"I don't believe in that horoscope stuff", s/he said...

[my_starz]

...and quite frankly, I don't either -- if by "horoscope stuff" you're talking about those little snippets, based on your sun sign, that purport to tell you what kind of day you're going to have. We've all seen them on assorted websites, in newspapers (remember newspapers?), and at the checkout counters in supermarkets -- and there isn't a one of them that's worth the pixels or the ink that was used to display them, IMO.

The very thought that the entire human race is composed of only 12 sets of personality-clones, not even differentiated by reproductive equipment, is absurd on the face of it. Even allowing for the possibility that all folks born under a given sun sign may share certain basic characteristics, there is still no rational justification for expecting that all Virgos are going to meet a tall, dark stranger on Tuesday, or that Thursday is a great day for investing if you're a Capricorn (but not a good day if you're born under any other sign).

None of the above is meant to imply that astrology can't be a useful tool, or even that getting glimpses into what a specific individual's future may hold is beyond its scope. But predictive astrology is a very advanced practice, and far more is required than a quick answer to "What's your sign?" in order to provide meaningful results. All aspects of astrology - personality assessment, compatibility with others, foreseeing what may be in store - begin in the same place: a natal chart. I'll be back another time to talk about that cornerstone of astrological practice.

(PS: Feel free to post comments, even if you disagree with any of my opinions -- but please refrain from name-calling, blatant disrespect, or other generally disruptive behavior. The spark of truth arises from the clash of differing opinions, but let's remain civil, okay?)

Comments

Yes...

[ysabetwordsmith]

I note that astrology resembles many other branches of science and art, in that oversimplification makes a usable system less accurate and plausible.

I wasn't particularly impressed by astrology until someone ran my natal chart. It's accurate to the point of being embarrassing -- people who can read a chart will look at it and laugh, it's so apt. Thing is, I have a really intricate personality with a lot of odd corners and apparent contradictions. That means almost all personality assessment systems are wildly inaccurate for me. Astrology is good enough to account for those. A system that can map my labyrinthine self precisely must have a very high degree of precision.

And yes, I do tend to run everything through empirical testing like that; let's try it and see if it works. My further investigations of astrological processes and other people's charts have generally supported my initial conclusion that there's something to this.

[thejeopardymaze]

I always suspected the majority of daily and weekly horoscopes are computer generated, and the only ones I read are from The Onion.

Yes...

[ysabetwordsmith]

I think most of those are, yes.

Computer-generated astrology can be quite accurate; it just depends on the amount of information provided. Most "horoscopes" from newspapers or the like use only sun signs, and are pretty much worthless. GIGO.

[my_starz]

Bad daily horoscopes have been around long before computers could have generated them, but it wouldn't surprise me if some of the current ones were using PCs to crank them out.

[rix_scaedu]

I like the astrology columnist in the daily paper I get because he seems to be trying to engage the reader's brain with his pieces and, prediction or not, it's often good advice anyway.

[my_starz]

Good advice is a worthwhile commodity, regardless of the package in which it arrives. Whether or not it's good astrology is another question entirely.