Quote:
Originally Posted by rhoyaltempest
Some people study astrology. There's nothing "silly" about it and while I don't study it myself, I have respect for those that indeed take their astrological signs seriously. All I know is I'm 100% textbook Taurus in every way so there's definitely something to it...at least for me.
|
If Taurus 100% describes you, but does not 100% describe every person within the Taurus sign, then no, it's called coincidence. The human brain likes to see patterns, that doesn't actually mean there is true causation, or even true correlation. Particularly since the human brain also ignores things that disagree with the conclusions it already has and retains the things that agree. So when the horoscope is 'right' then we remember how AWESOMELY right it was and when it was wrong we remember how AWESOMELY RIGHT IT WAS LAST TIME.
So yes, it is silly. It's not science. It can be studied as a practice the same way many other things are studied, but if it is anything it is purely faith based. As I've never seen anyone actually claim a zodiacal faith, I'm not particularly concerned with calling it silly.
That doesn't mean it's wrong to read a horoscope for entertainment, or to read up on the historical and religious beliefs of the time of Ptolemy when the western zodiac was created and understand the concept... but basing one's life on it, complaining about having to relearn one's life as a ________ because they're no longer a ____________ is silly.
And k_s appears to be mistaking astrology with astronomy.
Threaded Mode
