A Scientific Astrology

[ydoaPs]

I'd like to be clear about this: I'm not talking about the fortune telling scam you see in newspapers. I'm talking about personality traits associated with astrological signs; maybe there may be something to it.

 

What if the modern view of astrology is a bit off? I'm thinking that if we move away from astrology being about the effects of constellations on our lives and toward astrological charts being a complicated calendar, we might find a shred of truth behind all the mystic nonsense.

 

If the astrological charts act merely as a complicated calendar, it could be that cyclic Earthly (vice celestial) events are at root. Is it not possible for temperature and the availability of certain foods to have an effect on fetal development? If so, then when you are born may well have an actual effect on who you are as a person.

 

Ancient people may have noticed subtle personality differences between people born in certain times of the year. If these people were one of the MANY that were obsessed with the sky, then they could easy connect the wrong correlation as the causation.

 

Then again, any such effect might be so small as to effectively not exist. If THAT is the case, then there is no hope for astrology.

[John Cuthber]

People born at particular times of year (I forget the details) are more likely to suffer from hay fever*.

People who suffer hay fever are less likely to succeed in athletics. Therefore there is a seasonal relation between month of birth and athletic ability.

The trend is reversed if you look at the antipodes.

 

If you call that "astrology" then astrology has some validity.

On the other hand, most astrologers don't seem to think that this type of correlation is what they mean.

Also, the effect is due to the sun/ Earth system and to no other heavenly body; which rules out almost everything astrologers say.

They make "predictions" due to the current arrangements of the stars and planets. These have no physical meaning.

 

*

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1468028

[lemur]

I have also noticed some seeming validity in astrological explanations of personality traits and interactive dynamics between people. I'm not sure if this is because of the kind of complex chains of spurious correlations like that between birth month, hay fever, and athletics or if it's because human personality perception is subjective enough that any coherent description can appear to be true for most people. Another possibility is that astrology has the effect of influencing some people's perceptions of other people and that these perceptions and the corresponding behavior toward those people influences their personal/social development and personality expressions. In other words, if someone is always telling you that you're a certain astrological sign and telling you what kind of personality you have, you may be likely to become aware of these parts of your personality more than others, which could cause them to become dominant. Of course, this wouldn't explain people who've never been exposed to any astrological counseling, but then once you start fishing around for examples that confirm their expected characteristics, you're bound to find something and then if you extrapolate those to be determinant for other aspects of their lives, you have created a tautology.

 

. . . or maybe the relations of the heavens just influence our nervous systems and development in a way that astrologers have tapped into for millennia.

[neurogeek]

I have also noticed some seeming validity in astrological explanations of personality traits and interactive dynamics between people. I'm not sure if this is because of the kind of complex chains of spurious correlations like that between birth month, hay fever, and athletics or if it's because human personality perception is subjective enough that any coherent description can appear to be true for most people. Another possibility is that astrology has the effect of influencing some people's perceptions of other people and that these perceptions and the corresponding behavior toward those people influences their personal/social development and personality expressions. In other words, if someone is always telling you that you're a certain astrological sign and telling you what kind of personality you have, you may be likely to become aware of these parts of your personality more than others, which could cause them to become dominant. Of course, this wouldn't explain people who've never been exposed to any astrological counseling, but then once you start fishing around for examples that confirm their expected characteristics, you're bound to find something and then if you extrapolate those to be determinant for other aspects of their lives, you have created a tautology.

 

. . . or maybe the relations of the heavens just influence our nervous systems and development in a way that astrologers have tapped into for millennia.

 

It's so cool that you say that, because I'm a psych/neuroscience nut. I watch human behaviors all the time and have definitely noticed that there is some kind of correlation between star signs and behaviors. Most likely it's because people read about their sign and then sort of subconsciously adopt behaviors based on what they read about their sign, like you've mentioned, however I like to think that it's a combination of both earth science and psychological perception. Our bodies are made of of millions of molecules and atoms that have electrical charges....is it possible that perhaps depending on what time of the year you were born those electrical charges do different things when the earth is closer or further away from other celestial bodies or when the earth is in a specific position on its axis? It sounds a little farfetched I know....but it could be possible right? One might argue that perhaps we are so insignificant compared to the masses of celestial bodies and their interactions, but I dont think that's accuarate. We are made up of the stuff of the universe....oxygen, nitrogen, carbon - a crap ton of elements. Who is to say that we can't be affected by something like that? Did you know that there are a lot of studies going on right now in neuro research on mental disorders where they will place a magnet or shoot an electrical impulse into certain parts of the brain that can change the way a person behaves? The magnets are the most interesting part, because our earth is basically one big magnet. We lie and thrive and a big magnet...why can't it influence the way we go about our daily lives?

 

Check it out: http://web.mit.edu/n...al-control-0330

and http://news.discover...n-morality.html

Edited January 25, 2011 by neurogeek

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

There's a significant correlation between birth month and achievements in some fields. For example, the cutoff dates for age groups in sports can make a huge difference. It turns out that a disproportionately large portion of professional athletes were born very early in their age group, making them the oldest players in their sport when they first started playing. When you're five or ten years old, being eight months older than the other kids gives you a huge developmental advantage -- and hence more success -- and you end up with more coach attention, more wins, and a track towards future professional status. The kids who made it in just before the deadline are the young weaklings and often don't do as well.

[Mr Skeptic]

What if the modern view of astrology is a bit off? I'm thinking that if we move away from astrology being about the effects of constellations on our lives and toward astrological charts being a complicated calendar, we might find a shred of truth behind all the mystic nonsense.

 

Well I doubt astrologers would go for switching your sign by half a year if you were born in the southern hemisphere. On the other hand, most of the world's landmass is in the northern hemisphere, so on average it should still have some effect.

[ewmon]

What the OP proposes would be "environmentology". I think that if the influence of the environment were significant, we'd have heard old wives' tales about winter babies, spring babies, etc. So, such an influence is likely not significant.

[Marat]

There is good science showing a strong correlation between babies born in the early winter months, eseentially January and February, having a significantly higher incidence of schizophrenia later in life. Studies of birth season in the southern hemisphere indicate that there this trend is reversed, pointing to a weather influence on the developing fetus. The likely mechanism is that when the weather conditions are right for virus season, a developing fetus whose brain is at the critical point of formation will be negatively impacted by the mother's flu virus and have a higher chance of becoming schizophrenic.

 

There is also a concentration of type 1 diabetics born in the late Fall and early Winter, from about October to the end of December.

 

I think there is also some good evidence of the IQ of people born in the winter months being higher, perhaps because the newborn infant subtly perceives that it has been born into a more stressful environment and so this alerts its drive toward more rapid intellectual development. In my own life I have seen this connection confirmed time and time again, almost to the point where if I hear that someone was born in July or August, when everything is warm is stress-free, I have a hard time overcoming my expectation that he will not be smart. Whenever I have looked at biographies of famous people, the dummies were all born in summer, and the smarties were all born in winter (with the exception of Goethe).

 

Kepler, who was born into an age which took astrology seriously, and who was by profession a part-time astrologer, regarded astrological influences as a normal part of physics. His argument was that since everything in the physical universe was connected and humans were physical beings, why shouldn't the physics of the solar system influence human behavior?

[swansont]

There is good science showing a strong correlation between babies born in the early winter months, eseentially January and February, having a significantly higher incidence of schizophrenia later in life. Studies of birth season in the southern hemisphere indicate that there this trend is reversed, pointing to a weather influence on the developing fetus. The likely mechanism is that when the weather conditions are right for virus season, a developing fetus whose brain is at the critical point of formation will be negatively impacted by the mother's flu virus and have a higher chance of becoming schizophrenic.

 

Good science? Perhaps you have a citation or two to share?

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/season.html

 

I don't see a particularly strong correlation. The graph there shows no statistically significant effect, despite the curve that's drawn — you can draw a straight line through the data with a relative risk of 1 and stay within the error bars. You cannot conclude that there is an effect from that graph, without even looking at the study to see if it was flawed.

 

And even if there is an effect, you have a number of causal possibilities.