Thursday, January 13, 2011

I'm not a Leo

Leo vs. Virgo
Now, I've never been one to believe in astrological signs or follow horoscopes. But occasionally I find the whole thing entertaining, and I liked identifying myself as a Virgo.

Except now, according to science (astrology is a science, right?), my sign has changed due to a shift in the sky over the millenniums. Earth is now in a different spot in relation to the sun than it was when the 12 zodiac signs were originally assigned.

So instead of a Virgo, my birth date now falls under the zodiac sign of the Leo.

I have a problem with this. It's not so much that I'm extremely attached to being a Virgo (but, in a way, that is part of the problem). But at the time I was born, had the Earth already made this shift? If not, then I am still and always be a Virgo.

This might be a confusing argument, but bear with me, and hopefully you can follow my logic.

Our signs are supposed to predict our personalities, our fortunes, dating compatibility, etc. If the Earth was in the same position it was 3,000 years ago when the signs were created, then I don't see why my sign would change. I would have been born during the Virgo sign. My personality, etc, would be set based on that. This shift cannot change that fact. Besides, to make my argument simpler, I have not changed.  And I doubt that just because the Earth has shifted now will mean my personality is going to switch from that of a Virgo to that of a Leo. Unless the "star doctors" are going to shift the descriptions/definitions of each sign as well?

It's people who are born after this shift who will now have different signs. But like I said earlier: I am, and always will be, a Virgo.


And apparently CNN agrees with me... although for different reasons.

2 comments:

  1. hehehe! I think this new change reflects growth and, well, change in our characters :-). Ok fine. I liked being a Leo for a day.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Haha! And I'm sure you were a good one. :)

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts with Thumbnails