“My ex-zodiac partner’s sign was compatible with mine, but we didn’t have a fantastic relationship.” Compatibility, as determined by astrology, does not guarantee that your companion would never cheat on you or lie to you. It also doesn’t guarantee that your spouse will constantly make the necessary modifications to keep the relationship alive. It is preferable to follow your heart rather than rely on planetary placements.”
In This Article...
Is it true that horoscopes are scientifically accurate?
Astrology is a collection of belief systems that assert that there is a connection between astrological phenomena and events or personality traits in the human world. The scientific community has dismissed astrology as having no explanatory power for describing the universe. Scientific testing has discovered no evidence to back up the astrological traditions’ premises or alleged effects.
Do relationships between people born under the same sign work?
Finding a companion who shares your zodiac sign can feel like a perfect match. You have similar ideals, eccentricities, and life perspectives, and you just seem to understand one other in a way that no one else does. The stars appear to be in perfect alignment until you realize they’re just as obstinate, competitive, and sensitive as you are. It can make you believe that dating your own sign is just as horrible as dating someone with whom you are incompatible. There are benefits and drawbacks to dating each zodiac sign, regardless of which one you are, but should you date your own?
When it comes to the advantages, Monahan claims that dating your own sign might be a breeze. This is known as a sun conjunct sun in astrology, and it is an aspect that encourages ease and harmony. This feature predicts that you and your partner will have comparable life perspectives and attitudes.
Signs like Gemini, Leo, and Aries, according to Monahan, are great at dating their own sign. Gemini is a changeable sign, which means they’re adaptable and energetic. It’s impossible for two Geminis to get bored with each other, which is a great plus for the twins. They’ll be able to talk through any potential roadblocks because they’re a Mercury-ruled sign that appreciates communication. Gemini excels at talking things out. Two Leos will feel secure in each other’s company and will be able to benefit from each other’s achievements. When two Aries marry, they will have little trouble dealing with a “clingy” partner because they both appreciate autonomy and freedom.
Another disadvantage of dating someone who has your zodiac sign is the lack of balance. Your sign’s general strengths and weaknesses will be shared by both you and your partner. “If no one can take care of certain responsibilities or give particular energy,” Semos explains, “it may be difficult to make a partnership work.” Because their differences compliment each other, some incompatible zodiac couples can work. When you have the same zodiac sign, you don’t truly get that.
Virgo and Pisces, for example, two indications that have a harder time dating their own sign. When two Virgos get together, they’ll have an extremely productive relationship because the sign excels at organizing, planning, and scheduling. Virgo, on the other hand, is known for being judgemental. “Unless one or both Virgo’s charts have more large picture hints, these two can end up nitpicking each other to death, missing out on the pleasure that dating or having a meaningful partnership can bring,” Semos warns.
When two Pisces date, the problem is exactly the reverse. Pisces is controlled by Neptune and is imaginative, intuitive, and sensitive. According to Semos, two Pisces who get together can feel like soulmates from another dimension living on a different plane. This pairing, however, will not go far unless one partner is ready to take on one of “life’s pesky details.” Semos explains, “Someone has to work, arrange doctor’s appointments, and pay payments on time.” “Otherwise, you’ll end up with starry-eyed evicted lovers.”
So, what’s the final word? Is it a good idea to date someone who has the same zodiac sign as you? The good news is that it isn’t your worst matchup. If other features of your birth charts compliment each other well, it can lead to a long-term relationship. It’s crucial to realize that astrology encompasses much more than solar signs.
“Each partnership, like other relationships, has its own personality and taste,” Semos explains. “There is no such thing as a “bad” or “good” kind. Each combination has its place, depending on what additional gifts and soft spots appear in each person’s natal charts, as well as what each person is searching for right now in terms of dating or a relationship. It all relies on your objectives, as it always does.”
All partnerships need effort. Even the zodiac signs that are the most compatible will have problems. If you desire to date someone with the same zodiac sign as you, you should anticipate to experience both good and bad days.
Is it true that many believe in astrology?
“Astrology in the Age of Uncertainty,” a fascinating piece by Christine Smallwood:
Astrology is currently experiencing widespread popular acceptability that has not been seen since the 1970s. The transition began with the introduction of the personal computer, was expedited by the Internet, and has now reached new levels of speed thanks to social media. According to a Pew Research Center poll from 2017, about a third of Americans believe in astrology.
Astrology, like psychoanalysis before it, has infiltrated our collective vernacular. At a party in the 1950s, you could have heard someone talk about the id, ego, or superego; now, it’s normal to hear someone explain herself using the sun, moon, and rising signs. It isn’t just that you are aware of it. It’s who’s saying it: folks who aren’t kooks or deniers of climate change, who don’t find a conflict between utilizing astrology and believing in science…
The religion breakdown was the only thing that surprised me about this table.
I had the impression that mainline Protestants were the rational ones, but they believe in astrology at the same rate as the overall population.
But, hey, I guess they’re ordinary Americans, so they have average American ideas.
Only 3% of atheists believe in astrology, which is also unexpected.
This makes sense, yet it seemed reasonable to me that someone may not believe in God but believe in other supernatural things: in fact, I could see astrology as a type of replacement for a traditional religious system.
But it appears that is not the case.
Brian Wansink has been compared to an astrologer who can make astute observations about the world based on a combination of persuasiveness and qualitative understanding, and then attributes his success to tarot cards or tea leaves rather than a more practical ability to synthesize ideas and tell good stories.
Does Brian Wansink, on the other hand, believe in astrology?
What about Marc Hauser, Ed Wegman, Susan Fiske, and the rest of the mob who call their detractors “second-string, replication police, methodological terrorists, Stasi,” and so on?
I doubt they believe in astrology because it symbolizes a rival belief system: it’s a business that, in some ways, competes with rah-rah Ted-talk science.
I wouldn’t be shocked if famous ESP researchers believe in astrology, but I get the impression that mainstream junk-science supporters in academia and the news media feel uncomfortable discussing ESP since its research methods are so similar to their own.
They don’t want to be associated with ESP researchers because it would devalue their own study, but they also don’t want to put them under the bus because they are fellow Ivy League academics, so the safest plan is to remain quiet about it.
The greater point, however, is not astrology believing in and of itself, but the mental state that allows individuals to believe in something so contrary to our scientific understanding of the world.
(OK, I apologize to the 29% of you who don’t agree with me on this.)
When I return to writing on statistical graphics, model verification, Bayesian computation, Jamaican beef patties, and other topics, you can rejoin the fold.)
It’s not that astrology couldn’t be correct a priori:
We can come up with reasonable theories under which astrology is real and spectacular, just as we can with embodied cognition, beauty and sex ratio, ovulation and voting, air rage, ages ending in 9, and all the other Psychological Science / PNAS classicsjust it’s that after years of careful study, nothing much has come up.
And the existing theories aren’t particularly convincing: they’re speculative world models that may be good if the purpose was to describe a real and enduring occurrence, but they’re less so without actual data.
Anyway, if 30% of Americans are willing to believe such nonsense, it’s no surprise that a significant number of influential American psychology professors will have the kind of attitude toward scientific theory and evidence that leads them to have strong beliefs in weak theories with no supporting evidence.
Indeed, not only support for specific weak theories, but support for the fundamental principle that pseudoscientific views should be treated with respect (although, oddly enough, maybe not for astrology itself).
P.S.In defense of the survey respondents (but not of the psychology professors who support ideas like the “critical positivity ratio,” which makes astrology look positively sane in comparison), belief in astrology (or, for that matter, belief in heaven, gravity, or the square-cube law) is essentially free.
Why not believe these things, or not believe them?
Belief or denial in evolution, climate change, or unconscious bias, on the other hand, can have social or political consequences.
Some opinions are purely personal, while others have a direct impact on policy.
I have less patience for famous academic and media elites who aggressively support junk science by not just expressing their trust in speculative notions supported by no real data, but also attacking those who point out these emperors’ nudity. Furthermore, even a hypothetical tolerant, open-minded supporter of junk sciencethe type of person who might believe in critical positivity ratio but actively support the publication of criticisms of that workcan still cause some harm by contaminating scientific journals and the news media with bad science, and by promoting sloppy work that takes up space that could be used for more careful research.
You know how they say science corrects itself, but only because individuals are willing to correct themselves?
Gresham’s law is also true, but only when people are willing to distribute counterfeit notes or money they think is counterfeit while keeping their lips shut until they can get rid of their wads of worthless stock.
P.P.S.Just to be clear:I don’t think astrology is a waste of time, and it’s possible that Marc Hauser was onto something real, even while faking data (according to the US government, as mentioned on Wikipedia), and the critical positivity ratio, ovulation, voting, and all the rest…
Just because there isn’t enough evidence to support a theory doesn’t mean it’s untrue.
I’m not trying to disprove any of these assertions.
All of it should be published someplace, along with all of the criticism.
My issue with junk science proponents is not that they advocate science that I and others believe is rubbishwe can all be wrong!but that they consistently avoid, repress, and resist reasonable open critique.
P.P.P.S.Remember that #notallpsychologists.
Of course, the problem of junk research isn’t limited to psychology in any way.
Professors of political science, economics, sociology, and history, to the extent that they believe in astrology, spoon bending, or whatever (that is, belief in “scientific” paranormalism as describing some true thing about the natural world, not just a “anthropological” recognition that paranormal beliefs can affect the world because people believe in it), this could also sabotage their research.
I suppose it’s not such a big problem if a physicist or chemist believes in these things.
I’m not attempting to shut down study into astrology, embodied cognition, ESP, beauty-and-sex-ratio, endless soup bowls, spoon bending, the Bible Code, air anger, ovulation and voting, subliminal smiley faces, or anything else.
Allow for the blooming of a thousand blooms!
Given that a sizable portion of the populace is willing to believe in scientific-sounding notions that aren’t backed by any good scientific theory or evidence, it should come as no surprise that many professional scientists hold this viewpoint.
The repercussions are especially evident in psychology, which is a vital field of study where theories can be hazy and where there is a long legacy of belief and action based on flimsy data.
That isn’t to say that psychologists are awful people; they’re merely working on difficult challenges in a field with a long history of failures.
This isn’t a critique; it’s just the way things are. Of course, there is a lot of excellent work being done in the field of psychology. You’ll have to work with what you’ve got.
Which zodiac signs should stay away from each other?
According to an astrologer, the most incompatible zodiac signs should never, ever date.
- CANCER AND ARIES. Aries is a fast-paced sign who thrives on the thrill of the moment.
Is it possible for two zodiac signs to be together?
Signs belonging to the same element are often compatible, so the fire signs of Aries, Leo, and Sagittarius, for example, are all good matches. Couples from outside your element might offer extra zing – the Air and Fire signs complement each other well. They both have an outgoing personality that keeps the relationship going strong.
Do astrological signs have any bearing on romantic relationships?
When two people are in a relationship, their preferences, likes, and dislikes are more likely to be shared. Relationships persist for as long as the spouses tend to stay together or as long as their objective is satisfied. Most relationships will last longer if both partners are committed to living a long life and having a family.
If the sole objective of a relationship is to provide physical pleasure, it is unlikely to continue long. As a result, there is no link between zodiac signs and breakups because everything is determined by the partnership’s goal and individual traits.
What are the zodiac signs that are uncommon?
Aquarius sun signs are “considered to be the distinctive thinkers of the zodiac,” according to Stardust, as they are the most rare zodiac sign. They’re also known for being “innovators and creators of new viewpoints.”
Aside from being the rarest zodiac sign, what distinguishes this sign from the other 11 zodiac signs is that “they are known to be the watery portion of air,” according to Stardust. As a result, they are “both logical and intuitive.” According to Stardust, they also “have the ability to see where humanity is going and make actions toward progressing it.” (Perhaps they also know how to ease stress for each zodiac sign?)
People believe in astrology for a variety of reasons.
Self-Discovery It’s likely that people study astrology in order to gain a better understanding of themselves and increase their self-awareness. Astrology has been shown in studies to significantly impact and even validate a person’s self-concept, as well as improve their confidence in their unique characteristics.
Do the signs of the zodiac change every year?
Is that to say that your zodiac sign changes each year? No, it’s more like once every 30 years or so. (Thank G, you’ve got some time to think about it.) “Each sign has 30 degrees, and the advanced sun moves less than a degree per year, so this movement is quite slow,” Montfar explains.