Validity of Astrology *split from INFJs and western astrology*
- Thread starter Duty
- Start date
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
I will not debate it beyond this point. I have wasted far too much energy in the past because of it, and I refuse to do so anymore: It explains the world to me, it holds so much truth in my eyes, and it gives me so much direction. It explains the not so common sense world we live in. It has not failed me yet, and I doubt it ever will. It is almost too accurate, which quite frankly can be very annoying in some cases.
If it works for you, use it.
If it holds so much truth, then wouldn't you be excited to pass that truth on? Yet you run from debate...
It seems that a bunch of vague descriptions can be interpreted to come out as "the truth" under most any circumstances. If astrology is so true, I say we put it to a more objective and scientific test to see if it comes out to be true.
I imagine such a test has been done, and astrology was found to be inconsistent, or vague at best, yet you take personal anecdotal evidence over an empirical test. I'm just curious as to why.
Btw, why doesn't astrology account for the fact that there are thirteen constellations that the sun enters, and no longer are there 12 (Ophiuchus).
Last edited:
I don't think Indigo is "running" from the debate, given the posts I've read from him previously, he doesn't strike me as the fleeing type. Also, he specifically stated that it worked for him, he didn't say it was for everyone. However, I think for many of us, despite whether or not it appears to be true is really quite irrelevant because ultimately, it leads to self reflection. For myself, it has the same appeal of a fortune cookie or a goofy personality quiz, it's not going to rule me or define my actions, but it does give me an opportunity to journey and question myself in ways that I otherwise might not have. There is wisdom to be found in self reflection, regardless of what gets you there, whether it be scientific tests, Astrology, Tarot, Religion etc... For myself, I do see distinct accuracies in these methods and I find it quite amusing and interesting. Either way, if it works for someone and they've found a practice that resonates with them, be happy that they have made this discovery, regardless if you don't understand why they believe it or apply it to your own life.
Also, I'm well aware of Ophiuchus not being part of the western Zodiac and I don't believe any astrologers have recovered the reasons why it was left out other than we have more advanced technology now vs. when the Zodiac Chart was created. So, apparently it was an accident...(or since I don't believe in accidents, maybe not).
(Yes, I know, what a convenient belief). It's all a matter of perspective, and while science and evidence is glorious, humans are still quite the mystery (and the inner workings of the soul and how it relates to everything else, an even bigger one).
If it was true, wouldn't it be for everyone?
Self reflection is a good thing, but isn't self reflection more useful, efficient, and honest when it's done in the useful fields of philosophy, psychology, and sociology, rather then fields like astrology? These fields are logical, tested, and (although it doesn't matter that much) respectable.
No and no.
Like I said, science and evidence is good...but it's limiting, it can't and doesn't explain everything. Especially where matters of the soul and real guidance in this life are concerned. Also, I didn't discount philosophy, psychology, or sociology, I'm a cherry picker, I use them all.
I personally believe that each person has their own truth, their own spiritual connection to divinity, a spark that they know is there and true, and whatever method they can find to make that connection and bring it to the surface, let that serve as their truth. It's like one person using hypnosis to cure a smoking habit vs someone else that uses the patches. They both quit, both methods worked. They both came to the same result with different methods, but each has their own truth regarding the circumstance, their own experience, their own reality. Science can't say: "Well, it worked for person A, so it must work for person B". We know that's not true, so why isn't it possible that it's true for our souls and our purpose in life? I believe divinity determines what we will use and how we discover our truths. Whether that be through science or something more subjective.
“Here the skeptic finds chaos and the believer further evidence that the hand that made us is divine.”
-Robert Moses
It's all perspective. And even if someone was a slave to astrology, it's no worse than being a slave to logic and science, technically they're both tainted with human creation. So, I think a healthy balance and tolerance for those trying to find their way is best.
Like I said, science and evidence is good...but it's limiting, it can't and doesn't explain everything. Especially where matters of the soul and real guidance in this life are concerned. Also, I didn't discount philosophy, psychology, or sociology, I'm a cherry picker, I use them all.
I personally believe that each person has their own truth, their own spiritual connection to divinity, a spark that they know is there and true, and whatever method they can find to make that connection and bring it to the surface, let that serve as their truth. It's like one person using hypnosis to cure a smoking habit vs someone else that uses the patches. They both quit, both methods worked. They both came to the same result with different methods, but each has their own truth regarding the circumstance, their own experience, their own reality. Science can't say: "Well, it worked for person A, so it must work for person B". We know that's not true, so why isn't it possible that it's true for our souls and our purpose in life? I believe divinity determines what we will use and how we discover our truths. Whether that be through science or something more subjective.
“Here the skeptic finds chaos and the believer further evidence that the hand that made us is divine.”
-Robert Moses
It's all perspective. And even if someone was a slave to astrology, it's no worse than being a slave to logic and science, technically they're both tainted with human creation. So, I think a healthy balance and tolerance for those trying to find their way is best.
What makes them respectable? That they are all classified as science? Or that they utilize models and technology, and study theories of behavior? That famous names like Freud and Meyers Briggs, and Aristotle are attached to them?
The stars and their inflences have been studied for as long as any of the sciences you mentioned (if not longer). According to my brief delve into research, an Astrologer was originally an interpeter of celestial phemonona. Various ancient cultures had their own systems and practices...Babylon, the Aztecs and Mayans, the Greeks and Romans. There are Bablyonian astrological records dated back to 1645BC and the earliest known Horoscope at 410 BC.
The form of astrology currently popular today has been coined Humanistic Astrology, whereby the planets ,aspects, degrees and other relationships are linked to human nature.
{quoted from http://www.astrology.com/aboutastrology/overview/history/} ~In the 1950s, French astrologers Michel and Françoise Gauquelin used sophisticated statistical studies to link the positions of the Planets to human nature. Others, such as Dane Rudhyar, have expanded the study of Humanistic Astrology.~
Now, while the current popularity of astrology as it's evolved today, it can be considered a very young system. Personally, I view it as a tool. To be used in the same manner as the MBTI. It is nothing more than a rough draft. A broad stroke portrait of a person. With a few pieces of information I have a rough idea of what to expect of you as a person. It is by no means complete as your life has added details that have effected your life in ways that are unknowable to a casual observer.
Just out of curiosity, have you ever been charted?
What makes them respectable is that they use methods that are respectable. Science used to suspect that light traveled through the "aether." Once it was proven otherwise, the best theory prevailed. Astrology can't even make a correction so basic as to include Ophiuchus.
I'd like to take 100 people born with the same chart as me...theoretically they should all be pretty much the same people with pretty much the same basics to them. Now, I've never run such a test (and I'm not sure if someone has ever done such an experiment, but I could find out if you really are curious) to see if this prediction is true, but I suspect it isn't.
Now, I understand INFJs like to find hidden meanings and symbols everywhere. I also understand that it is only people that put meaning into things. However, although astrology may have some meaning to you, astrology does not describe reality, nor does it attempt to determine what techniques are acceptable in order to discover reality. It doesn't use any reasoning, and testing the predictions of astrology leads to those predictions being disproven (a prediction would be that 500 people with the same chart would all have the same tendencies and personality).
So while it may have meaning to you, and the only meaning in the world is given by people, it still does not describe reality as it claims to do just that. It's not a respectable endeavor except perhaps as art...because it claims to predict and explain a part of reality, when this is a complete falsehood.
Last edited:
Just cause this is how you perceive things to be doesn’t mean it's how things really are you know. There are plenty of things in this world that science can't answer.
Oh Duty, I can't help but laugh - not at you, but at the disagreement.
I'm not sure this (validity of astrology) is something reasoning alone can explain. I'm not trying to convince you. I do think that it is a way of looking at it differently.
And likewise to those who think astrology describes reality.
This is why we have a set of methods to determine what objective reality actually consists of. Astrology fails when put to the test under those methods.
Like what?
Plenty of things they can't explain YET maybe...that doesn't mean we turn to making speculation true and anecdote as precedence. It means we say, "I don't know the truth," and it's as simple as that.
Truth is just not something to be thrown about so easily. It's a precious thing that deserves more respect then speculation and anecdote.
Last edited:
Sure. Goes for a whole bunch of conclusions people come to based on their perceptions.
Rather than looking for black and white examples of what can be proven, why not look at the grey shade of what hasn't been disproven and consider the possibilities.
I don't know the truth and I’m not talking about making speculation true but who’s to say we will ever discover all the truths in our universe, in the meantime why shut your mind to something because it makes no sense to you rather than trying to understand it?
Last edited:
You don't take that which hasn't been disproven as truth. You take it as possibility, but you certainly don't posit it as truth as astrologers have.
Also, if you really want me to find evidence that astrology's predictions are untrue, I can attempt to find something. Thing is...I'm willing to wager it HAS been disproven in the first place.
Astrology has been posited to be truth, when it is not. It makes inaccurate conclusions...conclusions that should follow logically from astrology's premises (500 people born with the same arrangement should all be pretty close to the same personalities and lives) as these conclusions turn out to be untrue.
Astrology is speculation, anecdote at best. I shut my mind to it not because I don't understand it, but because it treats truth so carelessly.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
Truth is what you make of it.
You are looking at this far too logically, astrology isn't logical and not everything in life is. You have to remember that you are in a sea of Ni dominates here.
Don't see the relevance of this...explain better?
I don't care what dominant functions people are, and such is irrelevant, when people posit something as true, and it isn't, then they're wrong. It can't be both wrong and right at the same time, it can't be grey areas and it can't be hidden meanings. Any conclusion based off such false premises may still be true, but the belief in such a conclusion is not justified. It's a disservice to the world and a disservice to the very idea of truth to believe otherwise...no matter your temperament.
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
*sigh* I hate to say this... but who cares! This has alot of grey area for me, it works for me. And for me, that is all that matters.
I wont debate this, it is pointless in my eyes. If it works for you, that is all that matters!