Astrology, just curious...

[Thor]

So back in EUFA 2008, the European Soccer (Football) tourney, they were panning on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_de_Villepin

As when they pan on celebs in the stand, they often tell us a story, but this time we even got a few min quick little story done by a reporter. To my amazement, it was about how Mr Villepin was a very big proponent of Astrology and one of Frances most famous Astrologers was on his speed dial.

Not only that, in this fluff piece, they interviewed the lady astrologer who proudly told a story where she felt a meeting was not in his best interest on a certain day due to the alignment of the stars, and that he should delay it by a week. He followed her advice.

So this is my question, I know everyone loves to laugh about what sign they are, if they are like me 'a scorpion' and behave like they claim we behave.. Or if they go further and believe that Astrology is accurate and something we 'should' believe in..

So my question really is this, IF you had a politician that publicly claimed belief in Astrology, and one who didn't would you vote for the person who believes in a belief that holds absolutely no serious data to back up any of its claims?

Because I've read that as much as 40-60% of some nations believe in Astrology, and that is the most astonishing thing of all to me.

I mean its not Bigfoot, but we have elected politicians in France weekly talking to an Astrologer who can help them on decisions?!?

[REDVAN]

I don't know if I believe in astrology per se, because both my brother and I are the same sign. For my brother, he holds few traits of our sign, and of any others (Chinese zodiac etc) but for me, I fit very well with my stereotype.

I realize descriptions are vague for them, but they are fun. Not sure I'd trust someone who truly believed in them though.

[The Fonz]

I don't believe in zodiac signs or whatever they're called. I mean really, you can read the description for any sign and you'll always find traits that describe yourself, they're very general descriptions.

[AC]

The fact that people legitimately believe in astrology is insane. Especially given that:

"Because of the precession of the equinoxes, the equinox and solstice points have each moved westward about 30 degrees in the last 2,000 years. Thus, the zodiacal constellations named in ancient times no longer correspond to the segments of the zodiac represented by their signs.

In short, had you been born at the same time on the same day of the year 2,000 years ago, you would have been born under a different sign."

[Vulcan]

Nancy Reagan was into spiritualism and astrology and supposedly controlled Ronny's schedule using her astrologer. Scary stuff in my opinion but if we new the true motives of some of these politicians, maybe things could be worse than following astrology.

IIRC, Mackenzie King was into seances trying to communicate with his dead mother, yet he did a pretty good job.

[RougeUnderoos]

I think the Ronald and Nancy Reagan were into astrology.

As to the question about voting for someone who buys into it, I probably wouldn't. I don't think it is different than any of the more mainstream superstitions though, so maybe I would, depending on the choices offered.

[evman150]

Sure believing in astrology is indicative of lack of intelligence, but so is believing in "God", buying scratch and wins, using incorrect apostrophes (logo's) and wearing "lucky" underwear.

Also, reminded by the other thread, crop circles belongs in the group.

They are all things that feast on the poor, unintelligent, uneducated, and disenfranchised portions of society and the world.

Would I want a leader who believed in any of it? No. But this isn't a perfect world, and it isn't often that the right person for the job actually becomes a politician.

[troutman]

http://www.skepdic.com/astrolgy.html

There are many satisfied customers who believe that their horoscope accurately describes them and that their astrologer has given them good advice. Such evidence does not prove astrology so much as it demonstrates the Forer effect, and confirmation bias. Good astrologers give good advice, but that does not validate astrology. There have been several studies that have shown that people will use selective thinking to make any chart they are given fit their preconceived notions about themselves and their charts. Many of the claims made about signs and personalities are vague and would fit many people under many different signs. Even professional astrologers, most of whom have nothing but disdain for sun sign astrology, can’t pick out a correct horoscope reading at better than a chance rate.

Ivan Kelly, who has written many articles critical of astrology, thinks that astrology

has no relevance to understanding ourselves, or our place in the cosmos. Modern advocates of astrology cannot account for the underlying basis of astrological associations with terrestrial affairs, have no plausible explanation for its claims, and have not contributed anything of cognitive value to any field of the social sciences.

[Russic]

Whenever my mother-in law sees a bahaviour that is in line with a zodiac sign she proudly proclaims "well, that must be the *insert sign here* in you!". Whenever the behaviour doesn't match she just neglects it. Drives me insane.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Nancy Reagan was into spiritualism and astrology and supposedly controlled Ronny's schedule using her astrologer. Scary stuff in my opinion but if we new the true motives of some of these politicians, maybe things could be worse than following astrology.

IIRC, Mackenzie King was into seances trying to communicate with his dead mother, yet he did a pretty good job.

I remember hearing that about Nancy, I guess my concern is/has been that anyone in power using such people for advice on decisions that affect the voters is at best harmless but at its worst dangerous if that 'astrologer' has bad motives to push a certain agenda.

I guess for me its just scary to hear leaders of the west believing in such nonsense, its carries into other parts of their lives I'm sure so I question their rational, critical thinking which a leader should have in spades.

[missdpuck]

Fotze was born Under a Bad Sign..........blahblahblahblah

[Cawz]

The only part of astrology that has any merit is the fact that astrology is based on a cyclical pattern.

There was a move "Pi" that was sort about the same theory that everything in nature can be explained through numbers, and all the numbers will produce a pattern.

Since we are all part of nature, we are also part of these patterns, and it's not all that crazy to think that these patterns affect us.

Biorhythms, astrology (I'm a Sagittarius), Chinese calander (I'm an ox) are all based on patterns affecting us, who we are and how we feel. People who claim to be able to read these things are probably flakes, but there is some merit to the "science".

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Cawz

Biorhythms, astrology (I'm a Sagittarius), Chinese calander (I'm an ox) are all based on patterns affecting us, who we are and how we feel. People who claim to be able to read these things are probably flakes, but there is some merit to the "science".

Show us the merit.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by evman150

Sure believing in astrology is indicative of lack of intelligence, but so is believing in "God....

Gee, man, why'd you have to go and say that?

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

Gee, man, why'd you have to go and say that?

Because he's so smart, he has to rub in in that he believes in nothing. Which IMO, causes me to recall the saying that he who believes in nothing, will fall for anything.

[MissTeeks]

So I should stop reading my Cosmo Bedside Astrologer every year? Damn.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Because he's so smart, he has to rub in in that he believes in nothing. Which IMO, causes me to recall the saying that he who believes in nothing, will fall for anything.

LOL! Burn. He's holier than thou, and he makes sure you know it.

[Cawz]

Originally Posted by troutman

Show us the merit.

The merit is that everything in nature is based around a pattern or cycle. From the universe down to the atoms.

Man has been attempting to understand and read these cycles for many ages. Go take a look at how many branches of astrology these are and have been through history. Do you think that all of them are 100% absolutely baseless?

I dont neccisarily agree that the reading has any merit (we arent bright enough to figure that out yet), but man has known that patterns and cycles in nature affect and are dependant on each-other, and one shouldnt totally disregard it.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by evman150

Sure believing in astrology is indicative of lack of intelligence, but so is believing in "God", buying scratch and wins, using incorrect apostrophes (logo's) and wearing "lucky" underwear.

Also, reminded by the other thread, crop circles belongs in the group.

They are all things that feast on the poor, unintelligent, uneducated, and disenfranchised portions of society and the world.

Would I want a leader who believed in any of it? No. But this isn't a perfect world, and it isn't often that the right person for the job actually becomes a politician.

Considering that astronomy is an offshoot of Astrology, I find your comments interesting.

[FlamesAddiction]

I actually do think that some astrology has merit.... hear me out:

As we all know, the environmental conditioning of children and even infants, can affect their development greatly. Children born in certain months and seasons would have different environmental factors influencing their development. For example, a child born in spring and early summer in Europe would be less likely to be born during a famine. Such a child might have a huge advantage in their cognitive development over autumn and winter babies, as malnurishment slows cognitive development. This could be the origin of how ancient people thought that being born under certain constellations might be more "lucky" or "fortunate". They might simply have been better equipped mentally.

Also, infants and young children with less hardship would obviously develop different personality traits than children who had to endure hardships, or whose parents might have had to spend less time coddling them because they were dealing with rougher seasonal conditions. For example; people whose astrological sign predicted them to be "emotional" might have had experiences related to the season they were born that made them develop such a personality. A winter baby might be held more and develop a more nurishing personality. A summer baby might be left alone more and might become more independent, but maybe more wreckless and intaverted.

I think nowadays, this is probably moot as we control our environment much better now, but back 300 years and earlier, I can see how people born during certain months might be mentally, psychologically, and even physically different and how that could easily given them different "paths".