The voters have decided that Some-Noname-idk is right!
Vote on the post to say if you agree or disagree.
Related Posts
Also by Some-Noname-idk
+144They never talk about what Dragon turns into after Donkey drinks the potion in Shrek 2.. amirite? Also by Some-Noname-idk
+161Humanity would have achieved everything if we didn't had fall damage. amirite? Also by Some-Noname-idk
+4Jimi Hendrix suffered Tab Overload decades before Chrome was invented, amirite?
Also about Money & Economics
+128What other people think of you matters a lot, what you think of yourself is unimportant. amirite?
No that's OK. I AM going to immediately dismiss it out of hand. There is no correlation whatsoever between when you were born and where all the planets were on that day.
As someone with a degree in psychology and biology and am currently in my grad program for behavior analysis, I can tell you that astrology is 100% a pseudoscience. Nothing you can say will change that. And I'm not quick to dismiss it either. I've studding astrology, religion, and cults extensively in my undergrad. Astrology is just something to do for fun. It has no effect on you.
But during your degrees, haven't you come across the studies examining differences between birth months? That's what I'm getting at, not the stars or anything. I'm saying that the reasoning is false, but the ability to predict the likelihood of certain characteristics based on birth month might not be.
The only time I have spent studying astrology is dissecting how any article written about it is incorrect. You have to remember a study and an article are 2 VERY different things. And if it's not peer reviewed it's trash.
Zodiac sign is literally no different than "psychics" and they simply choose common things that 90% of people can relate to.
"Oh, you're Sagittarius? That means that your cheerful, and tend to overthink things. You might suffer from anxiety issues."
Great, so does everyone else. But I'm going to pretend that these generic things are specific to me and not anyone else lol
As I have said, we all know about the Barnum effect. Yet, each zodiac sign is associated with a few defining characteristics that are not that general. E.g. Leos are said to be very outgoing, which is definitely not a generic trait holding true for everyone.
Being outgoing is just being extroverted and that is a personality trait for 50% of people.
Half of these traits are common and the other half aren't. I'm a Virgo, and half of these personalities that are magically assigned to me aren't even true lol. As a Virgo, I'm meant to be confident, a perfectionist, organized, and have a good memory. None of which apply to me. And I'm sure that applies to everyone.
Another one of these traits is that I tend to be stressed, but who does that NOT apply to lol. Basically everyone gets stressed.
Being born at a certain time doesn't magically determine your personality. It's not that black and white. It's BS that gullible people fall into because they just want to believe in something. Usually the super rare ones that fit every trait perfectly just by pure luck
Hello fellow virgo, as a shy, disorganized scatterbrain i dont think horoscopes can tell anything about person
Omg you're such a Libra ⚖️♎
Lmao now here is an unpopular opinion. It's also baseless. Please show me where any of the things you mentioned has been borne out through peer reviewed study.
Any studies focus on climate, healthcare, and education may show differences between what months are healthier, more successful etc, but it's not because of the stars.
Zodiac people also claim a LOT more crazy crap than you're just saying here.
No part of horoscopes hold up.
Scientific consensus has pretty much labeled astrology as a pseudoscience.
Disagreeing with the consensus is like saying the earth is flat or vaccines don't work.
You're misunderstanding my point entirely
What? That I'm too quick to dismiss the validity of zodiac signs? Why shouldn't I dismiss when the majority of scientists agree that it is bogus?
As I said before, considering the validity of astrology and zodiac signs is like considering the validity of flat earth. They can be fun to learn about, don't get me wrong, but it's essentially fiction at this point.
I'm willing to entertain the idea that the gravitational effects of the other planets as they move around us can have some effect on our planet, like the moon but much much smaller in scale. I am not willing to entertain the idea that zodiac sign personalities have anything to do with science or reality.
It's so attenuated that it's meaningless.
People who WANT to believe in zodiac signs will look for ways to put people into those categories. It's a very lazy way to make some sense of humanity.
Classic Sagittarius.
Ironically, I feel like Sagittariuses are less likely to buy into horoscopes and zodiac sign stuff
I dismiss zodiac signs because it makes no difference in my life
I've always believed the concept that if there's a large amount of people who genuinely believe in something, there has to be some truth to it. Maybe not much, but there has to be something (I'm talking more about religions not like racism)
Thats literally text book fallacy
Hold on let me google something
Ah it was an insult. Thanks for expanding vocab though
thats not an insult
Yes! I completely forgot to mention that it is a somewhat self-fulfilling prophecy as well, thank you!
Correlation is not causation. Someone please make this line into a motto
It doesn't even align with birth month, either, though.
And what about people born at the end of the month or on the cusp of a different sign? How is that affected by leap year and the whole relevance to birth month?
I'm not buying any of it. It's not science.
Source?
This is EXACTLY what a Scorpio would say....
First off, citation needed.
Secondly, none of this has anything to do with what zodiacs pretend to assert.