# Astrology & Bigotry



## silhouesque (Aug 29, 2012)

I know astrology is very popular so there are going to be people displeased with what I'm going to say next: I think astrology is a kind of bigotry. Does anyone else think so?

Quite a few times I have heard astrology fans compare astrology to psychology and systems like Myers-Briggs typology. They claim that astrology is just another system to understand people. But that, to me, is a flawed comparison. In Myers-Briggs or any personality typology, people are typed according to their real personality traits as understood by themselves and observed by others, whereas in astrology people are typed according to their birthdate. In astrology, personality traits are assigned to each of the 12 signs and you are assumed to have the characteristic of your sign (or birth chart) -- no matter what. Whereas psychological type systems like Myers-Briggs look first at the real person in order to identify the type that best fit that person, astrology goes the other way around and tries to fit that person to his/her zodiac type just because s/he happened to be born during a particular time of year that is associated with a particular zodiac sign. In astrology, no one asks: "Based on my personality traits and tendencies, what zodiac sign am I?". No one tries to find out their true zodiac sign by reading about the 12 signs to see which one fits best or by taking a test that identifies their personality traits in order to match it to a sign. (I bet if that was done - a lot of people would fit a sign other than the one they were actually born under.) Instead astrology simply states: "Based on your zodiac sign, you therefore have xyz personality traits and tendencies."

Now, if there is indeed a lot of evidence to show that people really do exhibit the traits of their sign, then the astrology approach wouldn't be so bad. The problem is that plenty of people don't fit their sign or birth chart. For every person who says their sign fits them, there's going to be another person who says that it doesn't. Anecdotally, I've found that few people in my life really fit their sign in a significant way (and when I say their "sign", I don't just mean their sun sign; I mean the moon, rising, and other planetary signs and even the entire birth chart). Those who "fit" only kind of loosely fit, and there are some who totally do not fit. On a wider, non-anecdotal level, there have been many scientific tests done to find out whether astrology works -- and the evidence shows that it doesn't. Now, I know a lot of astrology fans accuse scientists of mistaking sun sign horoscopes for astrology and therefore their arguments against sun signs are flawed. But the truth is that quite a few scientists understand astrology pretty well and know that there's a lot more to astrology than sun signs. At least one of the scientists that I know about who speaks against astrology was actually himself a former astrologer. The scientific tests done on astrology have been done not only on sun signs but also on the entire birth chart. Astrology (and astrologers) had failed virtually all of those tests. There was even a test done on a group of time twins - people who were born within minutes of each other (and would therefore have extremely similar birth charts). Scientists tracked these time twins for decades in order to find out if they have similar personality traits and life events. The results were negative.

And yet the beliefs about the zodiac sign stereotypes still persists and are probably unlikely to die anytime soon. People are judged by their sign -- something they have no control over (because they cannot control when they were born) and something that is not even real (as shown by scientific tests and my own humble personal observations of 25 years). And anyone who has hung out at astrology discussions and forums online will easily notice that sign bashing is rampant. For example, too often I see comments like: "I've never met a Gemini I liked - they're ALL childish and constant liars", or "I can't stand Aries people - they're such loudmouthed pain-in-the-asses and they're selfish to the core", or "He's so heartless and controlling - he must be a Capricorn". And about 90% of the time the accusations made about a sign fits the traditional stereotype for that sign (e.g. I rarely see Aries people being accused of oversensitivity -- because being overly sensitive does not fit the stereotype of an Aries; instead, Aries people only ever seem to be accused of insensitive, selfish, overly forceful and aggressive and similar jerk behaviour.). That leads me to strongly suspect that the people making such accusations are falling into the trap of confirmation bias. After all, how is it possible that ALL Geminis that they've ever met are liars? With confirmation bias, people see what they already believe and ignore/forget what doesn't fit their astrological beliefs, and their astrological prejudices about each sign influences their interpretation of people's behaviour. For example: If a Gemini throws a tantrum, it'll be interpreted as the Gemini being childish (because childishness is often part of the stereotype for Gemini), but if a Cancer throws a tantrum, it'll be interpreted as the Cancer being overly sensitive (because deep sensitivity is part of the stereotype for Cancer and Water signs). 

It's bad enough if these stereotypes are based on something real -- bigotry is never good. But it's even worse that all of this bigotry is happening in the astrology world when it isn't even based on anything real. There are Geminis who are very honest person (I personally know some!) or Aries who are sensitive (I know such Aries people too), and kind and altruistic Capricorns (as luck would have it, the kindest and most warmhearted person I know happens to be Capricorn). If they read such accusations over and over again about their signs, they might feel at least somewhat hurt. And if they're quite young (a huge percentage of people interested in astrology are children and teenagers), such comments could negatively affect their self-esteem.

Before any astrology fan accuses me of misunderstanding astrology or not knowing enough about it to judge its effectiveness, I would like to mention that I know quite a lot about astrology and have been reading and thinking about it for at least 25 years. And I have come to the conclusion that, even if astrology is real and works (which I'm really beginning to doubt), it does more harm than good.


----------



## Tharwen (Mar 20, 2013)

i think belief has more power than any other concept.

misdirect that, and you get.. uh, the reality.

hah.. xD

i mean, look at the friday 13.

man, curses are real. and mostly made by people unaware of magic.
not funny.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

I had been self-studying upon the astrology topic for a few years. Nowadays, I rarely go to Astrology sites. 
By the way, I am Aries with the moon sign in Sagittarius, rising sign in Aries and my Mercury sign in Pisces. Since my Mercury sign ( communication style and mentality) is rather Pisces-liked, it has got me thinking that my way of presenting myself is similar to either *Introverted Feeling* or *Introverted Intuition*. The thing about Mercury in Pisces is that the communication style is rather moody, formal and somewhat abstract. Within the chart there are also Mars and Jupiter in Gemini. Here is an excerpt of what they mean:

Mars in Gemini can be unfocused. They easily get bored, so they need a frequent change of pace. When they are bored, they feel exhausted. If they are interested, on the other hand, there is no stopping them! *They have a passion for words, and are quite adept at using them as a weapon. They are good debaters, and love to argue.* They thrive in busy, energetic environments where everything is in a constant state of flux.

_Mars in Gemini can be *restless* due to their overabundance of energy. They are *adaptable, and love change.* They may take on a great many projects at the same time. They are *good with their hands, and may play a musical instrument, play video games or make things. If they can focus, they can accomplish many things.* Mars in Gemini has a *satirical wit, and sarcasm is a talent.* _

_upiter in Gemini is *intellectually adventurous. They love to learn, and are generally open minded. They have the ability to see all sides to an argument*, which can also be lucky for them in the end. They can remain neutral. They thrive in fast-paced, ever-changing environments. Their ability to absorb so much information helps them form their own good fortune, as the information could come in handy at any moment. They want to broadcast their ideas to the world, so they are perfect for careers in writing, music, performing, teaching or taking care of children. *Ideas are their stock in trade.*_

Those that are outlined in RED are not absolutely accurate. I may have to agree with you that there are some discrepancies within the Astrological universe, but so does MBTI. So does everything else. One shortcoming is generalization.. People have the tendency to assume.


----------



## stiletto (Oct 26, 2013)

I agree. Until I see scientific theories and evidence suggesting that astrology somehow affects magnetic fields which somehow alter your genetic disposition towards a specific personality trait, I don't think astrology has much ground to stand on.

However, that is not to say that it's not fun. I do my own tarot and horoscope readings. But I understand it's the way I interpret the results that guide my actions into fruition, not fate for fore-sight. 

There is no logical conclusion that can be drawn to say that astrology has similar merits and validity as MBTI. Even though MBTI isn't acknowledged as something the psychology field would take seriously, I still trust it's theories more than that of astrology.


----------



## HoldenCawffled (Feb 25, 2015)

Astrology is bullshit. That's it.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

The only thing I don't believe about Astrology is the prediction of future events that people generally read on the newspaper. How would one define what a good day is for me is beyond my comprehension.


----------



## Misaki (Feb 1, 2015)

Astrology is clearly complete nonsense. It's not in any way comparable to psychology. The validity of the MBTI is subject to dispute, but at least studies implementing it still follow the scientific method, which allows us to look for trends relating to the relationship between certain preferences and other things.


----------



## Stribog (Jul 13, 2012)

Personally, I find that there are weird little coincidences in every natal chart, especially when you find the strongest planets and analyze their degrees. How this is so - no one knows. Obviously. However, I see people take these things to the extreme, identifying themselves through signs, instead of their current real-world self because the sign sounds better than the actual person. Like this chick:














And so I agree that it is dangerous, though perhaps only for weak-minded people. Like I said, personally, there are trippy revelations, and if I consider what I read - just give it a chance before I write it off - I find that it often times _is_ true, but just buried. Merely opinion, but thought I should mention it.


----------



## Misaki (Feb 1, 2015)

Nosmirc said:


> Personally, I find that there are weird little coincidences in every natal chart, especially when you find the strongest planets and analyze their degrees. How this is so - no one knows. Obviously. However, I see people take these things to the extreme, identifying themselves through signs, instead of their current real-world self because the sign sounds better than the actual person. Like this chick:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I think this is often due to the way the human brain looks for patterns in stuff. Ideas like astrology take advantage of this through things like the Forer effect, keeping the subject sufficiently vague and generalizable so as to give the impression of prophecy or some such nonsense.

I feel this is the broader problem that afflicts many matters of religion, spirituality, and pseudoscience, where certain notions or experiences actually do in many cases have some validity to them, but we fail utterly in explaining them. This is unfortunate, because many people, in (rightly) dismissing the explanation dismiss the experience or whatever as well. I'm not saying that these experiences are always valid; after all, people can lie or be completely delusional. But clearly this isn't always the case.

When it comes to astrology though, clearly the explanation on offer is not even close to on the mark. If there are truths to be known about human personality, we are on firm ground not looking to celestial objects for them. This doesn't map on at all to what psychology and neuroscience have to say on the subject.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

I wonder if "pattern-seeking" is still relevant to human survival instinct in the 21st Century? Maybe the format has evolved. Maybe not. From what I know, superstition is the result of years of being aware of such patterns.


----------



## Misaki (Feb 1, 2015)

LuvGen said:


> I wonder if "pattern-seeking" is still relevant to human survival instinct in the 21st Century? Maybe the format has evolved. Maybe not. From what I know, superstition is the result of years of being aware of such patterns.


Always interesting to consider such things with evolutionary pressure removed from the equation in many important ways. Clearly it can do wonders for human creativity and stuff. I agree with you entirely about the connection between pattern-seeking and superstition. I think it was Michael Shermer that I once saw giving a talk about that. Unfortunately, looking for trends is an ability often wasted when what one gathers is not then subjected to rational skepticism.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

In our everyday world, we expect effects to have causes, but that's not always the case. With the urge to link cause and effects in everyday life remaining as strong as ever, the result is superstition. For example, a student who will only sit for an exam with his lucky pen. My guess is that many people regard superstitions as an insurance policy. :laughing:


----------



## Misaki (Feb 1, 2015)

LuvGen said:


> In our everyday world, we expect effects to have causes, but that's not always the case. With the urge to link cause and effects in everyday life remaining as strong as ever, the result is superstition. For example, a student who will only sit for an exam with his lucky pen. My guess is that many people regard superstitions as an insurance policy. :laughing:


Haha, it can be quite like an insurance policy, yeah. The shame is the damage these superstitions can do. Like, unless it's operating as a placebo somehow, sorry, but that pen isn't boosting your competence on the exam, and who knows how many people have forsaken studying time in favour of reliance on a lucky item or something. A more extreme example would be something like religious war.

Regarding cause and effect, unless we're talking quantum mechanics, we do live in a deterministic universe. There are chains of cause and effect operating, it's just that we oftentimes fail to interpret them correctly, and once superstitions become widely accepted enough, they can obstruct further inquiry as to what's truly going on. This is why I think it really ought to be challenged in all its forms.


----------



## VioletTru (Jun 24, 2012)

Interesting. At the same time, I think that astrology can be used for good, like as a starting template for planning and meeting personal goals, motivation, increasing connectivity with others, creative inspiration, developing self-confidence, etc. Shouldn't be taken literally, though, because when it all comes down to it people tend to believe what they want to believe, so every little similarity that they find amongst the charts will cause them to go "Aha!" regardless of overall validity.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

VioletTru said:


> Interesting. At the same time, I think that astrology can be used for good, like as a starting template for planning and meeting personal goals, motivation, increasing connectivity with others, creative inspiration, developing self-confidence, etc. Shouldn't be taken literally, though, because when it all comes down to it people tend to believe what they want to believe, so every little similarity that they find amongst the charts will cause them to go "Aha!" regardless of overall validity.


Astrology can be used as a form of philosophy or concept for creative inspiration.. Sometimes people use it as symbolism for their artworks. Sometimes people would make use of it as a piece of literature the same way as people would read Shakespeare's novels.


----------



## Misaki (Feb 1, 2015)

VioletTru said:


> Interesting. At the same time, I think that astrology can be used for good, like as a starting template for planning and meeting personal goals, motivation, increasing connectivity with others, creative inspiration, developing self-confidence, etc. Shouldn't be taken literally, though, because when it all comes down to it people tend to believe what they want to believe, so every little similarity that they find amongst the charts will cause them to go "Aha!" regardless of overall validity.


I can see where you're coming from on the positive role it can play. The same is often said of religion and spirituality. Of course, I'm not saying that I don't think people should be allowed to believe in any of that stuff, but that these ideas must also stand to scrutiny if subjected to it. It's critical inquiry that should be encouraged in all areas of our lives. 

But say somebody is walking into a bookstore, just as an example, looking to accomplish something along the lines of what you've described. I cringe at the idea of them heading to the section selling horoscopes over, say, the psychology aisle. Obviously personality isn't a topic that science has completely solved - far from it - but there's no doubt you'd be on a far better track. There are just better and worse ways to go about things, and being guided by reality definitely falls under the former. I also worry when I (and I have, in real life) see people making relationship decisions or something based off of their horoscope. The idea of a world leader following theirs is another rather scary one.

If astrology can have that impact on somebody without being true, why not cut it out and replace it with something that is? Clearly individuals are capable of generating these effects through other means, without depending on the false consolation of where things in the sky are positioned, so why not try to actually understand what's really going on in the meantime? If it's purely inspirative or something, and not taken for fact, I guess that's different. I just feel rather dismayed when people feel the compulsion to attribute their own accomplishments to fables.

Fun fact: did you know more than half of Americans think astrology is not merely a creative tool, but science? That's what really needs to be dispelled.


----------



## Notus Asphodelus (Jan 20, 2015)

People still view it as a way of coping with the anxieties of life. There's a book I've read somewhere which quotes:


> "If magic is to be defined as the employment of ineffective techniques to allay anxiety when effective ones are not available, then we must recognize that no society will ever be free from it."


----------



## Misaki (Feb 1, 2015)

LuvGen said:


> People still view it as a way of coping with the anxieties of life. There's a book I've read somewhere which quotes:


No doubt, but that kind of faith is very much a double-edged sword, and one I think we could do without for more reasons than I've put forth here. One thing though: in a lot of the world, not just effective techniques but reasonable ones are readily available. And for those to whom such is not the case, or who are perhaps simply unaware, not calling a spade a spade when it comes to the validity of astrology isn't going to open people up to them.

In terms of objectives, we actually don't seem to differ; it's the means, not the end, that I'm critical of. I might leave a quote of my own on this point:

"We must find ways of meeting our emotional needs that do not require the abject embrace of the preposterous." -Sam Harris


----------



## VioletTru (Jun 24, 2012)

Shouta Misaki said:


> I can see where you're coming from on the positive role it can play. The same is often said of religion and spirituality. Of course, I'm not saying that I don't think people should be allowed to believe in any of that stuff, but that these ideas must also stand to scrutiny if subjected to it. It's critical inquiry that should be encouraged in all areas of our lives.
> 
> But say somebody is walking into a bookstore, just as an example, looking to accomplish something along the lines of what you've described. I cringe at the idea of them heading to the section selling horoscopes over, say, the psychology aisle. Obviously personality isn't a topic that science has completely solved - far from it - but there's no doubt you'd be on a far better track. There are just better and worse ways to go about things, and being guided by reality definitely falls under the former. I also worry when I (and I have, in real life) see people making relationship decisions or something based off of their horoscope. The idea of a world leader following theirs is another rather scary one.
> 
> ...


Eh, I'd hope that the majority of people _aren't _placing their life's issues in the hands of "fate"-related stuff, a.k.a. not truly owning up to how their circumstances came about and finding more tangible ways to solve them. That's scary how that many people place astrology on the same level as science --"pseudoscience" perhaps? Nothing more than pop culture you read in magazines, useful only for motivation (without placing expectations on results/taking it literally) or creative thought.


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

I don't take anyone who believes in astrology seriously.


----------

