General Question

troubleinharlem's avatar

Why are the characteristics for my astrological sign pretty close to my personality?

Asked by troubleinharlem (7981points) January 24th, 2011

I don’t believe in horoscopes, tarot cards, or astrology, but I looked at the personality traits for Scorpio, and I found that for the most part, it was really accurate.
On my “Big Five” personality test, there was also a section about your “true” zodiac sign, and I tested as a “true” scorpio because of some characteristics I answered in the five hundred questions or so.

How is this possible? I don’t think that the stars have anything to do with my birth and personality, but it seems like they might. Can anyone help me figure this out?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

14 Answers

Rarebear's avatar

It’s called confirmation bias. What you should do is have someone go to another book or website you’re not familiar with, cut them out, and scramble them up. Try to pick your own.

WasCy's avatar

We’re all human, and being human we have multiple facets to our personalities. The “Zodiac signs” describe human traits with enough vagueness that we can ‘recognize ourselves’ in any of them. And since ‘our’ sign is supposed to describe ‘us’, then we also feel some kind of sense of belonging, too, I suppose.

I still prefer being a Scorpio, myself, to a Libra or Virgo, now that the ‘new’ signs have placed me on the dividing line between those two.

Nullo's avatar

Those things are broadly written so that everybody will turn up something.

Seelix's avatar

I agree with the other responses – people find meanings in horoscopes. I feel the same way about “fortune-tellers”. If a prediction is vague enough, it’ll come true.

Likeradar's avatar

I think @WasCy is exactly right. I’m a Taurus, and I generally fit the description. I am patient and greedy! I do like stability and being outside!
But then I read Scorpio… I am compassionate and impulsive!
And Gemini… I am versatile and inquisitive!

The point is, they all fit everyone.

crisw's avatar


Is three times the charm today? You beat me to it.


See this for my take on your question.

filmfann's avatar

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
No big thing. I’m an Aries (and we Aries don’t believe in the Zodiac), and I found 8 of the 10 descriptions listed for Scorpio fit me.

Rarebear's avatar

@crisw I’m glad you linked to that. I was looking for it and couldn’t find it.

Kardamom's avatar

Because all descriptions for horoscopes are GENERALIZATIONS. Any of the many (different in any city newspaper) horoscropes use generalizations that will have at least half of the descriptions fit anyone in the whole world. Amazing, isn’t it, how accurate they seem?

raisedhand432's avatar

I have many thoughts on this subject, as I have devoted 10 years to the study of it, alongside its’ companions mythology, and religion. What I will do is explain the chain of events and thoughts as they happened and try to explain my viewpoint on this. There is also a study I have devised to test astrology that I am currently working on.

On April 2nd, 2001, I met a man named Nick, who was born May 21, 1979. During the first hour we spent together, I noticed that his manner was very similiar to mine, unnervingly so. At this point in my life, I did not think there was any validity to astrology or to much of anything really. I have always been extremely skeptical and a very left-brained, logical mind. Anyways, I asked Nick, “Are we the same or something?” I asked him what his birthday was at that moment, and the urge to do so was instinctual. His birthday was exactly four days before mine, which is May 25, 1979. I then, instinctually, shared my experience of losing my left eye at the age of 15. He then told me he had also lost an eye. I injured my left eye June 2, 1994 and he injured his right eye May 13, 1994. This prompted me to study astrology and see if our similiar birthdates was the reason we are so similiar.
I devoured books on traditional astrology and mythology and religion for the next few years. I noticed a few interesting things and had some intriguing thoughts in that period. First, in relation to Christianity, it seemed that the story of Jesus and his disciples was a sort of allegory representing the zodiac. There are a couple of reasons why I thought this. The main reason deals with the disciple Thomas. Thomas translates literally to “twin”. Thomas’s most memorable and significant role in the bible is when he demands to stick his finger into the wound of Jesus, hence the term “doubting Thomas”. From this, I deduced that Thomas is representative of the sign of Gemini, the twins, for two reasons. The first is obvious: because Thomas literally means twin. The second reason is because he says he won’t believe until he is given proof, which is like the traditional idea of the personality of Gemini(which is my sign), that of a logical, skeptical person. Next, I deduced that the character of Jesus is the other twin. Gemini, the twins, is associated with the archetypal character of Hermes or Mercury, who is the messenger of the gods. The archetype is also the son of god and a selfless character devoted to service and the delivery of a message. The next curious thing I realized deals with the virgin birth. It occurred to me that perhaps it had to do with the sign of Virgo, the virgin. I realized that if Jesus were conceived during the time of Virgo(August 21-September 22), that he would emerge nine months later as a Gemini, as a twin, as Mercury, as the messenger of God. The last thing I noted about the disciples was that John the Baptist is probably a representation of Aquarius the water bearer. Next I discovered the myth of Odin, the scandinavian equivelant of Mercury, Hermes, and Jesus. I read a story about how he sacrifices his eye at the well of Mimir for wisdom. This affected me in a profound way, because I felt like I was basically one of many versions of Hermes/Mercury/Odin/Jesus and that I had lost my eye, so that this knowledge would become clear to me and that I should deliver the message. However, do not judge me as a fanatic for this. I am just a man observing and living. I recognize my inability to know, and keep an objective stance. But, this really got me thinking about the purpose of religious literature and mythology. It seems plausible to me that these stories resulted from these ancient peoples knowledge of the existence of these patterns that we call astrology, and that the stories were a way of passing the information along. Lastly, in regards to ancient people and how they came about these ideas, I wonder if they may have actually been smarter in certain ways than we are today. Perhaps, their right-brains were more developed and they could actually see and understand the patterns of life on a higher level than we can now because their minds were not hindered by language based thought. They were more enveloped in direct experience and therefore may have been able to actually see the pattern, which brings me to the next period of my studies- the last 6 years.
From the moment I met Nick and began to wonder about whether there was any truth to astrology, I began to ask everyone I met and knew what their birthday was. I also would look up the birthdates of any person I might study, see on television, read a book by, etc..
Any person I am familiar with in any capacity, I know their birthdate. For the first few years, nothing out of the ordinary occurred. I just sort of collected the data in my mind, and started questioning and comparing. Does this virgo guy act like this virgo girl? etc…

Now, here is the MEAT of what I have to say about this. I started to notice physical patterns. I started to see that virgos had a certain shape to their eyes. I started noticing geminis talked and acted a certain way. Then, I started, on occasion, to know someone’s birthdate within a few days because they looked very similiar to someone else I knew. I guessed Neko Case’s birthdate in this manner, simply by looking at a picture. I have done this quite a few times, and it is starting to happen more frequently as the pattern is becoming clearer in my mind. At some point, I realized that the simple reason this had happened was because I knew everyone’s birthday. If everyone went by their birthdate as their name, then everyone would have seen this pattern I am becoming aware of a long time ago. It is strange for me though, because I have not met one single person who looks at this the same way I do. Everyone seems to fall into two camps: they are either fanatical, gullible followers of astrology that regurgitate info from books like it is a religion that is all worked out already, or they vehemently deny the possibility and scoff at it. I have felt alone and isolated with what I feel is knowledge that could change the world as we know it. So, I have spent the last year or two trying to figure a way to show what I see. I figured if I can observe these patterns, there must be a way to show these patterns to others scientifically. One day, it hit me.
I have designed a study that can show what I see. The study will look at sets of siblings. If a pair of brothers have the same parents, it seems that they should be almost identical, yet they rarely are. I attribute this to their birthdate. There are other reasons, of course, but I think the birthdate is the main reason. I have noticed that some signs are taller while others are shorter, so height will be the focus. Since I am looking at same-sex siblings, it removes the unwanted variables of race, different genetics, gender, etc… Virgos and Pisces are the apex of the hypothetical line while Gemini and Sagittarius are the trough or the shortest of the hypothetical line. To make it very simple to understand, the hypothesis is that a virgo brother will be taller than his gemini brother a huge percentage of the time, if not every time. I will link a picture of the hypothetical line if anyone is interested. I am in the midst of collecting data right now, which is actually the reason I came to this site. I have been looking for ways to collect data online and figured this community may be willing to take part since it is devoted to knowledge.
There are a few more thoughts I’d like to add about this subject before I finish. I think that it is a science that could be developed. I don’t think that all of traditional astrology is correct. I think much of it is flawed. For instance, I do not think that the more in-depth astrological charts have any validity. I simply look at the birthdate. I also think that the 30 day span of a sign is too broad, and that as we study people to figure out the reality of the pattern, we can break it down into smaller increments, like 5 day spans. I also don’t go for the idea that it is causal. I think that the movement of the planets and everything is what time really is and that time and birthdates are just symbols we use to understand it, but the reality of it is understood without those symbols. To quote Bob Dylan, “Really the truth is just a plain picture”. I also think that we should learn about astrology from people, and not learn about people from astrology. Basically, it is completely undeveloped, though there is some truth in the ground plans the ancients laid out for us. We are the reality of it though, and that is where the answers will come from: the study of the people in correlation with time.

raisedhand432's avatar

Also, I think it is important to remember we don’t know everything. With this subject, people tend to write it off with a bold attitude. Everyday is a new day, and our thoughts change. You may realize something you hadn’t thought of. This is how it happened to me. I was sure there was no truth whatsoever to astrology. But, I discovered that there may be a pattern to it.
See above post.

klutzaroo's avatar

FYI, for anyone confused by the “new” signs, nothing has changed. Number one, its only for people born after 2009. Number two, that’s not even the type of astrology we follow anyway. Ours isn’t based on the actual stars, but on the solar calendar. Again, nothing has changed. Your sign has not changed. It is and will remain the same as its always been.

The description of Cancer fits me to a T. Even the general physical description (even down to “has trouble walking in a straight line without tripping,” lol). I’ve read every other description and there isn’t another that comes anywhere near close. It might be written to be general, but sometimes its a very specific description of traits that a person embodies and its rather eerie. But not all that uncommon.

crisw's avatar

BTW, I am also a Scorpio, and I just looked at your link. While all of the strengths fit me in some way, none of the weaknesses do (except perhaps “obsessive;” and I think that can be a strength!) The friendship characteristics were way off- I don’t do vengeance. Nor do I hide money, go in for conspiracy theories, refuse to admit I m wrong, appear unemotional, or act seductive and flirtatious.

So then I closed my eyes and clicked on a random sign. I got Taurus. And guess what! It was just about as accurate as the Scorpio profile! All of the strengths matches, none of the weaknesses did, and some of the other points fit well while others did not.

Again, this is how horoscopes work. You’ll remember the parts that seem to fit and conveniently discard the rest.

john65pennington's avatar

Short answer. I am a Sag and my horoscope and astrological definition is right on the money.

Answer this question




to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther