You might not know that Chinese astrology has been around for almost 5,000 years if you’ve just read about your Chinese zodiac sign on mass-produced place mats at Chinese restaurants. It’s a significant part of traditional Chinese culture, influencing perspectives on how to connect with the world in the best possible way, Chinese traditional medicine, and Feng Shui, the Chinese art of design. You might also be shocked to learn that your Chinese Zodiac sign is considered more accurate than your astrological zodiac sign by some astrologers, for a variety of reasons.
On the surface, Chinese and Western astrology appear to be very similar. According to the Feng Shui Institute, the Chinese zodiacSheng Xiaoincludes 12 primary signs, also known as terrestrial branches, each of which is symbolized by an animalRat, Ox, Tiger, Rabbit, Dragon, Snake, Horse, Sheep, Monkey, Rooster, Dog, and Pig, similar to western astrology. Your Chinese zodiac sign is based on your year of birth on the Chinese calendar, rather than your month of birth, and forecasts everything from your personality to how well you get along with others, according to Travel China.
The Chinese zodiac incorporates five earthy elements that interact to form a cycle of ups and downs for each sign, as well as your birth date, month, and time, making it far more complicated than Western astrology. Your Chinese horoscope, unlike Western astrology, is not set in stone, according to the website Your Chinese Astrology. Rather, it is up to you to apply the information to improve your future luck. Continue reading to learn more about your Chinese zodiac sign and how it may be even more accurate than your astrological zodiac sign:
In This Article...
Is the Chinese horoscope accurate?
, the Chinese zodiac isn’t scientifically correct, but teaching it is a pleasant method to assist the Western world gain a better understanding of Chinese culture. (She’s also the creator of Chineasy, a visual Chinese learning system.) With vibrant paintings of each sign and its name in Pinyin (the English pronunciation of Chinese characters), she delves into the history and present importance of the zodiac.
Do you believe in the Chinese horoscope?
Hundreds of millions of Chinese people still believe in the prophesies and “superstitions” portrayed in the Chinese zodiac. Some people in Chinese culture have based their relationships on the Chinese zodiac.
Which of the zodiac signs is the most accurate?
You might be hesitant to consult your rising sign daily horoscope if you’re a creature of habit who has long relied on your sun sign. According to astrologer and horoscope writer Mackenzie Greer, your rising sign is much more attuned to your real life and all of its complexity, which is why learning how to interpret your rising sign is worthwhile.
“Reading for your rising sign provides your horoscopes a level of precision that sun signs can’t match.” Astrologer Mackenzie Greer
“People frequently object to this advice, believing that their sun sign is the only truth,” Greer explains. “The problem with that approach is that accurate sun sign horoscopes are, technically speaking, big-picture focused; they aren’t fine-tuned to the nitty-gritty details of the here and now.” “Because your rising sign decides where all the houses or sectors of life are built up in your birth chart, reading for your rising sign offers your horoscopes a dead-on accuracy that you just can’t obtain from sun signs,” says the author.
Which of the two horoscopes is the most accurate?
Let’s go through the foundations of how astrologers create these projections before we get into the many ways to read a horoscope. The most crucial step is to gain a basic comprehension of your astrological birth chart. Your birth chart illustrates the positions of the planets in the zodiac at the time of your birth, and you’ll need an exact birth date, location, and time to create it. There are numerous astrological applications and online birth chart calculators that can assist you in getting started with your research.
Each of the 12 astrological houses in your birth chart reflects a different aspect of your life, such as love or profession. When planets pass through these houses, their energies impact different aspects of your life. The sign that dominates the first house of your birth chart is called your “rising sign,” and it has an impact on the rest of your chart’s structure. While a person’s birthday can disclose their sun sign, calculating their rising sign requires an accurate birth date, time, and location.
When astrologers create horoscopes, they imagine the ruler of the first house to be the sign they’re writing for, and then position the planets in the chart from there. This means that horoscopes for people’s rising signs are technically more accurate. Sun sign horoscopes, on the other hand, have become the standard since they are simple to use. All you need to know someone’s sun sign is their birthday, making it quick and easy to categorize. Sun signs were considerably easier to cover than rising signs as newspaper astrology columns became more popular in the twentieth century, because they don’t require people to know their birth time or have access to a chart calculating system.
Is it true that many believe in astrology?
Christine Smallwood’s fascinating piece, “Astrology in the Age of Uncertainty:
Astrology is currently experiencing widespread popular acceptability that has not been seen since the 1970s. The transition began with the introduction of the personal computer, was expedited by the Internet, and has now reached new levels of speed thanks to social media. According to a Pew Research Center poll from 2017, about a third of Americans believe in astrology.
Astrology, like psychoanalysis before it, has infiltrated our collective vernacular. At a party in the 1950s, you could have heard someone talk about the id, ego, or superego; now, it’s normal to hear someone explain herself using the sun, moon, and rising signs. It isn’t just that you are aware of it. It’s who’s saying it: folks who aren’t kooks or deniers of climate change, who don’t find a conflict between utilizing astrology and believing in science…
I ran a short Google search and discovered the following Pew report from October 2018:
The religion breakdown was the only thing that surprised me about this table.
I had the impression that mainline Protestants were the rational ones, but they believe in astrology at the same rate as the overall population.
But, hey, I guess they’re ordinary Americans, so they have average American ideas.
Only 3% of atheists believe in astrology, which is also unexpected.
This makes sense, yet it seemed reasonable to me that someone may not believe in God but believe in other supernatural things: in fact, I could see astrology as a type of replacement for a traditional religious system.
But it appears that is not the case.
Brian Wansink has been compared to an astrologer who can make astute observations about the world based on a combination of persuasiveness and qualitative understanding, and then attributes his success to tarot cards or tea leaves rather than a more practical ability to synthesize ideas and tell good stories.
Does Brian Wansink, on the other hand, believe in astrology?
What about Marc Hauser, Ed Wegman, Susan Fiske, and the rest of the bunch who call their detractors “second-string, replication police, methodological terrorists, Stasi, and so on?”
I doubt they believe in astrology because it symbolizes a rival belief system: it’s a business that, in some ways, competes with rah-rah Ted-talk science.
I wouldn’t be shocked if famous ESP researchers believe in astrology, but I get the impression that mainstream junk-science supporters in academia and the news media feel uncomfortable discussing ESP since its research methods are so similar to their own.
They don’t want to be associated with ESP researchers because it would devalue their own study, but they also don’t want to put them under the bus because they are fellow Ivy League academics, so the safest plan is to remain quiet about it.
The greater point, however, is not astrology believing in and of itself, but the mental state that allows individuals to believe in something so contrary to our scientific understanding of the world.
(OK, I apologize to the 29% of you who don’t agree with me on this.)
When I return to writing on statistical graphics, model verification, Bayesian computation, Jamaican beef patties, and other topics, you can rejoin the fold.)
It’s not that astrology couldn’t be correct a priori:
We can come up with credible hypotheses under which astrology is real and amazing, just as we can with embodied cognition, beauty and sex ratio, ovulation and voting, air rage, ages ending in 9, and all the other Psychological Science / PNAS classics.
It’s just that nothing has come up after years of rigorous research.
And the existing theories aren’t particularly convincing: they’re speculative world models that may be good if the purpose was to describe a real and enduring occurrence, but they’re less so without actual data.
Anyway, if 30% of Americans are willing to believe such nonsense, it’s no surprise that a significant number of influential American psychology professors will have the kind of attitude toward scientific theory and evidence that leads them to have strong beliefs in weak theories with no supporting evidence.
Indeed, not only support for specific weak theories, but support for the fundamental principle that pseudoscientific views should be treated with respect (although, oddly enough, maybe not for astrology itself).
P.S.In defense of the survey respondents (but not of the psychology professors who support ideas like the “critical positivity ratio,” which makes astrology appear positively sane in comparison), belief in astrology (or, for that matter, belief in heaven, gravity, or the square-cube law) is essentially free.
Why not believe these things, or not believe them?
Belief or denial in evolution, climate change, or unconscious bias, on the other hand, can have social or political consequences.
Some opinions are purely personal, while others have a direct impact on policy.
I have less patience for famous academic and media elites who aggressively support junk science by not just expressing their trust in speculative notions supported by no real data, but also attacking those who point out these emperors’ nudity. Furthermore, even a hypothetical tolerant, open-minded supporter of junk sciencethe type of person who might believe in critical positivity ratio but actively support the publication of criticisms of that workcan still cause some harm by contaminating scientific journals and the news media with bad science, and by promoting sloppy work that takes up space that could be used for more careful research.
You know how they say science corrects itself, but only because individuals are willing to correct themselves?
Gresham’s law is also true, but only when people are willing to distribute counterfeit notes or money they think is counterfeit while keeping their lips shut until they can get rid of their wads of worthless stock.
P.P.S.Just to be clear:I don’t think astrology is a waste of time, and it’s possible that Marc Hauser was onto something real, even while faking data (according to the US government, as mentioned on Wikipedia), and the critical positivity ratio, ovulation, voting, and all the rest…
Just because there isn’t enough evidence to support a theory doesn’t mean it’s untrue.
I’m not trying to disprove any of these assertions.
All of it should be published someplace, along with all of the criticism.
My issue with junk science proponents isn’t simply that they advocate science that I and others perceive to be rubbish; they can also be wrong!
However, they consistently avoid, deny, and oppose valid open criticism.
P.P.P.S.Remember that #notallpsychologists.
Of course, the problem of junk research isn’t limited to psychology in any way.
Professors of political science, economics, sociology, and history, to the extent that they believe in astrology, spoon bending, or whatever (that is, belief in “scientific paranormalism as describing some true thing about the natural world, not just a “anthropological recognition that paranormal beliefs can affect the world because people believe in it), this could also sabotage their research.
I suppose it’s not such a big problem if a physicist or chemist believes in these things.
I’m not attempting to shut down study into astrology, embodied cognition, ESP, beauty-and-sex-ratio, endless soup bowls, spoon bending, the Bible Code, air anger, ovulation and voting, subliminal smiley faces, or anything else.
Allow for the blooming of a thousand blooms!
Given that a sizable portion of the populace is willing to believe in scientific-sounding notions that aren’t backed by any good scientific theory or evidence, it should come as no surprise that many professional scientists hold this viewpoint.
The repercussions are especially evident in psychology, which is a vital field of study where theories can be hazy and where there is a long legacy of belief and action based on flimsy data.
That isn’t to say that psychologists are awful people; they’re merely working on difficult challenges in a field with a long history of failures.
This isn’t a critique; it’s just the way things are. Of course, there is a lot of excellent work being done in the field of psychology. You’ll have to work with what you’ve got.
What makes you think astrology isn’t true?
Astrology is a collection of belief systems that assert that there is a connection between astrological phenomena and events or personality traits in the human world. The scientific community has dismissed astrology as having no explanatory power for describing the universe. Scientific testing has discovered no evidence to back up the astrological traditions’ premises or alleged effects.
What was Jesus’ take on astrology?
I believe that God created astrology as a tool for us to better understand ourselves and to use as a spiritual tool. Numerous bible texts, in my opinion, support astrology. As a Christian, I try to remember what Jesus said. “There shall be signs in the sun, moon, and stars,” Christ predicted in Luke 21:25, referring to the importance of astrology. He explains the value of astrology with his pupils, as well as how it might be used as a sign of his return. Why would Jesus provide us this critical knowledge if we are not intended to understand the energies of the planets and signs, and if he was actually against it? Just as the three wise men knew Jesus would be born under the star in the sky that led them to him lying in the manger, Jesus warned us that when he returns, there will be signals in the sky.