View Single Post
  #8  
Unread 01-01-2018, 12:09 AM
obsidianmineral's Avatar
obsidianmineral obsidianmineral is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 470
Re: Would calling myself a Scorpio make me a poser

Quote:
Originally Posted by Whoam1 View Post
Problems lie in both systems just as in every sector in life, Ive learned to thrive in these dark places . And yes let me be a boring down to earth traditionalist that is capricorn, oh wait I shook the tree that's not very Capricorn of me... Let my Virgo moon make me really insecure and critiquing. *Cry* *Sob* *Cry* *Sob*, you hurt my feelings. Nope wait you didn't *next person* (this time use more facts instead of opinions). And your rising sign enters the moment you enter the earth this would be more accurate in you conception not in your physical emerging from your mother. Food for thought and thanks for the feed back.
Well, the fact is that most people use the tropical zodiac for a reason. If you're gonna be so hard on choosing the exact constellation that's rising in your birth, then use Ophiucus as your rising sign, because it's the actual constellation. The zodiac we use is there for a reason, it's based on symbolism and seasons, like most of the techniques used in astrology. There's really no point in trying to be more exact or real in using the actual position of the constellations when pretty much all of astrology is based upon the symbolism and symmetry of things. I don't know if you did know this, but the aspects, rulerships, triplicities, symbols for the planets, order, elements, etc. are all based on symbolical meaning, not exact facts. For example, trines are said to be harmonious because they represent the triangle, a figure that's regarded as spiritual and harmonious. And, going even beyond the basic structure of astrology, there's a lot of empirical research being done on astrology and most of it is done using the tropical zodiac. In personal experience I've seen vedic to fail a lot more times than tropical. I've asked many people about their charts in vedic and they just don't see it. If you use vedic as a result of opinion then you're free to do it, but it's a couple of testimonies against the much more vast and common use of the tropical zodiac.


There are also people who like to use the argument of "Vedic and Tropical are both correct because astrology is so mysterious and magical that in both systems, natal charts describe the same person" - Yeah, that's probably the weakest argument you can come up with. If you firmly believe this is the case then you firmly believe astrology is false. If things do "match up" even after changing the signs it's because your mind is telling you so, trying to find connections and patterns, a job at which our minds are really good at. It's like denying confirmation bias. Astrology is meant to be objective, yet it fails to have even a single zodiac system. Changing signs means changing the dignity and debility of the planets, therefore objectively changing the outcomes of a planet. So yeah, there's a flaw in trying to start from the premise that two zodiac systems are viable.


So, if we were to use logic we'd say that if astrology works, then there can only be one zodiac system and house system.
Reply With Quote