Talk:Sun sign astrology

message: It should be noted in the article that most astrologists on earth who do not particularly write Sun-sign horoscopes for newspapers severely disapprove of it, because unlike in serious, traditional astrology, there's no methodology, rules, or internal logic to it whatsoever, questioning whether Sun-sign horoscope writers are astrologists at all. Basically, science and most astrologists agree on Sun-sign astrology being a pseudo-science. The relation between traditional and Sun-sign astrology is a bit like between the Kabbalah and people who believe they can get rich by staring at the Hebrew word for "wealth" long enough.
It should also be noted in the article that most modern scientific attempts to debunk astrology purely deal with Sun-sign astrology, as it's much easier to understand and pick on than the systematic, systemic approach of traditional astrology, as can also be seen by those few debunking attempts that actually go beyond the Sun and try to look at single planet positions on their own, which is not how traditional astrology works in the strict sense either. Both is like trying to debunk genetics by merely looking at a single acid and refusing to look at genetics as a system with many internal and external factors. None of this is to say astrology would be right, it's just about how you can't prove it wrong because you don't understand the internal design. --2003:EF:1706:3280:D81F:AE49:9AB4:C825 (talk) 08:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Please supply citations to support your claims that (1) "most astrologists on earth ... severely disapprove of [Sun-Sugn astrology], (2) that Sun-Sign Astrology is inherently linked to "newspapers," and (3) that "most astrologists" (unnamed and uncited) are actually "questioning whether Sun-sign horoscope writers are astrologists at all." 50.78.98.129 (talk) 00:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have definitely heard of (1) before (I don't know if it is "most astrologists", or only those who use more complicated astrology who dislike Sun sign astrology). About (2), I have not really seen much Sun sign astrology outside of newspapers, while the more complicated astrology (which involves the planets, Sun, and Moon, and other things such as house systems, etc; rather than the Sun alone) is seen in books relating to astrology and other stuff than the newspapers; however, I think it is not really inherently linked to newspapers, just that is the most common use. I do not know anything about (3). There are good arguments against astrology, but too often, people who misunderstand it will make bad arguments, e.g. that the position of the Sun is incorrect (it is not in the constellation they say it is); actually, that is not the case because astrological signs are not constellations, even though they have the same names as twelve of the thirteen constellations along the ecliptic. (Astrological signs are angular measure of ecliptic longitude, each one thirty degrees. The Tropic of Cancer and Tropic of Capricorn correspond to the declination when the Sun is at the start of those named astrological signs, and is not related to the constellations of the same names.) --Zzo38 (talk) 19:36, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disapproved by traditional astrologists