BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:24 PM

TIA, no one is in a better position to judge those results than yourself. Other people can't possibly know you or your life circumstances half as well as you do. So I ask again, why give unmerited power and authority to someone else's opinions/perceptions about you?

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:33 PM

Not giving them any power over me whatsoever. I will still be who I am. What I am giving them power over is Astrodienst. Their responses will be a strong indicator (for me of course) of the accuracy of the "real" profile. All of the profiles make some pretty specific statements about my modus operandi and outlook that people who have worked closely with me for 15 years ought to be able to spot if.

The main reason I am having others judge the profiles was stated best by Richard Feynman: "the easiest person to fool is yourself", and from my life history and prior circumstances, I know that I am quite capable of fooling myself.


Besides, anything else would be a little bit like playing the shell game with myself. Not much fun or challenge if you already know which cup the pea is under.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 05:41 PM

The easiest person to fool is definitely oneself.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 06:09 PM

interesting article, M. Ted...and your summation of it is clear. It is, however, reporting 'about' presumed statistics gathered by Sheldrake, who is also reported thusly:
"Rupert Sheldrake is far from being a reliable source, and on the basis of his previous escapades, anything he says should be taken with a grain of salt the size of a Ford Explorer. He may have misrepresented the hard sciences' stand on experimenter blinding, and his report may be unbalanced or exaggerated, especially in light of the low number of parapsychology studies represented in his survey."

Now, he may be absolutely right on in the survey he reports, but not all 'standard' scientific tests require "blind" comparisions....and of course, we hear nothing about the results of 'blind' testing in the 'standard' sciences compared to parapsyhchology.

I, myself, was once part of a study of drugs in which there were 3 control groups, one of which was given a placebo, and the others given different strengths of the actual drug...and not even the techs doing the test knew who got what...... In that case, 'blinds' were required, in other types of experiments they are not. It all depends on what you need to prove, test or discover....then the NATURE of the results becomes important...are you wanting statistics, or 'happenings'? (i.e....if all the participants in group 3 in my study died, conclusions could be drawn!...If 52% reported they 'felt better', MUCH different conclusions are appropriate.)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*daylia*...."
I don't "believe" a thing about astrology, Bill. I know (not believe, but know) what I do to date through direct first hand personal observation and experience."

I never doubt that a person HAD the experiences they report, but I always 'take with a grain of salt' (that one the size of the Ford *grin*) most claims about the source and implications and conclusions to be drawn. When you say you "know" in this context, it is clear that you are using the word in a much looser way than I would like to see. In the scientific method, it is a pretty dicey term, reserved for times when absolute certainty needs to be talked about.

    Even in general discourse, one needs to be wary of the context. There is a BIG difference between saying "I know that tossing a lighted match in gasoline is likely to cause a big flare." and telling me "I know I saw the ghost of my grandfather" or "I know that the analysis of my astrological charts have been accurate."

Even the match/gasoline statement is not as precise as "I know that 2+2=4" because that is true by definition, and 1 time in a million that match may not cause a BOOM....but it is still pretty reliable, and we can easily agree to say "I know it is dangerous" because we agree on the basic rules in that case.

When we DO use words differently, then the logical problem of 'equivocation' can rear its head as people continue a debate, never stopping to note that one definition is more rigid than another.


"Is all this nitpicking necessary", she asks? *grin*...."well", says the stodgy philosopher, "only if you want the answers to be useful."

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: autolycus
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 06:34 PM

Daylia,

Sorry for the delay - today is one of my two days off, and I've been out hunting LPs.

I first thought of doing this as a pm, then thought I'd be a bit braver than that.

The alternative to "influence" is that at any moment, the universe has a pattern, existing in every particle of it (vaguely like my own 'pattern' being identifiable in every cell of my body, leg and liver and ear alike, tho' legs, livers and ears don't look like each other). The horoscope was simply discovered to be a way of reading off the pattern. So, correspondences between planetary events, and those here, are about synchronicity (the "same" thing going on in different places), rather than influence.

As I said before, prediction in the precise, scientific sense, is not sought or possible a lot because we do have free will. Astrology speaks more of tendencies (bit like scientists can't predict the exact time of climate collapse - and don't even agree th't that is inevitable - scientists, mark you).

Do I lack free will because I can't announce I'm going to jump off a cliff and fly and that be true?

No, it's just that actual constraints have to be taken into account. One's horoscope shows one's personal constraints and tendencies, the hand one has been dealt (in my earlier analogy).

So it's tendencies, not predictions, tho' it is these tendencies, not those. Each of us has a different bunch of talents, different temperaments. Did we choose our temperaments? Our talents?

Incidentally, when the object of a study is a person or people (psychology, astrology, anthropology, sociology etc.), it is difficult/impossible for the study to be truly scientific. That is, if for no other reason, because the subject and object of the study are, uniquely, of the same species (like trying to see your mind with your eyes), and axes are going to be ground, like it or not.

Dahlia, I'll leave my response to your kind request there for the moment. I'll be happy to share more, on piste or off, as we decide.

Most of the other postings have ignored one part or another of the earlier posts of us astronauts (hey, that could fly.) And there aint a durn thing we can do about (cept say it aint worth going on. You have free will, so it's your choice.)

Just a small point. Clinton, very feisty in asking others to provide answers and evidence (as I agree is oft valuable), may I prod you just once more to enlarge on your statement that you know enough about astro. to know it's bullshit. Don't be shy. We're not enemies, are we? What have you got? Best wishes

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 06:41 PM

I think you are absolutely right, autolycus. It's sychronicity of the whole system, not the detection of an influence or causation by various heavenly bodies. Any method of divination works for that very reason, provided the person doing it is sensitive enough to tune in. The degree of their sensitivity is the key to a good reading...NOT the method they use.

I've seen marvelously accurate readings done with tea leaves, for instance. One does not need astrology to do readings at all, but if one likes it, it's probably as good a method of divination as any.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: M.Ted
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 06:59 PM

The questioning of Sheldrake's credibility is a bit of hyperbole--he is actually a fairly reputable biologist, who advocates that science is a method, not a position-

He also contends that a lot of what passes for science is merely habit, and his critical point is that scientists tend to think that double blinds are only needed when there are human subjects involved--to cancel out their bias, and are completely oblivious to the idea that experimenter bias has a great effect on the outcome of research.

This is not a new idea, not even a controversial idea--most scientists generally forgo acceptance of what seem to be new discoveries until they have been independently verified many times.

The trick is, they recognize experimenter bias can be a significant in the work of others, but not in their own work.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: bobad
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 07:09 PM

Just to add a little to what BillD has to say on the subject of double blind studies. This methodology is used primarily to test the efficacy of therapies, drugs, treatments etc. ie. does the drug, therapy or treatment have an effect that is SIGNIFICANTLY different from that of a placebo, and by SIGNIFICANTLY I mean by using accepted statistical analysis to measure significance.

Another way to test efficacy is by evaluating the effect something may have by measurment. For example take a blood anti-coagulant, it's efficacy is easily measured by testing it's effect on the amount of time it takes to clot a subject's plasma in a laboratory procedure.

That would be a pretty straightforward way to say that something does what it claims to do. On the other hand if one wants to determine whether this effect has an effect on mortality or morbidity a double blind study would be used to answer that question.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 07:21 PM

Thursday March 2

Mar. 2, 2006. 01:00 AM
Thought for the Day: Mercury is always an elusive planet to pinpoint visually, but its astrological influence is unmistakable. Today it comes to a full stop in Pisces and begins its once-in-four-months retrograde cycle until the 25th. Be as adaptable as you can.


Wednesday March 1

Mar. 1, 2006. 01:00 AM
Thought for the Day: It's all excitement and high energy. The moon moves into feisty Aries, Uranus is positively electric and Mercury comes to a standstill as it squares off with intense Pluto. This month is off to a flying start.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: bobad
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 07:24 PM

"Uranus is positively electric"

No comment.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 08:27 PM

There's likely a good joke about AC/DC in there somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 08:36 PM

"Be as adaptable as you can."

working on it....even when Mercury is zipping in his usual manner and not standing still.


"...they recognize experimenter bias can be a significant in the work of others, but not in their own work."

yep...a common error...but not a universal one. It is not about whether experts sometimes are careless; it is about what good methodology is, whether followed carefully or not. If a basically flawed method is scrupulously adhered to, ALL its results are suspect. (NOT proven wrong...just not proven right)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:11 PM

The main reason I am having others judge the profiles was stated best by Richard Feynman: "the easiest person to fool is yourself", and from my life history and prior circumstances, I know that I am quite capable of fooling myself.

Likewise, TIA. Everyone's great at fooling themselves! And yes, there's been a few times when other people's observations and opinions about me and/or my personal life have proven helpful ie during a particularly difficult or crisis situation, when it's hardest to stay objective and keep a level head.

But honestly, other people's opinions usually turn out to be a distraction at best, harmful and misleading at worst. A few decades of trial and error have shown that life is much easier when I avoid seeking out other people's opinions and "advice" (??) about my own personal affairs as much as possible.

I shudder to think that I'd allow anyone else to direct, least of all dictate my choices or decisions or judgements re websites, or personal astrological reports, or posting on Mudcat, or playing the piano, or anything else I might be interested in pursuing! But then again, I do make it a point to trust nothing but personal hands-on observation and experience when investigating subjects like astrology.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:27 PM

Bill, I know that you don't really believe that I know what I know. Maybe you don't even think that anything is really knowable the way I go about knowing. This, however, does not mean that I don't know what I do know or that you don't know what you do know. All it means is I know that I know things that you don't know. And you know that you know things that I don't know, because we've chosen different paths in life.

ANd y'know what? Whooooopty-doopty! C'est la vie! I like you anyway. I know that. YOu may not think that I really know this, but I do. I can't prove scientifically that I know that I like you, or even that I do like you. But I still do know it anyway. And I do still like you.

Y'know?    :-)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:31 PM

To know that you know that I know that you don't really believe that I know what I know makes me know that you don't even think that anything is really knowable the way I go about knowing that you know. This, however, does not mean that I don't know what I do know or that you don't know what you do know. All it means is I know that I know things that you don't know that I know I know. And you know that you know things that I don't know that you know I know, because......because.......awww, screw it!!!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Cluin
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:42 PM

I view astrology as a relatively harmless hobby.

I very much doubt the movements of some very distant lights in the sky have a significant effect on individual futures as long as little things like free will and chance are around.

And if you think poring over star charts and silly arcane symbols will bring you to to some sort of higher consciousness, you can probably get the same result by staring long enough at a bowl of Alphabits.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 09:54 PM

Hunting LP's instead of grinding axes here on the Cat? Good for you!
Hope you enjoyed a successful blast from the past.

"The alternative to "influence" is that at any moment, the universe has a pattern, existing in every particle of it (vaguely like my own 'pattern' being identifiable in every cell of my body, leg and liver and ear alike, tho' legs, livers and ears don't look like each other). The horoscope was simply discovered to be a way of reading off the pattern. So, correspondences between planetary events, and those here, are about synchronicity (the "same" thing going on in different places), rather than influence.

As I said before, prediction in the precise, scientific sense, is not sought or possible a lot because we do have free will. Astrology speaks more of tendencies (bit like scientists can't predict the exact time of climate collapse - and don't even agree th't that is inevitable - scientists, mark you)."

Yup! Thanks for posting these intriguing ideas re synchronicity, Ivor. Never considered the astrological "map" quite this way before. Rather like a holograph ... hmmmm ... Little Hawk probably has some interesting comments about this. Thanks again!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Peace
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:05 PM

You are probably right, Daylis. Gravity is everywhere all at once. The star-croosed lovers in Romeo and Juliet, the desire of people to leave the 'surly bonds of Earth'--there is stuff going on we don't at all understand. If astrology helps you make sense of it all, then good for you.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:05 PM

Sheesh LH I just saw your post(s). And I knew that you'd have something interesting to say about Ivor's post, even before I saw your post! Now, I know that I knew this before I saw your post, but I can't prove it scientifically for Bill or anybody. That, however, doesn't change what happened or the fact that I knew. Or that I know that I knew even though this is unknowable for anyone else but me.

K. I think I've known enough for one day. Nitey nite all!




hey ....maybe I'll get to dream about mars conjuncting uranus ...

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:28 PM

"Bill, I know that you don't really believe that I know what I know."

nawwwwww...you don't know that! You BELIEVE that....*big grin*

well, anyhoo, it's good to .....ummmmmmm....'know' that you like me, in spite of my pedantic nit-picking. You are not shy about speaking your mind, and you always keep a sense of humor about it all. Valuble traits! No one 'need' convince anyone else of their point of view, just 'maybe' we will all think and understand a bit more from all this debate....

(well...except for CH...*grin*)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:33 PM

Not to worry Daylia. I'm not seeking anyone's opinion or influence on me or my behaviour or judgements. Simply have asked them which of the Astrodienst profiles best fits me. Their judgements will reflect far more upon astrology than they will upon me. I don't need astrology to tell me that I am actually quite difficult to influence (my spouse tells me this often and in many planetary alignments).

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:48 PM

Peace, I know I'm supposed to be asleep but I forgot to say thanks so here I am again. Those "Thoughts for the Day" are so very timely! Believe it or not as you choose of course, but I was wondering if Mercury had gone into retrograde earlier this evening, while I was at work. Little semi-trivial frustrating arrrgghhh stuff has been happening all day -- miscommunication, delays, devices not functioning no apparent reason -- and the Moon just entered Aries, too.   
Well!   Take it back, I say!      all this grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr I've been feeling ...

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Mar 06 - 10:58 PM

Yeah. Every time L'i gets that hind leg going and scratches his left ear really fast things tend to get a little weird for a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,Bagpuss
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 03:44 AM

Since some have questioned TIAs method of doing things, how about I do it the other way around?

Could someone volunteer to make up 4 or more charts and post them here. One for me, and some with other random details. make one of them close to but not identical to mine, just for fun and the others very different details. I will judge which best fits me.

My details Born: 09/10/1972 at about 9am in Felling, Gateshead, Tyne and Wear, England (not sure what level of detail they will accept for place of birth).

If you are the kind volunteer, make sure you keep a note of which horoscope is which.

You might need to hide details of which sun sign comes up, as I obviously will know this, but I don't know any other details.

Bagpuss

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 08:32 AM

TIA, thanks for clarifying your purpose and method so patiently. I was seeing you and your idea from the only vantage point I really have, and that's my own. I was concerned about giving undue power and authority to other people's opinions/perceptions, because that particular issue brings up unpleasant "old stuff" for me. However, this may or may not have anything to do with your typical mode of operation, and I can see that you are confident it does not. So, I'll go with it!

And I think your results will be interesting, bearing in mind the following factors affecting validity. Your co-workers are just as much a measure of these 'variables' as they are of the accuracy of the Astrodienst reports:

1. The extent and quality of their knowledge and personal perceptions of you (which is sure to be colored by their own personal vantage point and "issues", just as mine was earlier)

2. The co-worker's vocabulary (those reports ARE couched rather elaborately, as PF pointed out)

3. The amount and quality time and effort they put into studying the reports formulating an answer for you, and

4. Their personal opinions/feelings about astrology in general.


Bagpuss, I'll gladly do that for you. Can't do it immediately though -- stay posted! I'll be back ...

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 09:48 AM

K Bagpuss, here's your 1st choice. (I'm only posting the 1st 2 sections of each report, as they are quite loooooooooong and involved ...)

Sun in XXXX, Moon in Cancer

You were born with the Sun in XXXX and the Moon in Cancer. Your personality comes under the rulership of the Moon which indicates one who is attached to the comforts of his home life. You are friendly in manner and gesture. You are highly sensitive to nature and your surroundings. You should be careful not to fall under the influence of other people so readily.

You have the capacity to escape the confines of self and empathize fully with the feelings of others. The Moon in cancer always creates a personality overflowing with sensitivity and emotions. In order to feel secure it is very important that you have your family and social affairs completely settled and running smoothly.

Coming under the influence of the Sun in XXXXX, your core is intellectual, seemingly in opposition to your personality. Internally you are less emotional than appears by the role you have assumed in society. You need to have more determination and self-reliance in whatever you do.

The key to a better integration of your personality is to become more detached and independent of your family and home affairs and to acquire a more solid psychological focal point, so that you follow your goals with more determination.

Ascendant in Leo, Sun in the Eleventh House

At the time of your birth the zodiacal sign of Leo was ascending in the horizon. Its ruler the Sun is located in the eleventh house.

People with Leo in the Ascendant seem to possess a flair for the life of nobility and regality. Your life will be in many ways influenced by decisions you make that have been motivated by your pride, desire for power, for authority, and your need to convince others of your courage.

In life you will act with a rather frank, generous, and amiable disposition. The course of events in your life will unfold themselves swiftly, and a life full of chance and circumstances will be the outcome of your desire to rule, to organize, to hold the keys of authority. You should be aware that as a result of overly strong impulses there is the danger of failures and upsets in life. You will be generally regarded as an amiable, sincere and generous person who, however, has much pride and sensitivity. Egocentricity is one of the prices of being born with the Ascendant sign of Leo. Another aspect of this zodiacal sign is that your personality becomes excessively charged with passion and sexual desire. On the other hand, these zodiacal signs grant in life a large dose of vitality as well as a fine physical shape and a strong, healthy constitution.

Willpower is a characteristic of your personality. You seek opportunities and when you find them you go to it, using both your mind and your emotions to strive for success with zeal and determination. You are very self-assured and you implement ideas with a self- assurance that lets nothing get in your way of success.

It would be beneficial to you, however, if you were not so candid and frank and if you did not expect others to act and feel as you do.

Leo will grant you very sincere and affectionate relationships in which you desire to bring happiness and an overall feeling of charitable spirit and warmth to your loved one. In your sexual relationships you appear as happy, strong, playful and even a little innocent.

You will always act better as a leader than a subordinate.

This position denotes that friendships will have a direct bearing on all your important events. The position is rather favorable. You should obtain the sympathy and approval of superiors and persons of authority, or any of those who in some degree are more powerful than you are in your professional circle. Whatever profession you may be engaged in, you will rise due to your own inborn traits. You are very sociable, ambitious respectful, and attracted to conventional fashions and customs.

**********************************************************************

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 09:50 AM

Here's the 2nd:

Sun in XXXX, Moon in Scorpio

These astrological positions indicate a clever and shrewd personality. You tend to be aggressive and are often downright blasphemous. When crossed you wreak revenge in full measure. You relish displaying your wit and knowledge and make a point of telling others of your various successes and victories. These shows of your achievement, however, are to your detriment because they earn you the ill will of others. You lean toward the darker sides of life, and your imagination can be morbid. You are fascinated by the mysterious, malignant forces in the universe. A nocturnal individual, your thoughts often turn to death, finalities, and the mysteries of life after death.

The key to a more harmonious self lies in developing optimism and recognizing the good that exists in the world.


Ascendant in Sagittarius, Jupiter in the First House

At the time of your birth the zodiacal sign of Sagittarius was ascending in the horizon. Its ruler Jupiter is located in the first house.

Sagittarius rising denotes lives which are very dualistic; situations come and go as if divided into two sides - success and failure.

If you are able to raise the interests of your mind from common and trivial things to more profound subjects, your intellect will become very philosophical and attracted by law and peace, and it will be more intuitive than rational. In any case your life will be colored by impulsive and rather stubborn tendencies on your part, creating some inclination to go to extremes,

During the course of your existence you must try to develop intuition and human understanding so that you may be in a position to assist other people with your advice.

Sagittarius gives you a rather strong love of nature and makes you somewhat extroverted, demonstrative and passionate, falling in love frequently and without reservations. You are an intellectual, an intelligent person who has been fortunate enough to be granted also a good development of the emotional functions.

Your romantic life will be intense and varied. Your object of love may find you difficult to understand. In one aspect you will appear as passionate and energetic but because of the mutability of the sign you will also have an opposite tendency that will lead you away from involvement in the love affair and the latter impulse will be caused by a more inner trait, which is personal freedom.

Generally speaking, the sign of Sagittarius will incline you to exist in environments in which your physical body, emotions and thoughts are allowed total freedom for development. On a higher intellectual level you may find yourself inclined to dwell in the deep complexities of philosophy, metaphysics, religion and law. You are versatile enough to study more than one discipline simultaneously not forgetting to keep your body in physical movement, since you require both intellectual and physical exercise.

The general meaning of this position is that any success in life will be achieved through personal effort and merit. There is also a tendency for dignity and respectability caused by your strength of temperament.

You give an impression of spontaneity, frankness, and good disposition. Your temperament is innately honest, truthful, kind and courageous.

**********************************************************************

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 09:53 AM

Here's the 3rd:

Sun in XXXXX, Moon in Aquarius

This astrological combination lends you organizational ability and the likelihood of success in large undertakings that involve the public. You are highly independent in your thinking and progressive in your ideas. Perceptive and aware, you arrive at much of what you know through intuition. You always remain somewhat detached from others, but you are a keen observer of human nature.

You could gain financially from some official position in which you deal with very large groups of people.


Ascendant in Capricorn, Saturn in the Twelfth House

At the time of your birth the zodiacal sign of Capricorn was ascending in the horizon. Its ruler Saturn is located in the twelfth house.

The sign of Capricorn denotes an existence in which temperament is very important. You will give an image of ambition, persistence, will power, consistency and perseverance. You were born with the tendencies to seek material, social, and, perhaps, even political power.

Capricorn tends to a challenging life which forces you to exert all your resources in order to triumph. Because of your tact and prudence, you will be favored with the good will of important people.

Your mind is egocentric, rational and you have a natural tendency toward scepticism. Able to work hard, you will bear obstacles and frustrations with patience.

You will proceed with prudence in your love life and in all other activities. You will seriously consider all of the ramifications of a relationship, especially the aspects of your independence, and you will not commit yourself to a partner until you are sure of your choice. After that however there is a tendency to conduct a peaceful and quiet life.

You are very economical in your daily activities, and if you do not exert some control over this trait, it could appear as rather mean.

You are best placed in governmental, municipal, political, or large business organizations where hierarchy is very exactly defined. The key word for your professional orientation is responsibility.

This position indicates that your life is conducted in darkness and you are inclined to plan in the shelter of loneliness. You don't mind seclusion as long as you can think and express yourself freely.

You may be able to amass considerable amounts of money in a manner which is not acceptable to your acquaintances

************************************************************************

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 09:58 AM

And here's the 4th choice for Bagpuss! Will the REAL Bagpuss please stand up????

Sun in XXXX, Moon in Scorpio

These astrological positions indicate a clever and shrewd personality. You tend to be aggressive and are often downright blasphemous. When crossed you wreak revenge in full measure. You relish displaying your wit and knowledge and make a point of telling others of your various successes and victories. These shows of your achievement, however, are to your detriment because they earn you the ill will of others. You lean toward the darker sides of life, and your imagination can be morbid. You are fascinated by the mysterious, malignant forces in the universe. A nocturnal individual, your thoughts often turn to death, finalities, and the mysteries of life after death.

The key to a more harmonious self lies in developing optimism and recognizing the good that exists in the world.

Ascendant in Scorpio, Mars in the Eleventh House

At the time of your birth the zodiacal sign of Scorpio was ascending in the horizon. Its ruler Mars is located in the eleventh house.

Your life will be marked by your shrewd, secretive, obstinate, clever, and reserved disposition. You remain an enigma: with these traits, your life events could be either very tragic or very fortunate. To which category of Scorpio do you belong? There are two types, the extremely emotional, attracted by those pathological aspects of biological relationship, or the highly mystical, concerned with spirituality.

You are a person of extremes, very sensitive and desirous of attachment. There is some attraction to the occult or to psychic phenomena. You are active in the sense that there is a psychological struggle going on inside you between the positive and negative poles-those of affirming and satisfying or rejecting and repressing. You are very intense in your feelings and remain passionately attached to the person you love. Similarly, when you dislike someone you are very fixed in that feeling. However, there is room for optimism in that: whatever type of Scorpio you may happen to be, there exists a desire deep in your inner self for psychic regeneration.

At some point in your life, after the occurrence of a major dramatic event that will affect you deeply, the goal and entire expression of your ego may alter entirely. The intensity and profundity of your passion, however, will always be constant. You have a tendency to go into the shadows and secretly plan the course of action you will take, reluctant to let others know the exact nature of your mood or feelings. In your sexual affairs you are full of passion and strong attachment.

Exert more control over your passions; don't be so resentful of others. Use your strong will and character for favorable and beneficial things.

You have a strong inclination to be involved in medicine, perhaps even surgery. You are attracted by research and investigation in general.

This house signifies the most intimate and subtle aspirations of the native and is basically a house of friendships and acquaintances. People with their rulers here are individuals who, for better or worse, rise in life, supporting themselves by the assistance of friends. In any event, Mars is not an influence indicative of a person who has many friends.

It is likely that you are going to be struggling in life for the realization of your most intimate wishes. Many of these have to do with securing a substantial livelihood. If you can exert a good degree of control over your passions, you may fully succeed.

***********************************************************************

Now, will the real Bagpuss please stand up??   :-)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 12:48 PM

Thank you daylia. I shall have a thorough read and get back to you.

Bagpuss

PS. Why was the final one in bold? I hope it was just an error and not some attempt to unconsciously affect my choice.... ;-)

[fixed missing /b-mudelf]

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 02:53 PM

Thanks, mudelf, for fixing that tag. Bagpuss please be assured that mistake wasn't intentional - I was rushed this morning and didn't preview those posts. Sorry, and enjoy your 'research'!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 02:58 PM

PS   darn I wish I'd bolded ALL the headings for the second half of those reports (where it says Ascendant in XX, PlanetWhatever in XX) Please know that was just an oversight too, and not intended as any kind of "clue".

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bagpuss
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 04:17 PM

Okey Dokey.

Well I can honestly say that none of the profiles sounded particularly like me. None of them hit on any of what I consider to be key aspects of my personality. Some had some minor bits that could describe me, but equally some contained bits that were really unlike me. I won't bother mentioning bits that were neither like nor unlike me.

Profile 1: 3/10
The bits that fitted were about being friendly and sensitive and liking my comforts and empathising with others. Also the bit about me having an intellectual core. The bits about desire to rule, organise and hold keys to authority are nothing like me, ditto for the willpower bit.

Profile 2: 2/10
First section extemely unlike me, except perhaps the morbid imagination bit. Inclination to extremes, again unlike me. Love of nature is correct, but not extroverted, demonstrative etc.

Profile 3: 4/10
Organizational ability, definitely not. The only bit in the first section that rang true was keen observer of human nature (I studied psychology). Abition, persistence, willpower etc - totally wrong. Tendency towards scepticism, correct. Prudence in love life section fairly accurate, same with being economical in daily activities.

Profile 4: 3/10
First section same as for 2, so again, couldn't be more unlike me. Second section. Second section - Not an extremes sort of person, and not attracted to the occult or psychic phemomena particularly. Passionately attached to those I love, but conversely, NOT fixed in dislikes. Inclination towards medicine is correct, but definitely not surgery. Definitely attracted by research and investigation.

So I didn't feel any of them fitted me like a glove, but if forced to choose, number 3 was least unlike me.

Bring on the result...

Bagpuss

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 03 Mar 06 - 08:25 PM

Bagpuss, the birth data you gave above generated profile #4.

For #2, I made a minor adjustment to your data (date/time of birth became 10/10/1972 at 12 noon)

#1 is an old profile from my file (I chose the male closest to your age).

And #3 is a hypothetical person born Jan 1 1960 at 12 noon in Los Angeles California.


*egads*   


how morbidly disillusioning


;-)

But then again, I felt the same way you describe about the first natal chart I had drawn up. I'd used the "around 8am" birthtime given by my mother -- just as you gave the "around 9 am" time above. Some parts fit almost like a glove, others seemed to be describing someone else entirely. But a few years later I found my exact birthtime, and that 35 minute difference generated quite a different chart - one that did seem to be describing me reasonably well, most of the time.

And the 8 years elapsed between the two charts seemed to make a difference too. Certain descriptions I'd felt strongly were nothing like me back then made a lot more sense in hindsight. Of course! People change over the years, express different parts of their nature at different times in their lives; a natal chart, being a 'snapshot' of the heavens at the (hopefully exact) moment of birth, does not.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bagpuss
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 10:20 AM

But surely an hour either way would not change the first part of the chart, the the sun in Libra, Moon in Scorpio bit, would it? It didn't change that part for the one you altered slightly from my details. This was the part which was so completely unlike me. And I find it very unlikely that in the future I am going to become a person who is aggressive, blasphemous, vengeful and morbidly obsessed with death (I paraphrase).

So I think you might have to accept that my personality does not conform to that which is predicted by astrology.

Bagpuss

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Alice
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 10:43 AM

One of the flaws of astrology is that the zodiac signs and planet characteristics (female, male, warlike, peaceful, etc.) are completely arbitrary to the culture that invented them. In one culture a planet represents war, in another culture THE SAME planet represents peace. So, which zodiac or astrological belief is right.... the Mayan, the Chaldean, the different American Indian tribes who had differing beliefs about the stars, the Chinese, the many tribes and cultures that have come and gone over history that we don't even know about? Look back at the revival in Britain after World War I of the Chaldean zodiac and how it is now what we call "astrology".   The fact is, people project meaning onto symbols. Humans have a great capacity to imagine and find patterns to fit what they imagine.
Astrology is best understood by learning how it began.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 11:50 AM

The vital thing as far as I'm concerned in any system of divination is the individual doing it, not the method they use. They either have the ability to relax and put personality aside and tune in or they don't. I do not believe in the science of astrology particularly, but I do believe that some people can use it effectively as a tool to express their natural psychic abilities. The same thing can be done by reading a person's tea leaves or the lines on their palm...if you have the ability.

This is why astrological predictions from a computer or a newspaper column strike me as totally useless except for entertainment.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 12:11 PM

Too wordy...

"One of the flaws of astrology is that (it's) completely arbitrary"

Says it all...

Or

"astrological predictions (are) totally useless except for entertainment"

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 12:37 PM

Bagpuss, I gave those 4 reports no more than a quick glance before I posted them. Didn't read them through till last night in fact. I was surprised with the negativity of that kick-in-the-butt Sun/Moon description; almost regretted that I didn't PM the results instead of posting them here.   Who in their right mind would stand up here and declare "Oh yes folks, that sounds just exactly like me folks!!!"

It bugged me so much I snooped on you --- read through a few of your old posts here on Mudcat. And I must say, Bagpuss, I found nothing "downright blasphemous", absolutely no indication that you "relish displaying your wit and knowledge and make a point of telling others of your various successes and victories". I think if you did, it would be quite apparent here on the Cat!   Your posts give the impression of a respectful, well-spoken, well-mannered, good-hearted and knowledgable person - to me, anyway.

But surely an hour either way would not change the first part of the chart, the the sun in Libra, Moon in Scorpio bit, would it?

NO, it doesn't. That was the "clue" I knew I could not avoid when I posted the reports, so I just hoped it wouldn't occur to you.

You may be interested to know that the first section of my own report is the part I find least accurate as well. An Aries Sun implies aggression (which I'm not unless provoked beyond reason), and a Taurus Moon suggests a very "traditional", "conservative" person who's stuck in their ways and finds it difficult to change (.... uh ... NOT!!!)

But this is because while the computer instantly generates a very brief, general description of the person's sun and moon placements in the opening section, certain vitally important astrological "qualifiers" (ie house, aspect, dignity etc) are not addressed until subsequent sections of the report. And that's if they can be addressed at all, in those "short reports" offered free of charge (as a "first peek" for newbies) at Astrodienst. It's unfortunate, because these "qualifiers" are the very things HUMAN astrologers consider first, when analysing a chart. These variables make every natal chart as individual and unique as the people they attempt to describe.

THe second part of my report (re the Ascendant) is much more accurate. And it's very interesting, to me, that a career in medicine was mentioned in the second half of yours, Doctor.

(You are Dr. Bagpuss, right?)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 12:43 PM

" it's very interesting, to me, that a career in medicine was mentioned in the second half of yours"

You blather long enough, and something is BOUND to be close...

Again... no more than random chance....

Or as my grandfather was fond of saying, "The sun shines on every dogs ass sometimes...."

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 01:15 PM

Alice, I am just as skeptical of articles by "skeptics" as I am of articles by "psychics".

Prejudice, bias, slant, and partial (if not total) ignorance of the subject at hand are so common in such articles, they are best taken with a grain ... better yet, a mountain .... of salt.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: *daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 02:40 PM

"Astrology is a science in itself and contains an illuminating body of knowledge. It taught me many things, and I am greatly indebted to it. Geophysical evidence reveals the power of the stars and the planets in relation to the terrestrial. In turn, astrology reinforces this power to some extent. This is why astrology is like a life-giving elixir to mankind."

- ALBERT EINSTEIN


"Synchronicity does not admit causality in the analogy between terrestrial events and astrological constellations ... What astrology can establish are the analogous events, but not that either series is the cause or the effect of the other. (For instance, the same constellation may at one time signify a catastrophe and at another time, in the same case, a cold in the head.) ... In any case, astrology occupies a unique and special position among the intuitive methods... I have observed many cases where a well-defined psychological phase, or an analogous event, was accompanied by a transit (particularly when Saturn and Uranus were affected)."

- CARL G. JUNG (click here for more of Jung's views on astrology)

LH, Jung's observation re the effects of planetary transits on human psychological states and behavior (ie events) illustrate one of many differences between the subject of astrology and, say, palm-reading or using a pendulum.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 04:40 PM

Those are interesting quotes, daylia. Einstein was always saying things that would bother the hell out of materialistic types if they knew he'd said it.

Well, I think the planets can reveal much, but not because they are the cause of events...because they are part of the one interconnected reality: like in a hologram. What is here is also there, showing itself in a different outer form.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 05:19 PM

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 04 Mar 06 - 05:28 PM

Oops sorry -- that post didn't "take" for some odd reason.

LH, that's very true. And my last sentence should have read "...the relationship between planetary alignments and human psychological states and behaviour (ie events) ..."   and not   "... the effect of planetary alignments on human psychological states ..."

*sigh*    old mental habits can be real tough nuts to crack    :-)

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: Bagpuss
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 05:36 AM

Actually, no I am not a doctor. I just have an interest in health and illness. I have a psychology degree and most of my research work has been in health (mainly mental health) related fields. So yes, it did manage to get something right, but then so did the other three.

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 08:14 AM

Well, Bagpuss, are you sure it's 'scientifically wise' to make a final judgement about the vast and ancient art (or as Einstien says, 'science') of astrology based only on your first impressions of the first few sentences of a computer-generated "trial" natal report, even knowing that it was generated with an inaccurate birthtime?

I'm not!

You considered only a fraction of the info in that short report. I posted only the first 2 of about 8 sections here, to save bandwidth. You could order your complete report, interpreted by the highly respected human astrologers at that site. Don't worry - it's only about 60 pages long. ;-)

I do happen to have your entire short report on file now, right here. You can click on any of your planets, houses, aspects, angles etc on your chart for a detailed description of each factor, and in so doing uncover some interesting food for thought about yourself and your life, PLUS get yourself an excellent introduction to the field of astrology, free of charge.

I hope you don't mind, but I couldn't resist going over your chart last night -- very interesting! I'm certainly no expert (astrology is just a hobby to me) but the first thing I noticed was WOW, in the sign of Libra, you have a stellium (three or more planets) - your Sun, Uranus, and Mercury in the 12th House, PLUS Pluto and Mars in the 11th. This combined influence (all in Libra, an Air sign governing the intellect and usually much concerned with working toward social 'balance', peace and fairness) is so strong it governs your whole chart.

A stellium usually indicates tremendous strength of character, great powers of focus and drive in the given area of life. Does this sound like you?

Your chart has an obvious "Bucket" configuration -- 9 planets filling one-half of the horoscope circle and the remaining planet (in your case, Saturn) on the opposite half, forming the 'handle' of the 'bucket'.

'Bucket' people are said to be driven toward their goals with much energy, and the Singleton planet (Saturn) can indicate the goal of direction that a Bucket type pursues. Saturn is a 'heavy' planet, traditionally considered a "malefic" (difficult influence). Saturn's placement is said to indicate the individual's karma, limitations, responsibilities, burdens. In your case it's in the 8th house. Saturn actually "rules" the 8th House - it's Scorpio's house (and your Moon is in Scorpio), the house of passion, death, 'rebirth' (ie total transformation).

To me, all this adds up to what you called a tendency to be morbid, toward pessimism and perhaps even depression, plus a strong interest in /association with death. Does this sound like you?

And here's two short excerpts from your "short report" to consider as well, if you like. I know I enjoyed considering them, after reading some of your old posts!

Mercury in the Twelfth House (Incidentally, I have this placement too, and I also have a degree in Psychology)

Mercury was in the twelfth house at the time of birth. Psychologically you are continually trying to analyze others in order to find their motivation. A natural human researcher, you spend time projecting your interests and in faultfinding. It may be very desirable to reverse these tendencies and turn your mind's eye on your inner self. There are many good things about your mind; it is alert and subtle. It is very intellectual really, but you do have some talent for understanding the exotic. There is not much place in the world for your practical and efficient knowledge. This can lead you to anxiety, worry, self- depreciation, and an intense absence of self esteem. Feel more, think less, work harder."

Moon in the First House

The Moon is in the first house. This position indicates that you are strongly influenced by your feelings and moods.

Your awareness of yourself is influenced by your momentary feelings, and this perception is subject to rapid changes of mood and emotion. In time, you will learn to understand why you react as you do to various situations, and then you can begin to change your response patterns and take more control of your life.

Others sense your lack of emotional self-sufficiency and tend to get involved in your personal affairs, even if you try to prevent it. You express your sensitivity through an emotional need to nurture and be nurtured by others. While you would like to have guidance and supervision concerning your goals and objectives, it would be better to achieve your aims independently so that you will not feel obligated to others.

The advantage of this position lies in your ability to sense other people's needs and desires.

In fact, you have a calming effect on people who are under stress, and this makes you ideally suited for working with the public."

I'd vouch for that last claim, just from hobnobbing with you here on the Cat. Remember that thread about gay marriage? I do! Your calming, level-headed fair-mindedness was quite apparent as you took me on for days on end a couple summers ago!

daylia

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 08:47 AM

PS   Sorry that last post is so long. I'm really not trying to convince you of anything even if it appears otherwise, Bagpuss. You are most welcome to your own opinions and judgements - they has nothing to do with me, or even with astrology (I say this not out of disrespect but because you know so little about it).

I can and often do get carried away studying astrology though, for days on end even -- it's a fascinating and seemingly infinite source of information, insight, and discovery. To me. (not to mention a great way to snoop on people too ;-)

And all of this has nothing to do with you Bagpuss, except that you've given me new astrological "data" to observe and explore. So, thanks!

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 09:09 AM

PPS -- Bagpuss, if you don't mind me asking and just out of curiousity, are you married? Or do you have a "significant other"? And if so, is she (or he) a Taurus? (born April 20-May 20).

Subject: RE: BS: zodiac/star signs.. do you believe?
From: GUEST,*daylia*
Date: 05 Mar 06 - 09:10 AM

K this is really immature but .... 200!   YIPPEEEE!!!!