Which zodiac sign related to dreams?

star sign

You are here: »Forum» General »Zodiac Signs

Archive topic in the forum: General

Now I would like to create a not so historical topic: The topic of horoscopes and zodiac signs: -What do you think of horoscopes and zodiac signs? -Do you read horoscopes? -Which zodiac sign are you? -Since when have horoscopes been printed in newspapers and since when has the whole thing been around? Looking forward to your replies
Submitted by WDPG on December 6th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Give me my astrologer, he will patiently explain to me that I believe every nonsense, it is Venus's fault. Give me karma analyzes and prove to me in no uncertain terms that once in my earlier life I wasn't as stupid as I am today. Please hit me, hit me, please rip me off. please do it to me, do it to me, please fool me, please lay me down, lay me down, please lay me in, I'll be grateful to you. ..... I think this excerpt from an old song of the 'hectic' from around 1994 says it all. Unfortunately, I can't remember the rest of the text.
Submitted by Scifi on December 6th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Nothing. Why should stars tens of light years away decide our fate? In addition, the constellations have shifted since ancient times. I find it particularly strange that especially people who deny the existence of God for supposedly rational reasons, but then believe in the power of the stars. No. It's bad enough when colleagues annoy me with it. Let me put it this way: If an astrologer prophesied that if I walked on a certain street today, I would be run over, I would still walk over it. Gemini And I don't care. I have heard enough times what qualities a Gemini is supposed to have, and hardly any of them have applied to me. I find it particularly bad that I was asked about my zodiac sign during a job interview. If the setting criterion
Submitted by Scifi on December 6th, 2008 at 14:19
Bull. Allegedly a 'picture book' bull in terms of the characteristics attributed to the bulls.
Submitted by PèreJoseph on December 7th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Did you apply to be an astrologer? Sometimes in retrospect it is already funny what you find out during job interviews. One of the worst things I have ever heard from people around me was when my brother was told during a job interview: There is a bad working atmosphere in the department you were going to. The previous 2 in this position (in which he applied) were bullied there. Fortunately, that didn't work out there.
Submitted by WDPG on December 7th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Well, if you've already had as many job interviews as I have, you can find some things. I am often asked why they should take me of all people. But once I was asked, 'Why shouldn't we take you?' Stupid situation: you have to give some reason, otherwise it seems implausible, on the other hand, of course, you can't scare them ...
Submitted by Scifi on December 7th, 2008 at 11:57 am
Astrology. It is not only important to determine the day, but also the hour of birth and the latitude around the ascendant. Only then can statements be made at all. A distinction should also be made between daily horoscopes, clear conversation and created personal horoscopes that can result in an entire book. But since a documentary was shown on TV about a duel between a media scientist and top astrologies about events in the future, I'm again very much in doubt. Since it was reported, what Scifi already mentioned, due to the displacement of the earth's axis in the last 2000 years, reliable predictions can no longer be made. The constellations moved one place back in the example. To what extent the astrologers take into account no idea. lG
Submitted by lorginn on December 7th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
I would also like to consider the following: The hour of birth is more or less a coincidence. If so, then the point in time at which the egg and sperm cells fuse should be decisive, which, as a rule, cannot be determined anyway. The time of birth depends on many factors. And what about artificially induced births? Sorry if someone feels hurt right now, but astrology is humbug.
Submitted by Scifi on December 7th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
In this context, I would also like to refer to this post of mine:
Submitted by Scifi on December 7th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Since I found the above-mentioned brilliant song 'Please hit me' from the hustle and bustle, here is a transcript of the whole text: Yes, you're doing well, you know how to play the game. Thanks. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, ... yes !!!!! Give me my astrologer, he will patiently explain to me that I believe every nonsense, it is Venus's fault. Give me karma analyzes and prove to me in no uncertain terms that once in my earlier life I was not as stupid as I am today. Uh, uh, uh, uh, yeah, yeah, yeah, ... Please hit me, hit me, rip me off. please do it to me, do it to me, fool me, please, please lay me down, put me in, I'll be grateful to you. Give me a couple of fortune tellers who are sure to predict that everything will be as I want it to be or completely different. Give me voices from beyond, gossiping with the dead is okay, because you meet for a coffee chat and save yourself the coffee. Give me clairvoyants and UFOs and magic on top, no matter how big the bear is, please untie it for me. Please don't give me facts, just don't give me your wits, finally give me witches again, because they burned so well! Uh, uh, uh, uh, yeah, yeah, yeah, ... Please hit me ... The heart of the Aries hovers between dream and reality. Venus confuses her sense of reality quite a bit. Don't necessarily take every fine word for eternal truth; there is also a little poetry in it. Uh, uh, uh, uh, yeah, yeah, yeah, ... (The last paragraph is spoken by a voice imitator who imitates a well-known astrologer. The earlier stanzas are rapped.)
Submitted by Scifi on December 7th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
We had this topic in ethics class ... with the result that when comparing many horoscopes from the same period, they have different content and are therefore not credible. (Which is actually also logical ...) Only the 'self-fulfilling prophecy' is dangerous. I am Taurus myself and don't believe in horoscopes.
Submitted by Yannik on December 7th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Right attitude! :) Another review is due!
Submitted by Scifi on December 7th, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Thanks! We seem to be of the same opinion quite often;). (I only noticed that once).
Submitted by Yannik on December 7th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
If one observes the people who are born in a certain zodiac sign, one can observe that they have similar characteristics. But it doesn't really have to have something to do with the stars, it can also have something to do with the season, for example. It doesn't have to be like that, but somehow at least that's what I'm imagining. Often, however, it is not necessarily the characteristics that are assigned to the respective zodiac signs. I don't believe in horoscopes. Read my horoscope from time to time, but more for amusement. I can't take it seriously. It is particularly interesting when you read several horoscopes and you have an absolute super high with one today and a low with the other. Kind of funny. I am Aquarius by zodiac sign.
Submitted by WDPG on December 8th, 2008 at 6:08 pm
I guess if you find similarities, it's more because you are specifically looking for them. Whenever you compare two people, you will find something in common if you look long enough. If they happen to have the same zodiac sign, that leads to the misconception that the similarities are caused by the zodiac sign. I'll see if I can find anything about twins on the Internet, whether I have any resemblance to them.
Submitted by Scifi on December 8th, 2008 at 6:14 pm
Sounds very logical. Then I wish you a lot of fun;).
Submitted by Yannik on December 8th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
As expected, I have relatively little in common with twins, in particular I am not articulate and sociable and also not unsteady!
Submitted by Scifi on December 8th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
[quote = Scifi; 19351] As expected, I have relatively little in common with twins, in particular I'm not eloquent and also not unsteady, but certainly absolutely secret! [/ quote] It would be almost scary if the characteristics would be the same as the constellations. But I think you are very eloquent, what I read from you here in the forum. I took a look at ml out of interest: It would be almost scary if the characteristics were the same as the constellations. But I think you are very eloquent, what I read from you here in the forum. I took a look at ml out of interest: It would be almost scary if the characteristics were the same as the constellations. But I think you are very eloquent, what I read from you here in the forum. I took a look at ml out of interest: It would be almost scary if the characteristics were the same as the constellations. But I think you are very eloquent, what I read from you here in the forum. I took a look at ml out of interest: It would be almost scary if the characteristics were the same as the constellations. But I think you are very eloquent, what I read from you here in the forum. I took a look at ml out of interest: It would be almost scary if the characteristics were the same as the constellations
Submitted by Yannik on December 8th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
To all star interpreters, if you do not know your ascendants, you do not need to ponder any further. Have probably read over my post again: o lG
Submitted by lorginn on December 8th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
I have read your post very well and was very amazed. Actually, I thought you were a rational person. Can you help explain why you don't really believe in God, but rather in astrology?
Submitted by Scifi on December 8th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Well, I have my difficulties with faith. Belief does not mean knowledge either ... Astrology is not belief either, but mathematical calculations that are interpreted empirically. It's amazing how character traits or simply the type of person you get to know, but fits the constellation. I once had a work colleague who always seemed touched when she looked at me or spoke to me. I also felt a certain familiarity. Although I didn't like the women type. One morning she asked me about it. I replied very convincingly that our constellations fit perfectly and therefore there was a certain attraction. Since then I have been the guru for you: D lG
Submitted by lorginn on December 8th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
Cool pick-up line! : D 'Kleines - Our constellations fit together perfectly!' : D Seriously again: Can't it be that, as I already indicated in my contribution from 18:14, you simply pay close attention to the properties that fit the constellation! I am a twin and have looked here: Some of the characteristics listed there (interested in many things, likes profiles) already apply to me, others (eloquent, sociable, unsteady, gossip aunt) do not apply at all. So it always depends on the way you look at it.
Submitted by Scifi on December 8th, 2008 at 10:02 pm
and in my opinion that fits you perfectly ... lG Do you know your ascendant? That would be a second sign of the zodiac ... then a lot is put into perspective
Submitted by lorginn on December 8th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
I have a hard time with English, I am not a great rhetorician, I don't approach people very much, and I take secrets entrusted to me with me to the grave! I have already abandoned a hopefully started job interview by refusing to divulge the internals of a previous employer! I don't know my ascendant, and I don't care either.
Submitted by Scifi on December 8th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Submitted by lorginn on December 8th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Point 1 Every year, well-known esoteric experts (in addition to astrologers and fortune tellers as well as astrologers) are asked what events and developments can be expected in the next year. Year after year, the results are no better than the statistical hit probability. Point 2 As some people know, I myself am the father of twins, both boys, dizygoti, interval between the births: 8 minutes. I can report that they are very different in their properties and characters. Your bigger brother is pretty much in the middle between the two. Not a good evidence for the zodiac theory.
Submitted by Talley on December 9th, 2008 at 8:36 am
Since the early 1990s, astrologers have prophesied the death of Pope John Paul II for almost every year - only not for the actual year of his death. I did not knew that. Did you mention that sometime before July?
Submitted by Scifi on December 9th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Submitted by Yannik on December 9th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
I have a zodiac sign: Aries. I don't think much of horoscopes, I only read them when they happen to appear in some newspaper.
Submitted by Heiko82 on December 18th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
You are absolutely right about that. Otherwise the horoscope will be totally imprecise and superficial. I am Cancer with Aquarius ascendant. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Even if it gets embarrassing: I don't even know how to get my ascendant out.
Submitted by Heiko82 on December 18th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
I now feel addressed simply because I think the same way. The answer is very simple: you can work it out. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
There are pages on the net that will calculate that for you. To find out exactly (even with descendants) you need your date of birth, the time of birth and the place of birth. Try it out and tell me your opinion about what you got there. This also applies to all other critics of the zodiac sign: Please try it yourself and tell us how it was. I and certainly Lorginn would be happy to have another lively exchange of ideas with you. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:19 pm
There is lion. Quasi Aries with Leo ascendant?
Submitted by Heiko82 on December 18th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
What about the Chinese zodiac, the Celtic horoscope, numerology or the Tyrolean number wheel? Just to name a few more examples. Is there anyone here who has also dealt with something like this besides the normal zodiac signs? What do you think of tarot?
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:24 pm
That doesn't really say anything to anything. But I'm curious if I can still learn a lot here.
Submitted by Heiko82 on December 18th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
[quote = Heiko82; 21447] Aries with Leo ascendant? [/ quote] Sun (zodiac sign) = vitality, behavior, self-confidence, will, self-realization, mentality, life energy, the willful energy control - actually what I want, what I make of myself want. Ascendant = image, personality, activity, self-assertion, appearance, emergence of self-awareness, ego, manners - actually how I (like) show myself or how I react spontaneously, including the self-emphasized needs that result from it - the self-interests. ___________________________________________________________ Two elements of fire combine: an intense impulse to act (Aries) and distinctive ambitions (Leo). This constellation promises a good to unshakable self-confidence. Through efficiency (Aries) and self-confidence (Leo) you will achieve successes (Aries) and awards (Leo). In the case of disharmonious aspects, instead of natural authority, dictatorial arbitrariness can appear, or in place of greatness of soul, arrogance. Aries with Leo is great, but if the background is missing ... You are very self-confident and courageous, and you also have a strong claim to leadership. Planning and organizing is something you were born with. With you, however, feelings often have to take a back seat to the will. You want to have an overview and are ready to put in a lot of effort. You can expect great passions in love matters. _____________________________________________ And here a little more precisely: Sun (zodiac sign) = vitality, way of acting, self-confidence, will, self-realization, mentality, life energy, the willful energy control - actually what I want, what I want to make of myself. Ascendant = image, personality, activity, self-assertion, appearance, emergence of self-awareness, ego, manners - actually how I (like) show myself or how I react spontaneously, including the self-emphasized needs that result from it - the self-interests. ___________________________________________________________ Two elements of fire combine: an intense impulse to act (Aries) and distinctive ambitions (Leo).This constellation promises a good to unshakable self-confidence. Through efficiency (Aries) and self-confidence (Leo) you will achieve successes (Aries) and awards (Leo). In the case of disharmonious aspects, instead of natural authority, dictatorial arbitrariness can be shown,
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:28 pm
@ Heiko: And what do you think about it after reading through?
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 3:30 p.m.
Sounds like me in some things, even if I clearly don't think it's true.
Submitted by Heiko82 on December 18th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
To Protagoras: Have you already looked at my objections?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
To Protagoras: So what exactly do you deduce about me from my zodiac sign?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
That doesn't automatically make it a science. In the Middle Ages one has z. B. also calculated very scientifically, z. B. How many days of repentance are required for which sin.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Yes, my bunny, I have. :) But don't really know what to write about it.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Do I need your ascendant and I will tell you in simple terms what the stars mean about you. ;) Honestly: I guessed you were a virgin (maybe also fish). You sound like my best friend Otherwise a Virgo with a Gemini ascendant. ;)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I've never thought about him. I have no idea. You can see what you can give astrology when I have more in common with other zodiac signs than with my own. Does your best friend always complain?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
That's called tax revenue science or something. : D But it's a science - google it.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 3:49 pm
You and in need of argument?: D: D
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
It was more about lashes and the like. Every para-scientist considers his activity to be science. I like to believe you that I can find something about it in Google. How do you calculate your ascendant?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Then do it like Heiko - try it out. Well, try the ascendant. Yes, he did - until a good two months ago. Now he has a girlfriend ...;)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Then I would be in a better mood - until the divorce. But as I have already emphasized, if we really knew each other and it was really your turn, I would have been silent.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Not really. Too lazy to discuss it at the moment, because it's about coincidence again ... Sorry. But with individual, more specific questions, you will definitely get me to ask. ;)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 16:00
Do you know a reliable site? I don't want to have to read through all the terms and conditions to see if it is not chargeable.
Posted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:00 p.m.
Good: Why do you think that the time of birth is decisive and not the time of conception?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Send me your data via PM and I'll do it for you.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:01 pm
Good question. How do you want to know your conception? Because the time and place of birth is directly linked to the star constellation and everything can be calculated from there.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
And what about artificially induced births? Isn't that where natural development is interrupted?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
Yeah, sure. But it's not about the naturalness of the birth but only about when and where you were born.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 4:15 pm
You are a Gemini with a Virgo ascendant. Well, take a look - I was pretty much right with my assessment.: Cool: Tell me one more thing that horoscopes are not true ... :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Why does the place of birth play a role? What should be different about me if my mother had given birth to me in Horner Spital instead of Hollabrunner? I would be the same person. A person develops in the womb according to a genetically determined plan and is only influenced by the behavior of the mother, e.g. B. Consumption of harmful substances (I'm talking of alcohol, of course: D) influences. To what extent should the stars play a role? They don't change the genetic code.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:20 pm
You thought I was a virgin or a fish - that's something else. What does that say about me now? Is that why I am a better or a worse person?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Because then the star constellation for the calculation of your ascendant, etc. is different.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:25 pm
Gut: Why do you think that stars thousands of light years away affect human fate? The gravitational effect is negligible, as is the radiation (except for a supernova).
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Stop. Please read the long post to Heiko - at least the upper part. You carry your virgin side strongly to the outside. ;) So I was right after all. :) Besides, it has nothing to do with a better or worse person. I'll post the rest of it to you right away. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Personality: The Virgo ascendant provides all sun signs with a large portion of reason, which is reflected in a balanced life planning, whereby Taurus, Scorpio and Gemini particularly benefit from this rational aspect of Virgo by strengthening their self-confidence through a balanced worldview. Skills: Virgo ascendant thinks in their blood, so they are suitable for responsible activities such as research and teaching. With a lot of enthusiasm for the subject, they can win over others to their ideas without leaving the ground of reality - especially in financial terms. Dangerous speculations and insecure transactions that may promise high profits are therefore not their thing, because they love security and calculated risk in all areas of life. A high work ethic, objectivity and a crystal clear mind also make them excellent team players! Love: Virgo ascendants live their love in full harmony - divorces are extremely rare for them! However, the search for the "better half" can take a long time, because you are very critical when choosing a partner and only want to be satisfied with the optimum: But in the long run - if you consider the low divorce rate - it will not be a mistake got to! And does that sound familiar to you?
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 4:30 p.m.
Because it can be calculated.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:31 pm
I usually don't reveal anything at all, because I'm seen as rather closed and shy of contact.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
But you're telling me the opposite: that I need more self-confidence and that my worldview is too negative, so anything but balanced. That is partly true. However, in my performance reviews I am repeatedly criticized for not being a team player and communicative enough. Others for
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 16:37
The gravitational influence? You know Ptolemy. He was also good at calculating the spheres, but he was still on the wrong scientific path.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
I only posted the definition of your ascendant to you. Simply put, the way you appear to the outside world. And I estimate you to be at least 75% - 80% as it is there. To be 100% accurate, you have to invest some money and have everything calculated exactly. I can not do that.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:43 pm
Sorry, but I'm not an astrologer and I don't really know.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:44 pm
The Lord of Gemini is Mercury, the clever one, gifted with reason. But even he does not go against the nature of the twins. Because despite their high intelligence and their logical thinking ability, twin-borns will let their hearts speak in the decisive moments of their lives, even if reasons of reason stand against it. Most of all, Gemini detests boredom and stagnation. His life is subject to constant change. Because he loves variety and always has to be on the move, looking for something new, better or just for something different. Persistence isn't its strong point. He also tends to be somewhat superficial. There is little point in accusing him of lack of sympathy or demanding depth from him. Those who look for strong feelings in him will be disappointed, but those who need constant stimulation will appreciate him. It is astonishing that he is absolutely loyal in interpersonal relationships. He will always visit his old circle of friends. Probably the unsteady needs a resting point that is familiar to him. In erotic terms, however, he has at least two irons in the fire. The Gemini-born is passionate about talking and he is a brilliant speaker. But he also listens carefully to others. Because he is very curious and wants to learn as much as possible. That's why he always needs a crowd of people around him. He is less drawn to nature and certainly not to rural seclusion. His territory is the big city with its diverse possibilities. As an air sign, Gemini does not have a strong relationship with material things. Money is there for him to have fun. He likes to spend it on things that others think are superfluous. If he doesn't have one, he can live quite well in restricted circumstances. And he loves the game. Some surrender to gambling because of the excitement and excitement of the new. But here is the danger for him to become addicted. Because twins are easily seduced and have a tendency to be addictive.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:46 pm
And what's that supposed to do? I might as well throw out money to get a description of how I look. What do I get out of it then?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
But most of the time you don't believe in God either because you can't grasp him rationally. So why astrology if you don't understand it either?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
If you are interested, do it or get books about it (no, not a zodiac booklet, but a scientific treatise) and study it more closely. Otherwise leave it. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:49 pm
It is scientifically detectable. ;) That is the difference. I don't understand completely but partially. And it just convinced me - God on the other hand not (yet).
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
The latter. I, my surroundings and God decide my fate, but no points in the sky.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
Only if you tell yourself it's science. Just as it is sometimes claimed that dowsing and the like can be scientifically explained.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
It is - at least when there are no charlatans at work. Has something to do with geomagnetic fields and water veins. ;) And just because you lack interest in such sciences and believe in God does not mean that it cannot be explained scientifically.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18, 2008 at 4:55 pm
It is essentially not about your fate but about your personal condition. One should see horoscopes as a suggestion, not as a guide! If, of course, it is written: You expect a money win this week, then that is nonsense.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Mostly nonsense: That's right. Absolutely not. I like persistence, change is more of a concern for me. I am very consistent! Others are more likely to judge the latter than I am. I am very compassionate! I have very strong feelings! [quote = Protagoras; 21500] It is astonishing that he is absolutely loyal in interpersonal relationships. [/ quote] Absolutely!
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
But you still haven't explained to me why you believe that your personality is shaped by the stars and not by your genes, your upbringing and your environment and your life experiences.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Don't they contradict each other? Just as little.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:07 pm
What about the addiction? Before that you dread - see alcohol and smoking discussion. ;)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
And why should they be palpable for the rod or its carrier? Theology is also a science, but it is more of a human science than a natural science.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:09 pm
No. More details and also about your other posts tomorrow. Until then, have a good night :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 18th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
I have never tried to see if I am at risk of addiction. That would be nonsense: Make me addicted so that I then know that I can become addicted.: D.
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
Likewise. I'll take a look at your Cancer with Aquarius ascendant. Isn't 'Nachtle' Hessian?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Let's be honest: do you really think I would have a different personality if I had been born in a different hospital or if I had been born two days later (because I came two days early)? In addition: If I understand you correctly, the stars only determine our personality, not our future. Then what are horoscopes for?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
Well, that's what I found out about you on the internet: About 'Cancer with Aquarius ascendant': (Source: About 'Aquarius Ascendant' in general: (Source:) and here: (Source:) and here: (Source:) and here : (Source:) and here: [quote] The one born in the Aquarius ascendant is a very stubborn one
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Very interesting discussion! I am Aquarius, an air sign .... and the constellation Aquarius has set for us in January / February, otherwise only visible just above the horizon. Its stars are at different distances from the earth, so (this applies to all so-called star images) only form certain patterns or views from the earth, about which one could certainly argue. In addition, the 'constellations' have shifted since they were first identified: with the best will in the world, I cannot see any formative influence on myself! At most if you want to see yourself as part of the universe and see a relationship between everything and everyone! Then more like numerology, I've read very fascinating books about it. Commuting and dowsing is nothing mysterious, your subconscious answers conscious questions.
Submitted by Nora on December 18th, 2008 at 7.45pm
So you mean that it is not the water veins, geomagnetic fields or power points that are responsible for the results, but that it is just imagination?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 19:47
In short: you believe in everything paranormal, just not in God?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
So you argue that astrology is a legitimate science because you can calculate. But how do you come to the interpretations? How do you figure out what the zodiac sign and what the ascendant should be responsible for?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
So let's summarize: You cannot explain why the stars can influence our life and you do not know why the personality changes if you are born in a different place or a few hours earlier. The only reason you think astrology is science and true is because you can make nice graphs and do calculations on it. Have I understood that correctly? Incidentally, the Jehovah's Witnesses have scientifically calculated various worldsets from the Bible ... Can you at least explain why a dowsing rod can detect water veins? I really don't want to make fun of you, I just don't get it. Is it the magic of math? So much speaks against astrology (just remember that according to astrologers, Pope John Paul II should die every year in the 90s), nothing for it. You don't seem to think too much of Nostradamus (). Are you really that uncritical about science, despite its many failures? Could it be that, since you mostly do not believe in God, you are simply looking for some other superordinate power, namely the power of the stars, so that it gives you support?
Submitted by Scifi on December 18th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Here is an amusing excerpt from Alessandro Manzoni's ingenious novel 'Die Verlobten': (It's about an older, learned nobleman): This raises a question for me: If the astrologers apparently don't even agree among themselves which method is the right one, how should they then create usable horoscopes?
Submitted by Scifi on December 19th, 2008 at 02:48 am
Yes and no. I am from the zodiac sign Cancer. Most of the traits associated with cancer are true of me. The ascendant only tells how I present my personality to the outside world. As a tip: Take the description from Cancer and immediately remove it with Aquarius. Then it should roughly fit. Here in your summary a lot is missing, such as. Family life and creativity. What is definitely true: moody and exhausting, as well as being in- and extroverted. Also be empathetic and socially minded. Being sociable depends on my mood: whether I'm more of an ex- or introvert. ;) I am definitely not angry. But I freak out quickly, which is done again in 5-10 minutes. That has to do with my moodiness. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 19th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
I have not yet allowed myself to be taken to a fixed rating. Or? But I find the topic very interesting and have dealt with it a lot. I find some things plausible, other things in turn not. I am critical of this science and all other 'paranormal' but open to it. Until a few years ago, I even thought it was all nonsense. However, some experiences have changed my attitude towards it.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 19th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
I'm going to do the scifi now: But numerology is just a coincidence. For the rest, I agree with you, numerology is also a very fascinating subject.
Submitted by Protagoras on December 19th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
That's what is meant by 'irascible': Sudden, violent outbursts of anger that quickly subside.
Submitted by Scifi on December 19th, 2008 at 13:07
So I didn't mean outbursts of anger by freaking out, I like to moan around. Is that more understandable? When I'm angry, I usually start crying and go somewhere I'm alone until I've calmed down. ;) :)
Submitted by Protagoras on December 19, 2008 at 1:13 pm
[quote = Protagoras; 21724] As a tip: Take the description of Cancer and the same with Aquarius. Then it should roughly fit. Here in your summary a lot is missing, such as. Family life and creativity. Alright: Alright: Alright: Alright: Alright: Alright: Alright: Is that right? As a housewife, I can hardly imagine you.
Submitted by Scifi on December 19, 2008 at 1:17 pm
To put it poetically: the stars are so far away, the numbers are so close to me;) I once heard a lecture on the subject of numerology, was more than skeptical, and the lecturer told me based on my numbers (checksum etc) that I would go with Moved from home 19 years ago and started my own business straight away. Which was absolutely true and no one could have told him. That made me from a skeptic to an interested person ... In my opinion, commuting is the same: try it out and see what happens.
Submitted by Nora on December 19th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
It is not that unusual for people to move out of their homes after graduating from high school.
Submitted by Scifi on December 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
After graduating from high school, I would have been at 18 ... What convinced me so much was that he mentioned 19 with the addition of 'self-employed'. Which exactly was true: D
Submitted by Nora on December 19th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
I didn't know that 'self-employed' refers to your employment. After all, your profile says that you are (now) a secretary.
Submitted by Scifi on December 19th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
That 'self-sufficient' was actually more related to the human component;) I really wanted to get away from home before suffocating (I think you know what I mean).
Submitted by Nora on December 19th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Question to Protagoras: When you met your current partner, did you actually check straight away whether you fit together from the stars? And if you had found out, no, would you have dumped him right away?
Submitted by Scifi on December 24th, 2008 at 9:46 pm
But now I'm confused:
Submitted by Scifi on December 27th, 2008 at 1:21 am
Is it a coincidence that with Lorginn and Protagoras two agnostics (yes, Protagoras, I draw a drawer) are astrological believers? I think astrology is incompatible with Christianity. After all, it is also used to calculate the times of death. But how did Jesus say: 'You know neither the hour nor the day.' But that's by no means the only reason I don't believe in them. You can calculate a lot, but the most beautiful calculations are useless if you start from wrong basic assumptions.
Submitted by Scifi on December 27th, 2008 at 1:25 am
Do not see any connection between astrology and Christianity.
Submitted by lorginn on December 27, 2008 at 1:41 am
I don't see any connection either, just a contradiction, an incompatibility.
Submitted by Scifi on December 27th, 2008 at 1:44 am
It is not really possible to calculate the time of death. Where does the information come from? What other reasons are there? Faith excludes faith? Wrong basic assumptions?
Submitted by lorginn on December 27th, 2008 at 01:51 am
Even in ancient Rome, the sons of rich fathers had astrologers predict the death of their fathers. Ovid e.g. B. mentions this (in the Metamorphoses: 'The son researches the father's years long before that time.') In addition, every year some known astrologers calculate important events for the coming year. Since the early 90s they have been calculating the death of Pope John Paul II for every year. Protagoras argues that astrology is a science because one can make scientific calculations there, in contrast to theology, for example. However, it is based on the basic assumption that star constellations have an influence on our life or at least our personality, and not only that, but also where we are born. All the calculations and graphs are based on this assumption. And this very Ann
Submitted by Scifi on December 27, 2008 at 01:59
But that would have to apply in the same way to all people who have numbers like you.
Submitted by Scifi on December 27th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Let them deny it once, if they can, the fateful conjunction of Saturnus with Jupiter. And when did you ever hear it said that influenza is reproduced ...? And do the gentlemen want to deny me the influenza? Can you deny that there are stars? Or can you tell me that you are up there for nothing like so many pin buttons are in a sewing pillow? .... But what I cannot understand are the doctors; to admit that we are under such a harmful conjunction and then to say to ourselves with a bold forehead: r
Submitted by Scifi on December 28th, 2008 at 1:22 am
Hello Protagoras, could you be so nice and tell me YOUR opinion about my star constellation? I am: Sign of the zodiac: AQUARIUS ascendant: Sagittarius Moon: SCORPIO I don't know whether I should believe all of this 100%, but I can tell you from my own previous experience that after I got to know people PERSONALLY, I participate disproportionately often the determination of the zodiac hit the mark and people look at me confused because they want to know from me how I know this. I would be really happy, ELEKTRA
Submitted by Elektra on December 28th, 2008 at 7:37 am
Here, too, my reservation remains: Couldn't it be that you concentrated more on the similarities and rather negated the differences? For me it is also the case that there are definitely similarities between me and my zodiac sign, but also a lot of differences. In addition, these character descriptions are written in such a way that they will at least partially apply to someone soon. As for Protagoras: Please be patient a little. Since she only writes at work and is now on vacation in her company, she will unfortunately only get in touch in about 2 weeks.
Submitted by Scifi on December 28th, 2008 at 11:35 am
HELLO SCIFI, my statement can only be interpreted in terms of my hit rate when 'guessing' the signs of the zodiac. Regardless of differences and similarities, this is regularly significantly high, which should not be the case from a purely scientific and statistical point of view. Normally, my hit rate would have to be 1:11 - which is not the case, however, since I'm immediately right on every second to third person. If not, I often manage to at least say with the others whether it is a water / air / fire or earth star sign, which has made me think a bit over the years. I also never think much about the specific person beforehand - I feel this more instinctively, which I cannot explain to you rationally either. LG, ELEKTRA I still have a very personal question for you, because your posts always say: Until death - red - white - red! Could it be that you are also an admirer of the TEMPLAR ORDER? I ask you this because my son is very interested in the High Middle Ages, when his great passion has been medieval sword fighting for several years and embodies the role of a Knight Templar in his MA group HIEB & STICH. Since he has always been wearing a white tunic with a red cross with paws + matching cloak as a garment over his chain mail for years, and often makes similar statements, I suspected - I can of course be completely wrong ?!
Submitted by Elektra on December 29th, 2008 at 8:32 am
Good Morning! Unfortunately you are completely wrong - I am an admirer and representative of the glorious, great, but unfortunately not so great Austrian nation in the recent past. : D The saying from my signature comes from a speech that our Federal Chancellor Schuschnigg gave in 1938 shortly before the German invasion in order to mobilize his supporters for a resistance, which then did not take place. As far as astrology is concerned: People are not that different or that can be put into drawers in terms of character that really every twelfth is completely different from the others. I have little to do with my zodiac sign including the ascendant, and according to her, Protagoras is both introverted and extroverted at the same time. I have already explained my arguments against astrology in detail: First, the time of birth can be influenced artificially, why should a person's personality change too? And why should I have a different character if I was born a few miles further west?
Submitted by Scifi on December 29th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Dearest Protagoras, this statement from you sounds somehow very skeptical:
Submitted by Scifi on December 29th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Hello Scifi, well then I hope for you that the glorious nation will look better again one day. In any case, 'Salzburger Nockerl & Kaiserschmarrn' are not to be despised. I could sit down there! Regarding your statement regarding astrology: Of course, the arguments you put forward keep going through my head, because THEY are logical! What I still cannot explain to myself, however, is my quite high - and inexplicable - hit rate! If this had only happened a few times, it could still be considered a coincidence. But after 20 years? What do you think about ? VG, Elektra
Submitted by Elektra on December 31, 2008 at 9:26 am
I wish you a good morning! Kaiserschmarrn is one of my favorite dishes, I don't like Salzburger Nockerln as much. But basically I am very satisfied with our kitchen. According to Protagoras, I am a twin with a Virgo ascendant. We have already extensively analyzed my personality, which can be derived from this, and I answered really honestly: [URL] http://www.g-geschichte.de/forum
Submitted by Scifi on December 31, 2008 at 09:40
I am also not absolutely sure about astrology and its expressiveness, but I also cannot categorically dismiss everything as coincidence. I see it more like this: Every person is an individual, shaped by his genes, his socialization, life situation, etc. Therefore, each individual differs from the other, which makes the differences. However, there are certain basic features of a character, which can be found in the individual zodiac signs. Part of what I have often experienced. It is said of Sagittarius, for example, that you are generally communicative and willing to travel, which I found confirmed in several Sagittarius friends. If we then, as Protagoras already mentioned, include the ascendants, there is a very wide range of possibilities! The truth is probably somewhere in between; there are certain similarities & tendencies - but it always depends on the individual what HE makes of it. P.S. Doesn't Prince Harry have sail ears too? Which in turn would speak for the PRINCE OF WALES! A HAPPY NEW YEAR! LG, Elektra
Submitted by Elektra on December 31, 2008 at 10:49 am
Scifi, look at it this way ... at the time of your birth there is a very specific constellation of stars that is burned into your hard drive at that moment. The next few minutes the constellations shift again and you are someone else? Tonight I will again interview my wife mother, who is well versed in this topic, and report again in more detail. lG
Submitted by lorginn on December 31, 2008 at 10:54 am
And why should a constellation of stars 'burn into' me? They are light years away, the influence of their gravity and their radiation on the earth is negligible, so you can probably rule out that they change my gene structure. And if it does: why then only at the time of my birth and not permanently?
Submitted by Scifi on December 31, 2008 at 10:57 am
Scifi, if you approach this topic strictly scientifically, astrology will not open up for you. There is even a therapy that works with cosmic rays. Wasn't there ever talk of changing genes?
Submitted by lorginn on December 31, 2008 at 11:02 am
Me, yes. That is how I see it too. As Protagoras and I have already analyzed, Gemini are curious, attentive and do not like boredom. That applies to me fully. According to Protagoras, twins are also sociable, willing to spend money, flighty in love and big city people. None of this applies to me. At some point I read that twins are also quite enterprising with the courage to take risks
Submitted by Scifi on December 31, 2008 at 11:11 am
Hello! As also born in the zodiac sign Gemini (all other astrological aspects - no idea) I can confirm to you that Gemini always have their two sides, which can also contradict each other. (The living proof - not born in the zodiac sign Gemini - is sitting in the next room ...). VG Christian
Submitted by 913Chris on December 31, 2008 at 11:16 am
Here you differ from Protagoras: She believes in astrology, precisely because she considers it to be a serious science, like physics and mathematics. If it works, then more likely with the placebo effect. A friend of my mother's, who apparently couldn't cope with her divorce, suddenly discovered that she had healing hands. So she started her own business as an energetic specialist and is doing quite well in the business. When my mother once asked her snippily whether the therapy would actually work if you don't believe in it, the healer replied very well: If you don't believe in it, you won't come to her anyway. What then? As Elektra aptly said, a person's personality is determined by their genes, their upbringing, and their environment. If
Submitted by Scifi on December 31, 2008 at 11:21 am
Great: No matter how you are as a Gemini, so the zodiac sign is definitely right?
Submitted by Scifi on December 31, 2008 at 11:23 am
I, too, consider horoscopes, esthorics, etc. to be Humborg: you have to be able to play with words well, that's all. Elektra, you said that you encountered a lot of information in such a lecture. But: How many did this information not apply to ???
Submitted by CATO on December 31, 2008 at 11:31 am
You are an agnostic. Why? I suppose it matters that you cannot grasp God scientifically. But do you believe in astrology even though (or because?) It is not scientifically measurable?
Submitted by Scifi on December 31, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Because I can currently find myself in it. Christianity is also very impressive for me in terms of content, but not so tangible. It may be that astrology leads to self-dealing, while some things about the Catholic Church are harder to digest.
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 02:09
I received a training course on astrology for the New Year and try to reproduce it. So on the subject of the times of death it should be written that although there can be critical moments in a horoscope, these are difficult to find at first glance. In addition, the horoscope is not mandatory, but can be influenced by the person's free decision. It would be interesting to put a death horoscope over a natal horoscope, then it would be easier with an interpretation, also about the cause of death. Basically, the overall picture of a natal chart is to be considered. Tensions can be noticed, but they do not necessarily have to end in a negative way, or a harmonious picture emerges. The tensions can be worked on. The following planets belong in a natal chart: Sun; the dominant zodiac sign at the moment of birth moon; the subconscious, mood, family, mother Mercury; Contact with the outside world Venus; Love life and devotion Mars; Assertiveness, aggression Jupiter; Religion, morals Saturn; Father and past Uranus; Upheaval, revolution Neptune; Inspiration Pluto; Transformation lunar knot; Intersection with Act Chiron; newly discovered celestial body, represents the inner guidance Lilith; calculated sensitive point, stands for fear AC (ascendant); is the sign of the zodiac in the east during birth and shapes the personality more and more in the course of life; (Medium Coeli) the highest point in the horoscope gives information about the talents and profession. These planets are calculated at the hour of birth and placed in the horoscope. The points are connected with lines. First there is an interpretation of the planet in a certain house (1-12). Then we look at how one planet is in opposition, conjunction, sextile or trine or square to certain other planets. This also gives an interpretation. In addition, there are the distributions in the various signs, air, water, fire + earth signs. Example for a constellation of mine: Mercury in Leo in sextile (60 °) with Venus in Gemini results in the following interpretation: With this aspect you should be able to express yourself well in writing and orally and above all want to. You seem to have a special talent in this area. You may work as a writer or otherwise in communication, whereby an activity in the artistic field should not be out of reach ... The division of the horoscope into four parts was also interesting. With the idea, plan, deed and harvest that represent and show life, for example, where there are intense phases with change or where it is quieter, more boring? becomes. A total of 50 interpretations about one person are standard. A precise interpretation of the interpretation does not make sense, but the overlapping of energies as a whole gives a picture of the personality. It is a guide to the journey into the self. Not a belief but a preoccupation with a person's abilities and tasks. So please wait for your questions
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 03:08
Thank you for this detailed presentation. At least I now understand why Protagoras thinks the whole thing is science. However, I have already noticed a few contradictions and inconsistencies: But that sounds very vague. Somehow this reminds me of so many psychoanalysts (not all of them, of course, Caesar, although I wouldn't use any): If the therapy works, it is thanks to them. If it fails, it is the patient's fault because he has not 'opened up'. It sounds like an excuse that the horoscope is not compulsory but can be influenced: If a person agrees with their horoscope, this is proof of their correctness. If the person does not agree, the horoscope is not wrong, but the person has decided differently. In this way a horoscope becomes incontestable. I also concluded from Protagoras' and Electra's explanations that the horoscope is actually more about creating a personality profile. But how should one deliberately influence one's personality? You can of course work on yourself, but it's a long process. That I'm not a big city person, although i
Submitted by Scifi on 01.01.2009 at 10:59
Well recognized;) No it's not an excuse. In life you always have the choice to choose right, left or the middle :) Yes, there are different periods in life that come under the many possible planetary constellations, where change takes place or not. When you have a critical moment
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 14:20
Very spongy. You can always argue that way. I will never go to a casino, even though according to the horoscope I have a tendency to gamble. In other words: the horoscope is always right. If it doesn't work, then the horoscope isn't wrong, it has just been misinterpreted. Of course, you could also see it the other way around. They are not either. But I can still see a certain difference to Goethe.
Submitted by Scifi on 01.01.2009 at 14:29
Yes, and also why Pluto should be relevant, although z. B. Saturn's moon Titan is larger.
Submitted by Scifi on 01.01.2009 at 14:32
OK, thanks, I can live with that. lG
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 14:32
It is also interesting to look at the horoscopes of dictators. Like Hitler or Lenin, for example. There are considerable tensions, but also culminations of planetary positions, which indicate a unique ability to change relationships.
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 14:55
There is one more thing: In your opinion, it is not heredity, upbringing and experience that primarily determines a person's personality, but rather the time and place of birth. This gives rise to two interesting questions: - Would you advise a heavily pregnant woman to have an astrologer determine the ideal time and place of birth at which the child would develop a desired personality? Should the woman then go to this place and have the birth induced artificially there? - Assume that Hitler was not born on April 20th, 1889 in Braunau, but on April 19th, 1889 in Linz. He would have had the same parents. The father would have been bad as usual, he would have been brought up as usual, his mother would have died as usual. Do you think that only because of the slightly different date and place of birth instead of the real Hitler z. B. become a pacifist carpenter?
Submitted by Scifi on 01.01.2009 at 15:01
For God's sake. Don't you know what can happen? Every operation is a risk that needs to be considered carefully. That would be bungling into creation. No way. Minutes or changes in location can result in a different horoscope, but basic dispositions do not change constantly. Is the Braunau and Linz on one degree of latitude? There are, for example, planets that move very slowly in their orbit. Years are crucial. You have also forgotten that a horoscope does not necessarily lead to you becoming a psychopathic dictator. You have your horoscope and you should be able to deal with it.
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 15:12
So I'll summarize: The stars determine my personality, but still I'm not necessarily like my horoscope wants it to be. The stars basically dictate when I will have a car accident and when I will die, but only if I actually behave as my horoscope wants. What good is the horoscope then? And why am I not a rhetorically brilliant, sociable, extravagant city dweller with two lovers at the same time, even though I should be, according to my horsoscope?
Posted by Scifi on 01/01/2009 at 3:30 p.m.
...it shows. Would be better in the formulation. The stars show critical moments in life, but the choice is yours ... Can't judge your horoscope. Your written formulations are absolutely brilliant. The other descriptions are also not properties, but behaviors that you can live if you want.
Submitted by lorginn on 01.01.2009 at 15:42
[quote = lorginn; 23623] The stars show critical moments in life, but the choice is yours ... [/ quote] Great, what does that help me? Everyone has constant critical moments in their lives from which disaster can grow. In the job and in a relationship you can screw up at any time, you can have an accident at any time, you can be assaulted or the victim of a break-in at any time, you can get infected with a nasty disease at any time ... What I mean by that: First, if my horoscope predicts a critical moment for me, I still don't know what to look out for. You and Protagoras say that you shouldn't believe newspaper horoscopes that predict financial loss for a certain day. Second: The average person constantly experiences major and minor misfortunes. So if you read your horoscope and believe in it, it won't be difficult to remember any misfortune that can serve as confirmation that you really have a critical point. Now one more (hopefully not too) personal question: Did you actually read from your horoscope that your marriage would not work out? Did you and your wife actually go together in terms of the horoscope? If not, why did you marry her? If so, why didn't it work anyway? [quote = lorginn; 23623] Can't judge your horoscope. Your written formulations are absolutely brilliant. The other descriptions are also not properties, but behaviors that you can live if you want. [/ Quote] Protagoras has already done that for me: Great, what does that help me? Everyone has constant critical moments in their lives from which disaster can grow. In the job and in a relationship, you can screw up at any time, you can have an accident at any time, you can be assaulted or the victim of a break-in at any time, you can be infected with a nasty disease at any time ... if my horoscope predicts a critical moment for me, I still don't know what to look out for. You and Protagoras say that you shouldn't believe newspaper horoscopes that predict financial loss for a certain day. Second: The average person constantly experiences major and minor misfortunes. So if you read your horoscope and believe in it, it won't be difficult to remember any misfortune that can serve as confirmation that you really have a critical point. Now another (hopefully
Submitted by Scifi on 01.01.2009 at 15:55
[quote = Scifi; 23624] Now another (hopefully not too) personal question: Did you actually read from your horoscope that your marriage would not work out? Did you and your wife actually go together in terms of the horoscope? If not, why did you marry her? If so, why didn't it work anyway? [/ Quote] You devil. Bringing such questions to the point in such a short time is awesome. Yeah, maybe next time I should really ask the stars. From both horoscopes, a long-term happy relationship was contrary. Nevertheless, as is well known, hope dies at the end. No, let's write like this ... The nice thing about astrology is, if you don't give a picture of a catastrophe, you can also get good things from such partnerships. My thirteen years before that matched my horoscope very well, but I did more roller coaster rides with my wife. I don't want to miss that either. Everything is open to you. Tackle it. [quote = Scifi; 23624] Protagoras has already done that for me: You devil. Bringing such questions to the point in such a short time is awesome. Yeah, maybe next time I should really ask the stars. From both horoscopes, a long-term happy relationship was contrary. Nevertheless, as is well known, hope dies at the end. No, let's write like this ... The nice thing about astrology is, if you don't give a picture of a catastrophe, you can also find good things in such partnerships. My thirteen years before that matched my horoscope very well, but I did more roller coaster rides with my wife. I don't want to miss that either. Everything is open to you. Tackle it. [quote = Scifi; 23624] Protagoras has already done that for me: You devil. Getting to the heart of such questions in such a short time is awesome. Yeah, maybe next time I should really ask the stars. From both horoscopes, a long-term happy relationship was contrary. Nevertheless, as is well known, hope dies at the end. No, let's write like this ... The nice thing about astrology is, if you don't give a picture of a catastrophe, you can also get good things from such partnerships. My thirteen years before that matched my horoscope very well, but I did more roller coaster rides with my wife. I don't want to miss that either. Everything is open to you. Tackle it. [quote = Scifi; 23624] Protagoras has already done that for me: You devil. Bringing such questions to the point in such a short time is awesome. Yeah, maybe next time I should really ask the stars. From both horoscopes, a long-term happy relationship was contrary. Nevertheless, as is well known, hope dies z
Submitted by lorginn on January 1st, 2009 at 4:08 pm
And where is the power of the stars then? No thanks. In contrast to what is stated in my horoscope, I am thrifty.
Submitted by Scifi on 01.01.2009 at 16:24
I can answer 'no' to both questions. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on January 27th, 2009 at 11:22 am
We'd go very well together. :) :) :)
Submitted by Protagoras on January 27th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Why not, if you believe that with the help of horoscopes everything can be calculated scientifically exactly? So it would be only natural that you don't want to 'waste' your time on a man with whom, according to the stars, you cannot be happy? What do the stars say about you now? Do you go together?
Submitted by Scifi on January 27th, 2009 at 9:04 pm
You're exaggerating. As I wrote in one of the many posts here, I am very open but also skeptical about the whole thing. I don't just base my life on it. Besides, I've never been with someone I couldn't have been happy with in the long run (to take up your statement). What the stars say about my relationship We are a great match. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on January 28th, 2009 at 10:44 am
What did the stars say about your relationship with your ex-fiancé? Was it 'inevitable' for failure? And if not, why did it fail? (I already know roughly why it failed in reality, I'm interested in the astrological reasons.: D) Most of your contributions didn't work that way. You preferred to refer to the fact that astrology is a highly serious, exact science with which you can calculate everything scientifically exactly: But you once mentioned that your ex-fiancé was your first relationship and lasted 7.5 years. I thought your current one came right afterwards?
Submitted by Scifi on January 28th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
Yes and no. We could have done it too ... How do you know why or why it failed? To be honest, that's one of the topics I won't comment on any further. I ask to consider this. What bothers me about your statement: highly serious, highly scientific and exact. Why? Quite simply: I did not write that, just that it can be calculated. Even if I believe in it to a certain point, I don't get 100% nailed on it. He was my 1st long-term relationship and my 1st great love.
Submitted by Protagoras on January 29th, 2009 at 09:19 o'clock
I don't know for sure, of course, but you've already made hints. You wrote about your fiancé: You wrote about your current one: It can be seen from this that it is with yours
Submitted by Scifi on January 30th, 2009 at 1:31 am
I interpreted your statements differently:
Submitted by Scifi on January 30th, 2009 at 1:38 am
I can imagine. It is well known that after the failure of a long-term relationship, women get a few guys for in between and then dump them when they are ready for something serious again. Poor guys ... :(
Submitted by Scifi on January 30th, 2009 at 01:58
I hope now for you that you didn't mean it seriously. Otherwise, you are welcome to give yourself a slap in the face with my best regards. Get a couple of guys for in between ... honestly. Yes, I still had 2 relationships in between. That didn't really fit, but they weren't fill-in gaps, they were serious attempts at relationships. Unfortunately, the feelings for each other didn't work out, which was a shame. Regarding the other two posts from you: The relationship with my ex-fiancé failed because of other things. As I said, you won't find out more about it. Yes, it's just a science - perhaps better formulated border science. And as you can see from my posts, I don't understand it 100% either. So you can't pin me down in a highly scientific way either. I Agree?
Submitted by Protagoras on January 30th, 2009 at 8:43 am
[quote = Protagoras; 27817] I hope now for you that you didn't mean it seriously.[/ quote] To be honest, I'm not quite sure of you in this regard. Basically, I already have the impression that you are rather conservative when it comes to relationships and that you reject one-night stands in particular (To be honest, I am not entirely smart about you in this regard. Basically, I already have the impression that you are in You are rather conservative about relationship matters and especially reject one-night stands (To be honest, I can't quite make sense of you in this regard. Basically, I already have the impression that you are more conservative about relationship matters and especially one-night stands. Reject stands (to be honest, I’m not quite able to make sense of you in this regard. Basically, I already have the impression that you are rather conservative when it comes to relationships and that you reject one-night stands in particular (so to be honest, in this regard I will not entirely smart out of you. Basically, I already have the impression that you are in Be Drawings are rather conservative and especially reject one-night stands (to be honest, I’m going from Di.
Submitted by Scifi on January 31, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Why 'unfortunately'? Look at it this way: for some it is a pastime, for others it is gross nonsense and for others it is a help in life. Everyone has their own. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on February 10th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
But that is exactly the problem. Those who take astrology really seriously orient their lives accordingly. Whether choosing a partner or choosing a job - everything is made dependent on the stars. But if you consider astrology to be nonsense, as I do, that is extremely worrying. An astrology program is broadcast every Sunday evening on an Austrian radio station. People call there who make such serious decisions as whether they should get a divorce, whether they should quit their job, even whether they should emigrate, depending on the stars. The stars are not a basis for decision-making! These people let the stars or astrologers take their independent thinking and weighing up for them, instead of thinking rationally and making decisions. You probably see it differently as a believer in astrology, but it worries me. This is not a help in life, but damage to life.
Submitted by Scifi on February 10th, 2009 at 9:10 pm
I Agree. But ultimately everyone should collect their own (life) experiences.
Submitted by Protagoras on February 11th, 2009 at 09:55 o'clock
You have to do that anyway and you can't avoid it anyway. I'm just afraid that if you blindly rely on the stars and delegate all responsibility to them, these experiences will often be negative.
Submitted by Scifi on February 11th, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Ask all the superstitious here: Today is Friday the 13th. Were you afraid? : D
Submitted by Scifi on February 13th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
No, maybe even if you know what will happen on Friday the 13th. The ban on the Templar movement.
Submitted by Obelix on February 14th, 2009 at 02:37 am
No, but our training was canceled, others may have feared it. : D
Submitted by Heiko82 on February 14th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
Astrology is a search for the irrational. We live it in a scientific scale, rational world. The search for the mysterious metaphysical world was lost. We would like to delegate our fate. It is also an escape from responsibility towards oneself. It is seductive to know that you are not to blame but Pluto who lingers in the circle of Saturn. But it is dangerous to become dependent on the horoscope. It can be devastating to tie political decisions to the stars. One sees that especially Ludwig the 16, who, as is well known, directs his politics according to the stars: p
Submitted by Obelix on February 14th, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Yes. And like every Friday the 13th, it started with bad news and ended with good luck. :)
Submitted by Protagoras on February 24th, 2009 at 11:13 am