Do you know women who believe in horoscopes?

[PicnicBunny]

My friend is a Pisces. Okay, we’ve been friends for decades and when we were younger we were fascinated, as were most of the other women friends - especially because of the relationships with dating and making new friends angle. I’m a Scorpio.

I don’t put much thought into this kind of stuff anymore. But my friend is really driven by it still. She’ll meet a man and feel off because he’s a Sagittarius! Or another Gemini! And will expect me to agree. I don’t anymore tbh. I wouldn’t say she’s a typical piscean either but she’ll explain her own behaviour like, oh, you know I’m a piscean like your big sis and so you probably understand. We just […insert some trait eg being too generous and kind until they blow a fuse..]

I will try and reply with logic. Boundaries etc. oh, could you have possibly […] and her reply will be all pisceans are just this way. I don’t get out much anymore but people can’t still be reading horoscopes to understand the world?
She’s actually really smart otherwise. Brilliant job independent, confident go-getter if perhaps a little unlucky in love. But that’s because she’s a piscean of course.

Do you think horoscopes are still relevant? Or friends who do?

Our definition of science

Science is the pursuit and application of knowledge and understanding of the natural and social world following a systematic methodology based on evidence.
Scientific methodology includes the following:

Objective observation: Measurement and data (possibly although not necessarily using mathematics as a tool)
Evidence
Experiment and/or observation as benchmarks for testing hypotheses
Induction: reasoning to establish general rules or conclusions drawn from facts or examples
Repetition
Critical analysis
Verification and testing: critical exposure to scrutiny, peer review and assessment

sciencecouncil.org/about-science/our-definition-of-science/

Hth

@MiaMoor I would love the details if y don't mind sharing? So I can also get my one done lol

Astrology consists of a number of belief systems that hold that there is a relationship between astronomical phenomena and events or descriptions of personality in the human world. Astrology has been rejected by the scientific community as having no explanatory power for describing the universe. Scientific testing has found no evidence to support the premises or purported effects outlined in astrological traditions.[1]

Where astrology has made falsifiable predictions, it has been falsified.[1]: 424  The most famous test was headed by Shawn Carlson and included a committee of scientists and a committee of astrologers. It led to the conclusion that natal astrology performed no better than chance. Astrologer and psychologist Michel Gauquelin claimed to have found statistical support for "the Mars effect" in the birth dates of athletes, but it could not be replicated in further studies.[2]: 213–214  The organisers of later studies claimed that Gauquelin had tried to influence their inclusion criteria for the study by suggesting specific individuals be removed. It has also been suggested, by Geoffrey Dean, that the reporting of birth times by parents (before the 1950s) may have caused the apparent effect.

Astrology has not demonstrated its effectiveness in controlled studies and has no scientific validity,[1][3]: 85  and is thus regarded as pseudoscience.[4][5]: 1350  There is no proposed mechanism of action by which the positions and motions of stars and planets could affect people and events on Earth in the way astrologers say they do that does not contradict well-understood, basic aspects of biology and physics.[6]: 249 [7]

Therefore, any test of a scientific theory must prohibit certain results that falsify the theory, and expect other specific results consistent with the theory. Using this criterion of falsifiability, astrology is a pseudoscience.[18]

Astrology was Popper's most frequent example of pseudoscience.[20]: 7  Popper regarded astrology as "pseudo-empirical" in that "it appeals to observation and experiment", but "nevertheless does not come up to scientific standards".[21]: 44 

In contrast to scientific disciplines, astrology does not respond to falsification through experiment. According to Professor of neurology Terence Hines, this is a hallmark of pseudoscience.[22]: 206 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_science

the astrology columns you read in newspapers have little to no bearing on real astrology practice. The birth chart (a precise chart calculated at the time of birth) contains many elements beyond your sun sign - everything from your ascendant, your moon to all the planets, pluto, asteroids and a complicated house system. If a professional (good) astrologer (i.e. not the pop astrology newspaper columnist types) looks at your birth chart, with its current transits in aspect to your natal planets and houses, they will be able to tell you extraordinary things about your life, the people in it and what is going on at the moment. The horoscope columns are for the most part simplistic. That said, the movement of the sun around the zodiac can have an impact on people's lives, so it explains why, for example Gemini / Pisces can be at odds with each other sometimes etc. But often it's more complex than this, because a person could have loads of planets in Gemini, and the sun in Pisces, so that Pisces Sun could really vibe with Geminis. It's not about hard and fast rules and every chart is unique, which is why blanket rules don't always or often work. People think it's overgeneralised when the reality of "real" astrology practice is very different, nuanced and detailed.

It's not about hard and fast rules and every chart is unique, which is why blanket rules don't always or often work.

It's all complete bollocks, though.

@ClearMoth I was watching a podcast recently that explained that the experiments trying to discredit Gauquelin were in fact discredited themselves, the first round of tests they ran to try to get the same results agreed with his results and as a result they falsified the later published results or something because they were too embarrassed to admit that he had been right.

Here's a link to a podcast about it all but it may not be the one I watched, it is from the same series: theastrologypodcast.com/2018/09/27/michel-and-francoise-gauquelin-and-the-mars-effect/

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology_and_science

No, scientists are not 'embarrassed to admit' that astrology is 'right'.

Because it isn't.

www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/science/is-astrology-real

undsci.berkeley.edu/astrology-is-it-scientific/

theswaddle.com/why-do-people-still-believe-in-astrology/

www.zmescience.com/other/feature-post/astrology-doesnt-work-and-never-worked-heres-why/

@ClearMoth 'it's complete bollocks"

have you ever taken the time to research it yourself? IMO it's in depth experience that will change your mind. Get a reading from a really good (well known and genuine) astrologer? You might change your mind. Unfortunately most people are dogmatically attached to the idea it's 'bollocks' and will miss out on the real benefits of it.

Jung described it as the most complete system of psychological understanding of the character we have.

Well said

Understanding how science works, and assessing things on that basis, is the opposite of dogma.

I'm glad you find this pseudoscience psychologically comforting. Great that it works for you. It's still complete bollocks.

And no, I won't be handing actual money to a 'genuine' [sic] astrologer.

@Walkinginthesand thanks! No point arguing with dogmatists unfortunately. Whatever links they send that supposedly "disprove" it. Pah. Experience tells me otherwise.

@ClearMoth you seem a very angry person and astrology gets your goat right? Shame.

Has it ever occured to you that modern science can be dogmatic and use its own agenda to deny things? Remember when we thought the earth was flat? etc.

Have a nice day, hope you're not too angry over there.

Yes my friends and I were obsessed when we were teens. We read this like it was the Bible and applied it to all the boys we knew.

www.goodreads.com/book/show/400329.Linda_Goodman_s_Sun_Signs?from_search=true&from_srp=true&qid=o5hnPYc4cJ&rank=1

And there you have it. Evidence doesn't matter, because of how you feel.

I realise you are heavily invested in this, presumably because you either fleece the gullible, or have been fleeced yourself.
I'm off to work now. But it's very funny that you say that and call other people dogmatic. I think that's another word you would benefit from looking up. But you won't.

Whatever links they send that supposedly "disprove" it. Pah.

That's a perfect example of dogmatism. Beautiful. 😂

Not at all, your posts tickled me greatly.

Scientists haven't thought the world was flat for several hundred years. Plenty of people who are anti-science still think it is, though. They're not interested in 'links that disprove it' either. Just like you. Don't fall off the edge, will you?

I know about the Barnum effect, and I’m quite happy to find comfort in the vague belief that I have, that in no way rules my life or affects anyone else’s life.

The birth chart reading was a present, the man who did it used a computer program.

The information wasn’t vague or fishing at all, some was incredibly specific.

Not that I’m trying to persuade a non believer to believe in it. Everyone is entitled to their own belief, some sceptics seem to be offended that anyone would have a belief that they don’t (my son is like this, I try to teach him to respect others’ opinions, and if he doesn’t like it to avoid the topic altogether).

We Scorpios don't believe in Astrology

😂😂😂

Sounds like your friends potential Fates dodged a bullet. Anyone who judges people by when they were born is a walking red flag.

This is not about horoscopes though. This is about star signs. There is a significant difference between the two.

I guess, @PicnicBunny, you managed to not just hear from posters who know women who really, really believe in astrology. You have many women who do on the thread.

But, it’s a belief. People who really believe this stuff, really believe it.

No, I don’t, and neither do any my friends or colleagues. They’re never accurate for me, but worse is the Chinese horoscope…it’s the polar opposite to who I am !
Having said that, I must agree with a PP who found having their full natal chart read very accurate. I did this, and was also wondering how it could be so close!

Thank you all so much for replying. Sorry I didn’t reply before busy last day of school. Hope you’re all enjoying your Friday <3
It was really nice reading your replies, such a varied range of viewpoints on this!

Err mmm but I am honestly more confused than ever before hahaha

Ahaha I was just thinking this! And is it my need to hit her with the truth, shake her out of her dreamy ways? Come on woman! You are responsible for the choices you make!
Embrace the darkness! With a nice glass of blood from our enemies!