Poll :: Which star sign likes BTC most/least

[Otoh]

also pse to note that I never advocated a 'belief' in astrology, I'm just interested in looking at the sychronisity of such archetypes say in how they may coincide with human psychological behaviour in a measured situation & also if you haven't got it yet in having some fun ffs



(60 votes divided by 12 options gives 5 as a statistic norm average or whatever that may be called) & a graded distribution above & below 5 would be expected, any predicting of that which was specific to the 12 signs much less so imo



I've given up reading this post for today - seems like it's mutated in to some sort of it's sience-nazi created Frankestien & anyway prefer to concentrate on getting drunk atm



tipsy update

[Crypt_Current]

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias, myside bias or verification bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.

I see unexplained behavior.
I seek new information.
That new information explains the behavior.

Sounds more like the scientific method than confirmation bias to me.

wrong. science involves explaining behavior through models.

1. unexplained behavior
2. form hypothesis about correlation/causation between two variables
3. verify if causation holds given the evidence

there is no model here besides 'stars affect personality types'. this hypothesis needs to be tested. furthermore, unless a mechanism can demonstrate causation, it is a correlation at best (think ice cream sales and drownings).

your bias is assuming the model, and therefore focusing on the predictions of astrology that 'fit' your common sense (and most likely disregarding far more than you realize)

The problem here is we have not had the sufficient technology for creating a model large enough to verify affect on humans at such a large scale.  I think in time such a model could be constructed.  It would be arrogant and closed-minded to say that this is impossible.

[arepo]

um as it's you who seems to have got his knickers in twist about this then why don't you do the statistical analysis to show that this isn't an approximately even spread & don't forget to take in to account on a scale of 1 to 12 my predictions for each sign, hard maybe to do exactly but even a dodo could probably spot that Libra/Virgo are rated low whilst Sagittarius/Aquarius are rated high, use an independent third party to do a blind comparison or program a bot to do it for you & you will see that your probability stats are pwned, perhaps ur narrow view on reality too if you were honest with ur scientific testing

all i hear is 'no, YOU prove god DOESN'T exist!"

you're the one making the claim, i expect you to prove that the data demonstrates more than random chance. i sincerely don't have the vested interest to take the time to prove you wrong.

read about 'burden of proof', perhaps?

plus, this is not scientific because users can easily lie on polls (not saying they did, just tending to controls). furthermore, it's not even single blind as users can read the thread before they vote. in other words, your poll cannot conclusively demonstrate anything.

[Mushoz]

Please look up the definition of "illusory correlation". Might explain a lot more than those stars =)

Definition:

An illusory correlation is the perception of a relationship between two variables when only a minor or absolutely no relationship actually exists. For example, people sometimes assume that because two events occurred together at one point in the past, that one event must be the cause of the other. These illusory correlations can occur both in scientific investigations and in real-world situations.

Stereotypes are a good example of illusory correlations. Research has shown that people tend to assume that certain groups and traits occur together, and frequently overestimate the strength of the association between the two variables. For example, let's suppose that a man holds a mistaken belief that all people from small towns are extremely kind. When the individual meets a very kind person, his immediate assumption might be that the person is from a small town, despite the fact that kindness is not related to city population.

You are wrong because sometimes people are wrong.  Got ya.  It sure explains a lot.

What it means is that people see something in the stars, then something happens, and then attribute the thing that happened to the stars, even though there was no such relationship. That other post explained it really well. You can't test the hypothesis if the stars influence personality, events and other things like that.

[arepo]

Please look up the definition of "illusory correlation". Might explain a lot more than those stars =)

Definition:

An illusory correlation is the perception of a relationship between two variables when only a minor or absolutely no relationship actually exists. For example, people sometimes assume that because two events occurred together at one point in the past, that one event must be the cause of the other. These illusory correlations can occur both in scientific investigations and in real-world situations.

Stereotypes are a good example of illusory correlations. Research has shown that people tend to assume that certain groups and traits occur together, and frequently overestimate the strength of the association between the two variables. For example, let's suppose that a man holds a mistaken belief that all people from small towns are extremely kind. When the individual meets a very kind person, his immediate assumption might be that the person is from a small town, despite the fact that kindness is not related to city population.

You are wrong because sometimes people are wrong.  Got ya.  It sure explains a lot.

it's more specific than that. please don't belittle centuries of psychological findings.

plus, if you really want to go there, 'you're kind because the sun rose "in" a constellation as viewed from mesopotamia 2000 years ago' doesn't really sound very plausible to me.

[Crypt_Current]

Please look up the definition of "illusory correlation". Might explain a lot more than those stars =)

Definition:

An illusory correlation is the perception of a relationship between two variables when only a minor or absolutely no relationship actually exists. For example, people sometimes assume that because two events occurred together at one point in the past, that one event must be the cause of the other. These illusory correlations can occur both in scientific investigations and in real-world situations.

Stereotypes are a good example of illusory correlations. Research has shown that people tend to assume that certain groups and traits occur together, and frequently overestimate the strength of the association between the two variables. For example, let's suppose that a man holds a mistaken belief that all people from small towns are extremely kind. When the individual meets a very kind person, his immediate assumption might be that the person is from a small town, despite the fact that kindness is not related to city population.

You are wrong because sometimes people are wrong.  Got ya.  It sure explains a lot.

it's more specific than that. please don't belittle centuries of psychological findings.

plus, if you really want to go there, 'you're kind because the sun rose "in" a constellation as viewed from mesopotamia 2000 years ago' doesn't really sound very plausible to me.

Good for you!  For some people, it does.

[arepo]

The problem here is we have not had the sufficient technology for creating a model large enough to verify affect on humans at such a large scale.  I think in time such a model could be constructed.  It would be arrogant and closed-minded to say that this is impossible.

this is more level-headed. i appreciate that. and it would indeed be arrogant and closed-minded to refuse to do science.

let me remind you of the other component of the scientific method, however -- occam's razor -- which, roughly speaking, implies that the simpler theory is 'more likely' to be true. it is actually an application of the mathematical theorem called "Bayes' theorem".

given this, what reason do we have to believe that the arbitrary position of the earth relative to the sun affects personality traits? perhaps you might point to the predictive power of horoscopes, but we have a much simpler theory: the effects of confirmation bias, et cetera.

for instance, i could hypothesize that ice cream vendors cause drownings -- that they spend their money to lobby against safety regulations, et cetera. almost a conspiracy theory. but perhaps i don't have the resources to do an experiment demonstrating such a causal relationship? it is likely it is only correlation, that both things increase when it is warm out, and that i am falling victim to the tireless pattern-recognition software in my brain. limited in my ability to experiment, the rational belief to hold is the simpler one: one of non-causation.

that's occam's razor for you.

[arepo]

Please look up the definition of "illusory correlation". Might explain a lot more than those stars =)

Definition:

An illusory correlation is the perception of a relationship between two variables when only a minor or absolutely no relationship actually exists. For example, people sometimes assume that because two events occurred together at one point in the past, that one event must be the cause of the other. These illusory correlations can occur both in scientific investigations and in real-world situations.

Stereotypes are a good example of illusory correlations. Research has shown that people tend to assume that certain groups and traits occur together, and frequently overestimate the strength of the association between the two variables. For example, let's suppose that a man holds a mistaken belief that all people from small towns are extremely kind. When the individual meets a very kind person, his immediate assumption might be that the person is from a small town, despite the fact that kindness is not related to city population.

You are wrong because sometimes people are wrong.  Got ya.  It sure explains a lot.

it's more specific than that. please don't belittle centuries of psychological findings.

plus, if you really want to go there, 'you're kind because the sun rose "in" a constellation as viewed from mesopotamia 2000 years ago' doesn't really sound very plausible to me.

Good for you!  For some people, it does.

unfortunately, reality is not a popularity contest

[notme]

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias, myside bias or verification bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.

I see unexplained behavior.
I seek new information.
That new information explains the behavior.

Sounds more like the scientific method than confirmation bias to me.

wrong. science involves explaining behavior through models.

1. unexplained behavior
2. form hypothesis about correlation/causation between two variables
3. verify if causation holds given the evidence

there is no model here besides 'stars affect personality types'. this hypothesis needs to be tested. furthermore, unless a mechanism can demonstrate causation, it is a correlation at best (think ice cream sales and drownings).

your bias is assuming the model, and therefore focusing on the predictions of astrology that 'fit' your common sense (and most likely disregarding far more than you realize)

1.  Unexplained Behavior: Girlfriend is bitchy.
2.  Hypothesis: Perhaps she is dealing with some energy she is having a hard time with, which is making her bitchy.
3.  Verify causation: 3 planets that have conflicting energies are currently all in the same sign, which happens to be associated with the mind, and which is also highly crowded in her birthchart, I can compare to my birthchart and how I feel to understand the differences.

From this, I choose to approach her with more sympathy and understanding.  As a result of my change in action, she has more energy to deal with the conflict within her and gets over her bitchiness quickly.  This is a real example of how astrology has improved my life.

Perhaps I'm just a dick and she's responding to me showing the tiniest bit of sympathy, but I'm sure you can see why I prefer the other explanation.

My means may be invalid, but I don't care because I get the results I'm looking for.

Also, to all those who keep mentioning astrology being 2000 years out of sync, learn to read.  I already addressed that in my first post in this thread.  I am referring to Vedic Astrology, which is accurate in present day because it accounts for precession.

[Crypt_Current]

Please look up the definition of "illusory correlation". Might explain a lot more than those stars =)

Definition:

An illusory correlation is the perception of a relationship between two variables when only a minor or absolutely no relationship actually exists. For example, people sometimes assume that because two events occurred together at one point in the past, that one event must be the cause of the other. These illusory correlations can occur both in scientific investigations and in real-world situations.

Stereotypes are a good example of illusory correlations. Research has shown that people tend to assume that certain groups and traits occur together, and frequently overestimate the strength of the association between the two variables. For example, let's suppose that a man holds a mistaken belief that all people from small towns are extremely kind. When the individual meets a very kind person, his immediate assumption might be that the person is from a small town, despite the fact that kindness is not related to city population.

You are wrong because sometimes people are wrong.  Got ya.  It sure explains a lot.

it's more specific than that. please don't belittle centuries of psychological findings.

plus, if you really want to go there, 'you're kind because the sun rose "in" a constellation as viewed from mesopotamia 2000 years ago' doesn't really sound very plausible to me.

Good for you!  For some people, it does.

unfortunately, reality is not a popularity contest

Which reality, the REAL one??  

[Mushoz]

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias, myside bias or verification bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.

I see unexplained behavior.
I seek new information.
That new information explains the behavior.

Sounds more like the scientific method than confirmation bias to me.

wrong. science involves explaining behavior through models.

1. unexplained behavior
2. form hypothesis about correlation/causation between two variables
3. verify if causation holds given the evidence

there is no model here besides 'stars affect personality types'. this hypothesis needs to be tested. furthermore, unless a mechanism can demonstrate causation, it is a correlation at best (think ice cream sales and drownings).

your bias is assuming the model, and therefore focusing on the predictions of astrology that 'fit' your common sense (and most likely disregarding far more than you realize)

From this, I choose to approach her with more sympathy and understanding.  As a result of my change in action, she has more energy to deal with the conflict within her and gets over her bitchiness quickly.  This is a real example of how astrology has improved my life.

Don't you think sympathy and understanding would almost always help, regardless of what the cause of her bitchyness was? Or to take an even more extreme example, what do you think would happen if you left her alone for a while? Because of the fact she is already Bitchy, it will most likely only improve from there, since more extreme situations (even bitchier) are more unlikely than her returning to normal. This is called Regression to the Mean.

[notme]

From this, I choose to approach her with more sympathy and understanding.  As a result of my change in action, she has more energy to deal with the conflict within her and gets over her bitchiness quickly.  This is a real example of how astrology has improved my life.

Don't you think sympathy and understanding would almost always help, regardless of what the cause of her bitchyness was? Or to take an even more extreme example, what do you think would happen if you left her alone for a while? Because of the fact she is already Bitchy, it will most likely only improve from there, since more extreme situations (even bitchier) are more unlikely than her returning to normal. This is called Regression to the Mean.

But how do I have understanding without an explanation?  If I ask her for one, I get some superficial BS like "someone looked at me the wrong way".

Yes, she would get better if left alone, but sometimes I need her to return to normal quicker.  I have tried both ways.  Understanding the energy she's dealing with helps the process along tremendously.  Being able to make her feel like I understand what she is going through is tremendously helpful, and I am unable to do that without astrology.

Science is great, until you involve people and emotions.

[Mushoz]

From this, I choose to approach her with more sympathy and understanding.  As a result of my change in action, she has more energy to deal with the conflict within her and gets over her bitchiness quickly.  This is a real example of how astrology has improved my life.

Don't you think sympathy and understanding would almost always help, regardless of what the cause of her bitchyness was? Or to take an even more extreme example, what do you think would happen if you left her alone for a while? Because of the fact she is already Bitchy, it will most likely only improve from there, since more extreme situations (even bitchier) are more unlikely than her returning to normal. This is called Regression to the Mean.

But how do I have understanding without an explanation?  If I ask her for one, I get some superficial BS like "someone looked at me the wrong way".

Yes, she would get better if left alone, but sometimes I need her to return to normal quicker.  I have tried both ways.  Understanding the energy she's dealing with helps the process along tremendously.  Being able to make her feel like I understand what she is going through is tremendously helpful, and I am unable to do that without astrology.

Science is great, until you involve people and emotions.

Yes, in your eyes you might be being nice to her because of those negative energies she is dealing with, but in her eyes you might just be being nice. It doesn't really matter why you act the way you do, but if you trying to be nice because of those energies, she can benefit from you being nice just because you're nice (Which is of course a good thing!) and get back to normal quicker. It doesn't really matter what caused it, but in my opinion it's just so far fetched to seek a reason in the stars, when there's a bazillion other things that could have caused her behavior. Humans are complex creatures after all!

[notme]

Yes, in your eyes you might be being nice to her because of those negative energies she is dealing with, but in her eyes you might just be being nice. It doesn't really matter why you act the way you do, but if you trying to be nice because of those energies, she can benefit from you being nice just because you're nice (Which is of course a good thing!) and get back to normal quicker. It doesn't really matter what caused it, but in my opinion it's just so far fetched to seek a reason in the stars, when there's a bazillion other things that could have caused her behavior. Humans are complex creatures after all!

But that's just it.  I'm not in control of her behavior, or much else that effects it.  I can control my behavior, but I'm not going to go out of my way unless I have a reason.  Astrology provides that reason.  Trying to be nice because she's bitchy just gets me in trouble because it is forced.  Also, I don't go running to astrology every time we have an argument, only when she's excessively bitchy and I have no clue why.  Sometimes it is my fault.

BTW, I don't really look at stars except occasionally the birth star, which is another personality indicator like the sun/moon/ascendant signs.  The grahas I look at are Sun, Moon, Rahu, Ketu, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn.  Are you saying the sun doesn't effect people?  What about the moon?  Look at hospital records for full moons compared to normal nights, there are way more accidents.

[Serge]

this thread is fun.

i don't follow astrology much at all but i can say this: if you think you live in this world detached and unaffected by everything else you live in illusion.

[notme]

if you think you live in this world detached and unaffected by everything else you live in illusion.

+1

[Technomage]

I don't believe in astrology but I still find it interesting and fun to read at times. This is a refreshing thread, something totally different. I'm Leo btw. My Chinese zodiac is the Ox, also known as the Bull. Is it a coincidence that I'm also a Bitcoin bull?

[Mushoz]

Yes, in your eyes you might be being nice to her because of those negative energies she is dealing with, but in her eyes you might just be being nice. It doesn't really matter why you act the way you do, but if you trying to be nice because of those energies, she can benefit from you being nice just because you're nice (Which is of course a good thing!) and get back to normal quicker. It doesn't really matter what caused it, but in my opinion it's just so far fetched to seek a reason in the stars, when there's a bazillion other things that could have caused her behavior. Humans are complex creatures after all!

What about the moon?  Look at hospital records for full moons compared to normal nights, there are way more accidents.

Can you please give me a source? I'd be interested to read it. I've done a few quick google searches, but I'm finding things pointing out there are no such correlations. Thanks!

Here's a scientific article, which found no such correlation: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15166467

[notme]

Yes, in your eyes you might be being nice to her because of those negative energies she is dealing with, but in her eyes you might just be being nice. It doesn't really matter why you act the way you do, but if you trying to be nice because of those energies, she can benefit from you being nice just because you're nice (Which is of course a good thing!) and get back to normal quicker. It doesn't really matter what caused it, but in my opinion it's just so far fetched to seek a reason in the stars, when there's a bazillion other things that could have caused her behavior. Humans are complex creatures after all!

What about the moon?  Look at hospital records for full moons compared to normal nights, there are way more accidents.

Can you please give me a source? I'd be interested to read it. I've done a few quick google searches, but I'm finding things pointing out there are no such correlations. Thanks!

Here's a scientific article, which found no such correlation: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15166467

More self poisonings during full moon:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed&cmd=Retrieve&list_uids=7448570&dopt=Abstract

Increase in female calls, decrease in male calls during new moon at crisis-call center:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14664724?dopt=AbstractPlus

Aggravated assault more common near full moon:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/641019?dopt=Abstract

I couldn't find one directly about hospital admissions.  In my case, that was taken from anecdotal evidence from several nurses.  The effect may be limited to those who believe in it .  But, the reality is, people believe in it.  That would explain it being found in limited areas, but not seen overall.  I wish I could find a study that took place in rural India, or another place where astrology is highly regarded.

[Crypt_Current]

Scorpio, Aquarius and Leo all tied for the lead -- These are all "fixed" signs.