![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
We defy augury
Jun. 3rd, 2007 06:33 pmIt has been a beautiful weekend. I went with some friends to their friend's house, where I met many nice and interesting people. To get there we walked through a narrow strip of old-growth forest beside a river, which was absolutely beautiful. As it always seems to, being so rare for me nowadays, being surrounded by trees made me immeasurably happy. I felt like I could breathe again.
The house was a beautiful old country manor, and brimming with ancient and interesting books. The family has some sort of wetland restoration project going, complete with a small population of reintroduced beavers. I lived beside a North American swamp for six years, so beavers themselves, and their various constructions, are not especially exciting to me. But beaver dams and lodges in Scotland, where they have been extinct for hundreds of years, were an incredible sight. The beaver ponds are within a large enclosure of wild boars, one of which came to investigate us a few times while we were watching for beavers. Scary stuff! This morning we saw some of the babies (kept at the farm because they'd lost their mother), and even they were rambunctious, bitey little creatures, a lot like puppies but stronger and wilder.
This afternoon I returned to find that I still have internet! I must question Steph or Helena about this, but in the meantime I shall enjoy it, perhaps by proceeding into another excessively-long post--mostly cut, of course:
While I don't believe in Astrology, I still find it fascinating. Along with Tarot, Numerology,Phrenology, palm-reading and other such nonsense, I don't believe a word of it yet find myself greatly attracted to the concepts, to the point that I have studied some of them (though, perhaps because I have Mercury in Gemini, never in any depth). Recently ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
iamunicorngirl posted a link and description in her journal that she said was the most accurate Astrological description she had yet encountered online. Intrigued, I looked up my own chart. Following her example, I have struck out the inaccurate bits. However, since a lot of it (as such things tend to do) provokes a sort of 'eh, I guess that sort of describes me' type of reaction, I've also italicised the bits that struck me as especially descriptive of my personality:
( Generated by Starbud 2.0b )
I don't know about you, but I see an awful lot of strikeout in there. If it were "accurate", I would expect to only see a few bits struck out, especially given how general it all is. It occurs to me that many of these things would apply to most people, and the specific ones (and even many of the general ones) are only sometimes accurate.
It's also hugely contradictory. I pointed out above that I'm supposedly impatient despite the fact that patience is one of my biggest virtues. But I had a look at the bigger chart thing (Starbud being only a 'bud'), and see little besides contradictions. I'm apparently reserved and hard to figure out, but have a warm, outgoing personality, and am apparently very charismatic. I am actually so, so far from charismatic, and as introverted as they come. Well, maybe not so much anymore, but I am in no way outgoing. Oh, and it's advised me into various careers, mostly requiring contradictory strengths, many of them hugely inappropriate for me. Apparently I'm good with money, very frugal and perhaps stingy (because I am a Taurus, I am greedy, selfish and ungenerous), but Sagittarius in the second house says that I am very generous.
The descriptions based on the placement of the Sun were so wrong as to be almost comical. I've read enough descriptions of my Sun sign (Taurus) to know that I fit half of the aspects very well, and the other half hardly at all. But the Sun in the 7th house began with "This placement denotes a public personality"--enough said. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Most, though, were neither particularly accurate nor particularly incorrect. The one that struck me as the most accurate was the description of the effects of the placement of Mercury. I'll let you judge the strike-out vs. italicised balance for yourself:
( Mercury in Gemini and 7th House )
Of course, two almost-all-accurate descriptions out of 42 is not exactly convincing. So does this mean that Astrology is bunk? No, of course not. The fact that Astrology assumes that the position of various celestial bodies at the moment of birth can somehow influence a person's personality or predict their fate is what makes it bunk. But it's still interesting.
The house was a beautiful old country manor, and brimming with ancient and interesting books. The family has some sort of wetland restoration project going, complete with a small population of reintroduced beavers. I lived beside a North American swamp for six years, so beavers themselves, and their various constructions, are not especially exciting to me. But beaver dams and lodges in Scotland, where they have been extinct for hundreds of years, were an incredible sight. The beaver ponds are within a large enclosure of wild boars, one of which came to investigate us a few times while we were watching for beavers. Scary stuff! This morning we saw some of the babies (kept at the farm because they'd lost their mother), and even they were rambunctious, bitey little creatures, a lot like puppies but stronger and wilder.
This afternoon I returned to find that I still have internet! I must question Steph or Helena about this, but in the meantime I shall enjoy it, perhaps by proceeding into another excessively-long post--mostly cut, of course:
While I don't believe in Astrology, I still find it fascinating. Along with Tarot, Numerology,
iamunicorngirl posted a link and description in her journal that she said was the most accurate Astrological description she had yet encountered online. Intrigued, I looked up my own chart. Following her example, I have struck out the inaccurate bits. However, since a lot of it (as such things tend to do) provokes a sort of 'eh, I guess that sort of describes me' type of reaction, I've also italicised the bits that struck me as especially descriptive of my personality:( Generated by Starbud 2.0b )
I don't know about you, but I see an awful lot of strikeout in there. If it were "accurate", I would expect to only see a few bits struck out, especially given how general it all is. It occurs to me that many of these things would apply to most people, and the specific ones (and even many of the general ones) are only sometimes accurate.
It's also hugely contradictory. I pointed out above that I'm supposedly impatient despite the fact that patience is one of my biggest virtues. But I had a look at the bigger chart thing (Starbud being only a 'bud'), and see little besides contradictions. I'm apparently reserved and hard to figure out, but have a warm, outgoing personality, and am apparently very charismatic. I am actually so, so far from charismatic, and as introverted as they come. Well, maybe not so much anymore, but I am in no way outgoing. Oh, and it's advised me into various careers, mostly requiring contradictory strengths, many of them hugely inappropriate for me. Apparently I'm good with money, very frugal and perhaps stingy (because I am a Taurus, I am greedy, selfish and ungenerous), but Sagittarius in the second house says that I am very generous.
The descriptions based on the placement of the Sun were so wrong as to be almost comical. I've read enough descriptions of my Sun sign (Taurus) to know that I fit half of the aspects very well, and the other half hardly at all. But the Sun in the 7th house began with "This placement denotes a public personality"--enough said. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Most, though, were neither particularly accurate nor particularly incorrect. The one that struck me as the most accurate was the description of the effects of the placement of Mercury. I'll let you judge the strike-out vs. italicised balance for yourself:
( Mercury in Gemini and 7th House )
Of course, two almost-all-accurate descriptions out of 42 is not exactly convincing. So does this mean that Astrology is bunk? No, of course not. The fact that Astrology assumes that the position of various celestial bodies at the moment of birth can somehow influence a person's personality or predict their fate is what makes it bunk. But it's still interesting.
