Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Entertainment & MusicHoroscopes · 1 decade ago

Would'nt horoscopes make alot more sense according to season and not the stars.?

I mean like the stars are symbolic of the month, though wouldint in have more to do with the months of the year? like if a baby is born before november, he would grow up during the winter, and before may, he would grow up in the summer....So basically could this be more of a factor instead of the position of the stars?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The stars aren't symbolic of the month... and the months we use are actually fairly arbitrary and not particularly accurate (note: the Zodiac is MUCH older than our current calendar/months).

    Likewise, there's far more than just one factor... it's several factors - planets, houses, aspects, etc... - making up a horoscope, which would be far too over simplified by going by season.

    Not to mention seasons are different in different places (many places don't even have distinct seasons), so there's no continuity.

    Astrology is an ancient system, adopted by countless ancient cultures (Greek, Egyptian, Hindu, Mesoamerican, etc...) completely *independent* of each other (all with a 12 symbol Zodiac, coincidentally enough)... and it's far more complex than magazine horoscopes would have one believe. And contrary to what BloodTypeX said, no, it hasn't always been about commerce since day one. It's thousands of years old, and was originally what by today's standards would be a science/religion hybrid. Many of these cultures also had knowledge of astronomy predating ours by centuries (and even millennia), some of whom had calendars more accurate than our current calendar, actually. However, yes, it's often adopted into entertainment for the sake of making money (Sun Sign horoscopes in magazines and online, etc...) but that's certainly not the origins of Astrology, and anyone who knows anything about Astrology would quickly admit that those "horoscopes" are too over-simplified and aren't actually horoscopes and have next to nothing to do with Astrology.

  • 1 decade ago

    nah then it would take the mystery out of it all i mean there are only 4 seasons if each of us fell into the catagory of summer spring winter fall we wouldn't have the fun of asking the question what sign are you nothing would be a mystery we would know just by the seasons and any way how many times have u heard already if u were born in july oh ur a summer baby in november oh ur a winter baby smiled anyway we are known as seasons but we have to keep astrology going no? fun question

    Source(s): one's imagination
  • 1 decade ago

    the standard of astrology is based on constellations and planets and the main star the sun. the reason why it is still based on the planets and star constellations is because before julius/ and augutus ceasar there were only 10 months. astrology is older than the months but now it would be easier.

  • 1 decade ago

    Wouldn't horoscopes make a lot more sense if they matched up no matter where you went to get it?

    You can ask a fortune teller, you can check the newspaper, you can aks friends who know about that kind of thing, etc. and get different answers from each and every one of them.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    yes and no zodiac figures are just used by greeks to tell times and how a baby would act and be soo it would decide it's fate when it'd grow up depedning on the month and date of their birth date

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Horoscopes are based on absolutely nothing. They have been a monetary scam from the beginning. Seasons....No, gypsy, no.

  • 1 decade ago

    :/

    ummm... the calander is designed from the stars, not the stars designed from the calander.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    It all means nought

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    astrology has more to do with planets.

  • 1 decade ago

    no

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.