>>13802714Astrology offers a classification system. The zodiac and all of that stuff is touted by know nothings to actually define people. What it does is give abstract classes and then you can compare one against another to any degree thanks to spatial differences. One downside to it probably isn't exhaustive. Nothing can really build comprehensive personality classes though.
I don't study personalities like this as it leads to egomaniacal behavior. I think, if I were interested, I would be drawn more to enneagrams because it offers the same functionality under a different system, plus numbers are something I am comfortable with. The first thing that clued me into the parallel way of looking at this stuff was tarot cards. Some particular fortune, told some particular way - a certain number of cards, or even a shape the cards are dealt in - has finite number of outcomes each spelling a different tale. Obviously, people out there believe in clairvoyance and shit, but the practical matter is stepping away from your reference frame to some other. The job of the successful fortune teller is to hopefully grab enough information from the mark to really emphasize a portion of what they are missing. For example, If someone is greedy or need for a good outcome in business, try to remind them of how excess can mute more important thing, or how promises can be broken. Instead of advice, offer insight.
The idea that stars control us from birth is archaic and dates back to Plato, and likely before, where heavenly bodies are seen as prime movers, uncaused causes. This sort of thing has valuable metaphorical meaning, which I suspect they understood, but the literal take is asinine. Prime movers can't have bodies, and can't have motion, and yadda yadda. There is a lot more history to astrology. I think it is very likely every oral legend that made it into writing was probably a wanderers path beneath the stars. This is something I plan on studying when I am an old fart.
