. You will find that an equal number of personalities occur through each month, indicating no pattern at all. This is based on objective evaluated personality tests, which you have to agree are more specific and better at determining personality than a horoscope, if not for the simple fact that a horoscope assumes the answer before it even asks questions based on a pattern, while an objective personality test has no bias based on assumption. Shouldn't this test based on your logic then indicate the pattern implied?
Now approaching my main questions: Since you estimated in the OP that it's 25% heritage, 50% environmentality, 25% astrological sign, how do you explain findings for heritage for example, while there aren't any findings for astrological sign? (Also I have to mention here that the environmentality and heritability of a personality trait differs per trait, so giving a total estimate is rather useless in the first place.)
For example, according to the system of astrology a trait like extraversion or neuroticism should be more common for people born in month X than month Y. When you take 25000 people, and evaluate these traits however, you will find that there is no difference of personality based on the months those people are born in. And according to the laws of random numbers, the bigger your sample is, the more clearly you see that it's equally divided over month.
-How does this not prove randomness in personality based on birthdate? How can you possibly say there is any proof for birthdate influencing personality after that?
-How can you perceive your anecdotal findings to be more accurate than these findings, especially when you consider that your method of obtaining information shows clear flaws. (You will be much more likely to disregard faults and remember confirmations.)
About patterns, are you talking about the big picture of the universe? I do see a pattern here, a pattern of action and reaction according to the laws of physics, I don't understand why an underlying more far-fetched system of patterns is required or even noticable here.
|
When asked about the theory behind why astrology relates humans to the stars, you said...
I think the positions of any things in the solar system depict a pattern that reoccurs in all 'random' collections of events...and that the relationship between the planets and our lives is that they subscribe to the same patterns.
My most charitable interpretation of this is that you believe there is some sort of inherent structure or order behind any system, random or chaotic though it may appear. Einstein is on your team.
However, even such things as positions of stars change, and readings have uncertainties, and so on. A more permanent pattern which would be completely unaffected by time or location, undisputed, reproducible, have an unchanging structure within a seemingly random sequence, and is undeniably reflected in everything we see (all the time, not just in snapshots of time), is the very friendly and universally known number pi.
Now hold on. Numerology isn't crackpot shit. Let's have a thought experiment. If a Creator of the Universe wanted to leave Easter eggs (or guiding Tools) for His creations, wouldn't he have done it in a foolproof way? You can't mess up the natural constants no matter how hard you try. On the other hand, if He chose to do it by arranging stars in different ways, some of His more mischievous creations might fool the others by towing a star here, causing another to go supernova there, and BAM! His message is garbled.
Okay, we don't even have to postulate a Creator. If the Universe is inherently ordered and structured, then it would follow that all random things, such as the placement of stars or the roll of dice or a person's parentage would also be ordered and structured. It could even be argued that we only need to observe the closer random structure of the universe, such as the visible night sky, in order to determine the structure of "random" in our local piece of the universe. Well, we'd probably need to, because we really can only see the closest 10^-50% of the universe anyways. Well then, wouldn't it make a lot more sense to study the sun? It's a bazillion times closer than anything else, plus it's got a nice "random" generator whether you look at power output or sunspots or flares.
|
Dude. I will reply to both you and frits more fully but yes, it would make more sense to study a LOT of different things than the planets to work out these patterns but astrology was invented about 4000 years ago lol; and a lot of people put a lot of time into working out any correlations. So it's the most useful available set of studies one can find into this theory. (I'm interested in numerology but haven't ever looked at it in detail, it seems kinda insane to me from the outside but who knows).
|
hamerd I feel tremendously grateful to be around your presence. You have clearly outlined the moral authority and destiny of the most of us, I am flattered by your immaculate articulation on such a profound field that transcends the boundaries of logic and science to merely copulate a sensual and practical approach to our existence as a whole, it greatly improves our appreciation to our consciousness to unfathomable degrees in a direction that can only be matched by someone of your caliber, intellect and passion for all life on earth. In fact, it must be the allocated state of the moon, stars, and sun at this moment and time I came to realize my own desires and love for this universe of ours, and perhaps my atheist principles were all for naught, improbable, and I should bow before the amazing parallels of the stars to your well thought out ideals and patience to others.
Thank you, I will begin my journey into greater enlightenment and hope.
Perhaps the numbers and signs around me, are a greater compass to my own self discovery, I will read more into the historical basis of astrology and the amazing clutches that numerology may offer me, the way it has helped so many curious and clear thinking individuals of the past.
|
It seems that my entire life goes against the saying DNFTT
btw going to reply to frits and bottleabuser, just playing medieval total war then going to gym etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
