Your Zodiac sign - and how it influences your game

UrQuan

I'm a Mage, I have more magicka and talent for all kinds of spellcasting, but I'm often arrogant and absent-minded.
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Birthsigns#The_Mage

UrQuan

wayfarerx wrote: »

show previous quotes

x_t7ink_x wrote: »

The Egyptians clearly knew a lot more than we do present day... with science years ahead of ours..

WAT? For real? They had antibiotics, microprocessors and gene editing? Guess I missed that week in class.

They actually did kind of have antibiotics - they used Honey on wounds to prevent infections. I don't know if honey would technically be classified as an antibiotic (I've never been 100% clear on the exact scientific definition of antibiotics), but it definitely has powerful antimicrobial effects, and is incredibly effective at preventing infections - even at protecting against antibiotic-resistant strains of bacteria...

But no, the Egyptians clearly did not know a lot more than we do present day, and clearly did not have science years ahead of our own. They were far more advanced than most other civilizations of the time, and in many ways far more advanced than most civilizations that followed them for many centuries, but they weren't even close to current knowledge and science.

Fellenore_Ewalion

WHAT are you talking about?!?!

I was born twice, like a true star!

Daraugh

I was born on the Spring equinox so that makes me Pisces and Aries. I'm good so long as I don't weapon swap at the wrong moment

No Ophiucus? Honestly, the only reason I know that was because I was president of the Astronomy Club in college. (A physics major but graduated as an anthropology major concentrating in archeology.)

Ilsabet

I know what sign I am but I'm having a hard time connecting that to how I play the game. So let me describe how I approach ESO and let's see if you guys can tell me what sign best fits me.

1. I made 8 characters when I started the game. They all have brief but lore-appropriate and well-thought-out backstories. I planned them all out to be effective playable characters if I decide to start using them, which I haven't yet because of point 2.

2. Despite having 8 characters, I only actively play on one, having decided to continue into Silver and Gold on my main character as a throughline for her story rather than experiencing the other alliances on fresh new characters from those alliances. (It should be noted though that in other MMOs I've played I am definitely an altoholic. In the case of this game I say give it time, but it is notable that I've felt more compelled to stay with my main character.)

3. The other characters are primarily mules for my massive stash of stuff, because I am a hoarder. I will go out of my way to stop and gather any mats or loot any containers that I see. I keep stuff even if I'm not using it because someday I might find a use for it or be able to sell it. I have a hard time throwing anything away if I think it might be worth something.

4. I do everything in a zone before I move on, aside from group dungeons because those require finding people to do them and that's inconvenient for me. I consider my progress not in terms of what level I reach, but how much of a given map I've cleared.

5. I'm a dedicated crafter, and have devoted time to leveling up each craft skill, researching traits, doing daily writs, and acquiring motifs and recipes. I consider developing my crafting to be part of the overall building up of my characters, and I will get and learn motifs and recipes just to have them added to my characters' arsenal even if I know I won't really use them.

6. I don't RP with others but I do treat my main character like a participant in the story of the game, and I developed a whole thing where she's in love with Darien Gautier and that comes up every once in a while as I go through quests. It's all really for myself and in my own head though. (Although I did write a thing about Darien and posted it in the fanfic forum because I thought it was neat.)

7. I have stuck with my initial plans for my character builds and don't really feel any need to respec or reroll any of them. This is the case despite knowing that some of my race/class/build combos are not optimal and that my main weapon of choice is generally considered gimped. I did however remake my Dunmer after I learned that her non-red eyes were not appropriate for a full-blooded Dunmer.

8. I consider myself a "good" character morally, but I will kill anything that comes at me and steal pretty much anything I can get away with.

9. I'm not confrontational enough to enjoy pvp and I assume I wouldn't be very good at it.

10. I will go after achievements that take considerable time and effort (like the fishing one) if I feel like I'm getting something out of it (dyes, titles, or some other reward). The ones that only give points are more optional unless it's something I don't have to go too far out of my way to do.

Lenikus

I was born in April 23rd,
i dare people to guess my playstyle and struggles based on horoscope alone ;3

Bananko

DonoVDV wrote: »

I am a Sagittarius.

I struggle to commit to just one main character. I am an altoholic of the worst kind.

I'm also a Sagittarius and I'm the exact opposite on that matter.

Phinix1

notimetocare wrote: »

I am an intelligent person that does not relate nonsense to my actions.

Actually, agnosticism ("I don't know") is in most cases more intelligent, objective, and scientific than the easier but substance-lacking atheism (I BELIEVE there is nothing). The later is almost as much a religious leap of faith as, well, religion. In the absence of definitive evidence, who can say there ISN'T some intelligence out there beyond our level, interacting in ways we cannot understand?

It's a big universe.

As far as the stars influencing us in some unseen way, not even physicists can completely eliminate that possibility either. Not until they have a model to explain quantum gravity and dark energy, and how it interacts with the distribution of regular matter and energy in our little space-time fold.

It is quite possible the whole scene is set in motion and maintained by forces emanating from an entirely other dimension of reality, projected like shadows in forms and arrangements defined as much by what is casting them as by their own interactions, a sort of interdependent co-creation. I know some people don't like admitting they aren't in control of everything, but the reality is, we control VERY little and again, what we know of this reality does at least allow the possibility that what is casting these shadows is doing so by their own choice or design.

The fact that ancient humans recorded their interpretation of these influences with certain names doesn't prove the influence didn't exist. However, something more fascinating to consider is the quantum properties of observation itself. Perhaps the repeated act of observing specific characteristics in association with certain phenomenon actually do lend that phenomenon certain influences? But perhaps, only to those that choose to accept the possibility of such things?

Ultimately I think it (the Zodiac et al) is simply a form of language tool, an exercise in creative self definition. It is a way we can highlight aspects of ourselves we either want to emphasize in our artistic, creative expressions, or change in some way. The characteristics described are like the Tarot; universally applicable in SOME way or another. It is all in the interpretation.

But using symbol and metaphor doesn't have to mean people believe in superstitious fairy tale creatures. It can simply mean they have imaginations that aren't quite so hung up as so many in the modern material world on the trappings of a rigid, immediately quantifiable, and literal interpretation of everything.

I guess what I am trying to say is that we really don't know, and that sometimes, NOT knowing can be the whole point. "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

jkemmery

Phinix1 wrote: »

show previous quotes

notimetocare wrote: »

I am an intelligent person that does not relate nonsense to my actions.

Actually, agnosticism ("I don't know") is in most cases more intelligent, objective, and scientific than the easier but substance-lacking atheism (I BELIEVE there is nothing). The later is almost as much a religious leap of faith as, well, religion. In the absence of definitive evidence, who can say there ISN'T some intelligence out there beyond our level, interacting in ways we cannot understand?

It's a big universe.

As far as the stars influencing us in some unseen way, not even physicists can completely eliminate that possibility either. Not until they have a model to explain quantum gravity and dark energy, and how it interacts with the distribution of regular matter and energy in our little space-time fold.

It is quite possible the whole scene is set in motion and maintained by forces emanating from an entirely other dimension of reality, projected like shadows in forms and arrangements defined as much by what is casting them as by their own interactions, a sort of interdependent co-creation. I know some people don't like admitting they aren't in control of everything, but the reality is, we control VERY little and again, what we know of this reality does at least allow the possibility that what is casting these shadows is doing so by their own choice or design.

The fact that ancient humans recorded their interpretation of these influences with certain names doesn't prove the influence didn't exist. However, something more fascinating to consider is the quantum properties of observation itself. Perhaps the repeated act of observing specific characteristics in association with certain phenomenon actually do lend that phenomenon certain influences? But perhaps, only to those that choose to accept the possibility of such things?

Ultimately I think it (the Zodiac et al) is simply a form of language tool, an exercise in creative self definition. It is a way we can highlight aspects of ourselves we either want to emphasize in our artistic, creative expressions, or change in some way. The characteristics described are like the Tarot; universally applicable in SOME way or another. It is all in the interpretation.

But using symbol and metaphor doesn't have to mean people believe in superstitious fairy tale creatures. It can simply mean they have imaginations that aren't quite so hung up as so many in the modern material world on the trappings of a rigid, immediately quantifiable, and literal interpretation of everything.

I guess what I am trying to say is that we really don't know, and that sometimes, NOT knowing can be the whole point. "There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

While I do not disagree with most of what you say, there is a ton of scientific evidence specifically debunking astrology. The fact is that astrology has been proven false, entirely false, numerous times by numerous actual scientists.

wayfarerx

Phinix1 wrote: »

Actually, agnosticism ("I don't know") is in most cases more intelligent, objective, and scientific than the easier but substance-lacking atheism (I BELIEVE there is nothing). The later is almost as much a religious leap of faith as, well, religion. In the absence of definitive evidence, who can say there ISN'T some intelligence out there beyond our level, interacting in ways we cannot understand?

Have you read The God Delusion? Dawkins has a very impressive take down of the various forms of agnosticism in there. Definitely very applicable to the "discipline" of astrology. Also, this:

Phinix1 wrote: »

(I BELIEVE there is nothing)

is the world-view called nihilism, atheism is a different beast.

BomblePants

@llsabet - Virgo?

Cinbri

Capricorn http://www.astrology-zodiac-signs.com/zodiac-signs/capricorn/
"They strive to get to the top only with their experience. Problems may occur when the Capricorn is forced to be very close with his associates. " definetly my PvP experience, i know why i despise PvP raids now.

Lilygoat

mistermutiny89 wrote: »

I'm a Scorpio,

I have eight characters that I like to strip naked and Breton dance in the main cities for one dollar tips.

Oh my I just found out why my woodelf with a bow sucs, really bad, I am an 11th month, 11th day, haa not telling the year, but it probably is affecting my play. Is it really true everyone hates Scorpios, sure felt like it my whole life. I am told by the great and the wise, that us Scorpios, are either the great soaring eagle, which if we are there is no limit to our possibilities, or we are just self destructive to ourself, with no help from others but our self, and we usually can get ourself out of the most bad situations all on our own. But never have I read, the likes of what you mentioned, which sounded more like an exhibitionism of yourself, this sure is not typical Scorpio behaviour. So I would say, your rising signs, are not Scorpio at all. You should have a reading done and you will find out your rising signs, as your rising signs are very influential, in your daily life. Sincerely an 11/11 Scorpio

khele23eb17_ESO

Sagittarius, and in fact I quite enjoy playing archers in MMOs. Just not in ESO... They need to work on bow effectiveness compared to... everything else.

MasterSpatula

Aquarius. And I actively make every decision based on how a proper Aquarian would do it. Much like Nancy Reagan, I consult a noted astrologer to guide me on whether I should deconstruct that purple item or not.

I believe PVP should only happen at keeps and resources. Due to my Aquarian idealism, I refuse to sneak because I refuse to accept that anyone would attack me at the wrong place. Due to my Aquarian stubbornness, I keep doing that even though it's idiotic.

Aquarians are said to be 50 years ahead of their time. But in fifty years, retro games are going to be really in, which is how I can even justify playing ESO in the first place.

I'm especially active when the moon is in the Seventh House. However, there are currently only five recognized houses, with the Sixth House, House Dagoth, in hiding. This means my characters cannot set foot in Morrowind. This presents some difficulties.

Ilsabet

BomblePants wrote: »

@llsabet - Virgo?

No, but I'd be interested to know why you thought so.

Nestor

Phinix1 wrote: »

Ultimately I think it (the Zodiac et al) is simply a form of language tool, an exercise in creative self definition. It is a way we can highlight aspects of ourselves we either want to emphasize in our artistic, creative expressions, or change in some way. The characteristics described are like the Tarot; universally applicable in SOME way or another. It is all in the interpretation.

Its a language tool, but not for describing humans. It is a system that was used to predict the seasons in the absence of a calendar, or a standard calendar. When the sun moves through the Vernal Equinox, it is time to prepare the fields for planting, when it moves through the Autumnal Equinox, you better have all your crops in. Yes, I am simplifying it, but this is the gist. The Zodiac was used to note the position of the sun in the sky to suss out what season is coming to plan for crops, migrations etc.

BomblePants

Ilsabet wrote: »

show previous quotes

BomblePants wrote: »

@llsabet - Virgo?

No, but I'd be interested to know why you thought so.

Put me out of my misery!

I thought you might be Virgo as you sound very thorough in almost all areas (quests, back story, crafting, achievements).... even the post itself was detailed.... another Virgo trait (I'm not mystic Meg - I just dated a Virgo one time)...

Ra'Shtar

Lilygoat wrote: »

show previous quotes

mistermutiny89 wrote: »

I'm a Scorpio,

I have eight characters that I like to strip naked and Breton dance in the main cities for one dollar tips.

Oh my I just found out why my woodelf with a bow sucs, really bad, I am an 11th month, 11th day, haa not telling the year, but it probably is affecting my play. Is it really true everyone hates Scorpios, sure felt like it my whole life. I am told by the great and the wise, that us Scorpios, are either the great soaring eagle, which if we are there is no limit to our possibilities, or we are just self destructive to ourself, with no help from others but our self, and we usually can get ourself out of the most bad situations all on our own. But never have I read, the likes of what you mentioned, which sounded more like an exhibitionism of yourself, this sure is not typical Scorpio behaviour. So I would say, your rising signs, are not Scorpio at all. You should have a reading done and you will find out your rising signs, as your rising signs are very influential, in your daily life. Sincerely an 11/11 Scorpio

You are not really a Scorpio according to this study http://a.files.bbci.co.uk/bam/live/content/zs2pfg8/transcript
Also you can see you true sign here http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zp4fvcw#z9twq6f

Phinix1

jkemmery wrote: »

While I do not disagree with most of what you say, there is a ton of scientific evidence specifically debunking astrology. The fact is that astrology has been proven false, entirely false, numerous times by numerous actual scientists.

In the text-book sense of "this symbol must necessarily mean this, that constellation must necessarily mean that"? Sure. But as a symbolic tool for self-reflection like the Tarot? I don't think it is possible to prove such a subjective concept ultimately true or false.

I guess it is all in how you apply it. There are many cultures that attribute significance to certain visible celestial objects. Of course, not all cultures that do attribute the SAME characteristics to the same objects. If one takes a purely literal approach, seeking to quantify one finite and absolute value to such things, they must inevitably pick one of these as the "right" interpretation and label all others "wrong," or else label the whole concept "wrong" or flawed or worthless.

I personally find that to be a rather irresponsible, dishonest, and wasteful approach.

If one instead chooses to see it subjectively, as an abstract symbolic language tool for self reflection, they can CHOOSE which interpretation if any rings most true to them PERSONALLY, and reinterpret that to suit their own needs. They can see and understand and accept the various interpretations and intentions of others, evaluate them by their own standards and perspective, and quantify them accordingly. There IS no universally finite value or quantity for subjective experience.

That is the most fatal flaw with current AI thinking. In the artificial world, EVERYTHING must have a finite and predictable value, or it simply does not compute!

With things like this it doesn't HAVE to have a scientific basis, though I am not entirely convinced science has definitively debunked any of this even on a literal level. I can think of several scenarios where it would be impossible to do so. For example, imagine there are aliens, millions of years advanced technologically, and that for whatever artistic, cultural, or spiritual reason, they practice their own version of astrology. Perhaps they choose to impose their own interpretations on galactic reality as a function of some sense of cultural responsibility.

How would you know if you were being influenced by these aliens manipulating reality according to their own beliefs if they chose not to inform you about it? To you, it would seem just like so many atoms, so many mundane laws of physics. But the laws of physics can be bent, manipulated, re-purposed.

"Any sufficiently advanced technology would be indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke

wayfarerx wrote: »

Have you read The God Delusion? Dawkins has a very impressive take down of the various forms of agnosticism in there. Definitely very applicable to the "discipline" of astrology. Also, this:

show previous quotes

Phinix1 wrote: »

(I BELIEVE there is nothing)

is the world-view called nihilism, atheism is a different beast.

Yes, though it's been a while. I think nihilism is more the lack of believe that anything is meaningful, sort of the "what's the point of anything" philosophy, if you could even call it a philosophy. Atheism is the BELIEF that there are no higher powers, no gods, no deities.

Perhaps I was generalizing by saying it was a belief that there was nothing (was thinking more along the lines of "after death"), but the idea I was going for is that Atheism more than Agnosticism tends to require belief, and any "proof" therefor hinges largely on abstract sophistry and word play, not tangible scientific evidence which is, of course, unattainable at our present level of technology.

Ask yourself, could an alien a million years advanced technologically hide it's presence on Earth from us? If so, then your science is nowhere near advanced enough yet to prove or disprove much about the fundamental nature of reality.

Nestor wrote: »

Its a language tool, but not for describing humans. It is a system that was used to predict the seasons in the absence of a calendar, or a standard calendar. When the sun moves through the Vernal Equinox, it is time to prepare the fields for planting, when it moves through the Autumnal Equinox, you better have all your crops in. Yes, I am simplifying it, but this is the gist. The Zodiac was used to note the position of the sun in the sky to suss out what season is coming to plan for crops, migrations etc.

True enough in some cases. However, many cultures used it more as a symbolic tool for their creation mythologies.

Such an abstract practice as assigning meaning to symbols, obvious celestial symbols that happen to be readily visible to anyone looking up at night, can hardly be marginalized as "always for this or that purpose."

I think my point was that we each as individuals have a choice how WE will use them, and what they mean to us. We don't need symbolism to be "right" or "wrong" according to any interpretation in order to be meaningful to us in our own way.

Such is the essence imagination, conscious free will, art, and creative expression.

wayfarerx

Phinix1 wrote: »

show previous quotes

wayfarerx wrote: »

Have you read The God Delusion? Dawkins has a very impressive take down of the various forms of agnosticism in there. Definitely very applicable to the "discipline" of astrology. Also, this:

Phinix1 wrote: »

(I BELIEVE there is nothing)

is the world-view called nihilism, atheism is a different beast.

Yes, though it's been a while. I think nihilism is more the lack of believe that anything is meaningful, sort of the "what's the point of anything" philosophy, if you could even call it a philosophy. Atheism is the BELIEF that there are no higher powers, no gods, no deities.

Perhaps I was generalizing by saying it was a belief that there was nothing (was thinking more along the lines of "after death"), but the idea I was going for is that Atheism more than Agnosticism tends to require belief, and any "proof" therefor hinges largely on abstract sophistry and word play, not tangible scientific evidence which is, of course, unattainable at our present level of technology.

Ask yourself, could an alien a million years advanced technologically hide it's presence on Earth from us? If so, then your science is nowhere near advanced enough yet to prove or disprove much about the fundamental nature of reality.

Atheism is one of those hard-to-pin-down labels seeing as the subject matter it deals with is so nebulous, but I always subscribed to the more scientific view of the term. Atheism does not require that one strongly believe that there are no deities, just that there is no compelling reason and/or evidence to believe they do exist. It is not a position based in personal belief, but rather one based in skepticism.

To use your alien example, there are no natural phenomena we can observe that require technologically superior aliens to explain and there is no evidence that said aliens exist. This does not mean that there is no way such aliens could exist. It just means that, without evidence, the theory holds the same value as flying pink unicorns on Mars or that we are all descended from the Ehlnofey.

Phinix1

wayfarerx wrote: »

To use your alien example, there are no natural phenomena we can observe that require technologically superior aliens to explain...

Except we have no clue what the universe looked like one second BEFORE the "Big Bang," where it "banged" from, or what it banged into, virtually no idea (beyond theory and speculation based on about as much evidence as atheism) for why the universe doesn't rip itself apart, why Quantum Entanglement works, and so many other "spooky" aspects of our limited understanding of "the nature of things."

Of course we learn more every day. But to say there is no more reason to believe in the existence of aliens than pink leprechauns riding unicorn frogs on Mars? I have to disagree.

We DO have an example of "alien" intelligence arising in nature. US. WE emerged. WE have intelligence and consciousness and technology. So, we KNOW that can happen. So far, I don't think we've seen an example of pink leprechauns riding unicorn frogs emerging on Mars, or anywhere for that matter.

So, based on that admittedly limited control, it would seem the obvious conclusion that the emergence of thinking beings capable of technology is MORE likely than the emergence of pink leprechauns riding unicorn frogs.

If it happened once, it PROBABLY happened elsewhere.

Given the age of the universe, IF it happened elsewhere, it PROBABLY happened a LONG time before it happened here. Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude, it would likely be possessed of MUCH more advanced technology (assuming it hadn't destroyed itself using said technology before it evolved to be much more advanced than ours).

Arthur C. Clarke then applies.

wayfarerx

Phinix1 wrote: »

show previous quotes

wayfarerx wrote: »

To use your alien example, there are no natural phenomena we can observe that require technologically superior aliens to explain...

Except we have no clue what the universe looked like one second BEFORE the "Big Bang," where it "banged" from, or what it banged into, virtually no idea (beyond theory and speculation based on about as much evidence as atheism) for why the universe doesn't rip itself apart, why Quantum Entanglement works, and so many other "spooky" aspects of our limited understanding of "the nature of things."

There will always be mysteries and things we do not understand, all I was trying to say was that the atheist / skeptic position is that grasping at wild theories backed by no evidence whatsoever is not particularly helpful, not that we-know-eveything-we-will-ever-need-to-know-and-thats-that.

Ilsabet

BomblePants wrote: »

show previous quotes

Ilsabet wrote: »

BomblePants wrote: »

@llsabet - Virgo?

No, but I'd be interested to know why you thought so.

Put me out of my misery!

I thought you might be Virgo as you sound very thorough in almost all areas (quests, back story, crafting, achievements).... even the post itself was detailed.... another Virgo trait (I'm not mystic Meg - I just dated a Virgo one time)...

Gemini. Which I think should mean I have a split personality, but the one main character thing kind of debunks that.

SirAndy

DonoVDV wrote: »

Your Zodiac sign - and how it influences your game

How does the random distribution of stars in the universe influence my game play?

Not at all ...

Phinix1

wayfarerx wrote: »

show previous quotes

Phinix1 wrote: »

wayfarerx wrote: »

To use your alien example, there are no natural phenomena we can observe that require technologically superior aliens to explain...

Except we have no clue what the universe looked like one second BEFORE the "Big Bang," where it "banged" from, or what it banged into, virtually no idea (beyond theory and speculation based on about as much evidence as atheism) for why the universe doesn't rip itself apart, why Quantum Entanglement works, and so many other "spooky" aspects of our limited understanding of "the nature of things."

There will always be mysteries and things we do not understand, all I was trying to say was that the atheist / skeptic position is that grasping at wild theories backed by no evidence whatsoever is not particularly helpful, not that we-know-eveything-we-will-ever-need-to-know-and-thats-that.

Indeed. All I was trying to say is that ALL theories are "wild" and backed by no evidence until we undertake the Scientific Method to uncovering it.

The ultimate judgement of a given view should rest on the objectivity of the subject in question, and not their alignment with any particular philosophy, which themselves are largely open to interpretation.

namelessperson

So, ignoring all the arguments and getting back on topic, I'm a Virgo.

That said, I definitely fit my sign with my approach to this game. Of course I researched before I even got the game what all the classes were, and of course I read all about all four of them. I then thought carefully about how I had played in previous Elder Scrolls titles. I usually maxed out Sneak, and used my favorite three schools of magic: Conjuration, Restoration and Destruction, in that order. Oh, and Mysticism when that was still a thing. I was torn between nightblade and sorcerer of course, but I ruled out nightblade for some reason, likely because it seemed very popular at the time, and I hate doing things that seem to be overrated, that "everyone's doing". Ack. Well, I really like healing, besides being a stealthy magic type, so I was torn then between doing a dual wield sorcerer or a magicka templar. I made two characters, one was a Breton sorcerer and the other was an Altmer templar. I stuck with the sorcerer and he is currently VR16, whereas the templar is still collecting dust at lvl 15. Heals were too basic looking or something, idk. I really felt my Breton character; I fleshed out his backstory in my head, gave him a mostly lore-friendly name, and built him to the best of my ability according to how I always play TES games. he uses a resto staff healing pet build on one bar and dual wields on the other, is a vampire, and has hella weapon and spell critical (like almost 60% for both values). Stealth, dual-wield, Conjuration, Restoration and Destruction, just as I detailed, but in this game's parameters. I figured out a build based on tried-and-true previous results, and devoted myself completely to it, in a typical Virgo way. I have detailed, specific, personal reasons for doing everything in games like this, and this leads me to appear stubborn when people fail to understand that. "Stuck in my ways" some might say :P

Phinix1

namelessperson wrote: »

Oh, and Mysticism when that was still a thing.

I miss Mysticism. And Illusion magic. WTB new class/world tree ZOS!

The process you describe it probably the biggest reason I love the Elder Scrolls series. It lends itself perfectly to creative imagination.

jkemmery

Phinix1 wrote: »

In the text-book sense of "this symbol must necessarily mean this, that constellation must necessarily mean that"? Sure. But as a symbolic tool for self-reflection like the Tarot? I don't think it is possible to prove such a subjective concept ultimately true or false.

Again, astrology has been proven scientifically invalid, in it's entirety, on several occasions, by several researchers. This is a scientifically accepted fact. It is irrefutable. If you choose to believe otherwise, you do so against the concept of fact vs. falsehood. That's your choice, and as such I respect that. However, no amount of verbiage will ever convince me otherwise.

Phinix1 wrote: »

That is the most fatal flaw with current AI thinking. In the artificial world, EVERYTHING must have a finite and predictable value, or it simply does not compute!

With all due respect this is absolutely incorrect, sorry. No offense, again, but it just so happens that I'm a programmer and quite familiar with AI research and techniques, and I can tell you that NOTHING MUST have a finite and predictable value to compute. Quite the contrary, the whole field of AI research revolves around solving problems that are NOT finite and predictable. Any ordinary piece of software can do that.

Daraugh

Nestor wrote: »

show previous quotes

Phinix1 wrote: »

Ultimately I think it (the Zodiac et al) is simply a form of language tool, an exercise in creative self definition. It is a way we can highlight aspects of ourselves we either want to emphasize in our artistic, creative expressions, or change in some way. The characteristics described are like the Tarot; universally applicable in SOME way or another. It is all in the interpretation.

Its a language tool, but not for describing humans. It is a system that was used to predict the seasons in the absence of a calendar, or a standard calendar. When the sun moves through the Vernal Equinox, it is time to prepare the fields for planting, when it moves through the Autumnal Equinox, you better have all your crops in. Yes, I am simplifying it, but this is the gist. The Zodiac was used to note the position of the sun in the sky to suss out what season is coming to plan for crops, migrations etc.

It's even is reflected in the Tamriel stars this way. First Seed, time to prepare the fields, Spring Equinox. Last Seed, you can get one last planting in before Fall and so on. The clock in Prague has some depictions of plowing, and while it's not completely understood there's certainly parts that looks familiar.

As far as astrology goes, I suppose it has influence over your life if you believe it does. But that's true of everything, scientifically proven or not. I don't believe that the stars define my personality, but if a person does believe that they are defined by a source then they are defined by that source. It's not the stars, it's the individual and the power of belief.