Even though you like a lively exchange of ideas, you're encouraged to be as restrained as possible. At least for the moment. Certain individuals feel far more strongly about their ventures than you realise. What you regard as merely a humorous remark could hit home, if not actually be hurtful.
Absolutely spot on for my 9.30 am meeting this morning. Perhaps I should have listened more acutely too.
Monday 13 September 2010
Friday 10 September 2010
Sorting out a family snarl?
So here we are, waiting for the legal process to divorce us and for the property market to sell the family home. The forecase for this week seems very relevant:
Any family snarl-ups should start to sort themselves out, to everyone’s satisfaction, as Mercury, your ruler, strides forwards in the domestic angle of your chart. This is especially true if some sort of property deal is involved.
Its not quite a definite prediction, and it might refer to other "family snarls" perhaps so there might be different ways in which it could be correct. Lets see.
Any family snarl-ups should start to sort themselves out, to everyone’s satisfaction, as Mercury, your ruler, strides forwards in the domestic angle of your chart. This is especially true if some sort of property deal is involved.
Its not quite a definite prediction, and it might refer to other "family snarls" perhaps so there might be different ways in which it could be correct. Lets see.
Tuesday 7 September 2010
The value of being correct sometimes
I have been looking at horoscopes for a long time, and some of the results are in this blog. It seems to me that:
- horoscope predictions are right more often than can be explained by pure chance;
- horoscope predictions are right less than 50% of the time;
- there is a little consistency between astrologers. This doesn't mean astrology is rubbish, or at least no more than some people making better food than others means that cookery is rubbish.
You might not agree, but this is my opinion based on careful observation and thinking. Anyway, this is my blog.
The question then is "so what"?
First, a digression. Lets say that I had a way of predicting with 25% accuracy which horse would win a race in which (say) 12 horses start. If I chose a horse at random I have a 1/12 = 8% chance of being correct; so this prediction is much better than random but still a long way short of 50/50. Of course there are many non-random ways of choosing a winner, of which I might adopt some if I knew anything about horses. BTW the existence of other methods of prediction might or might not be beside the point -- see later.
In such a case the logical thing would be to back the predicted winner if the odds compensate you for the 75% probability that it would lose. But if you could know which outsiders had a 25% chance of winning, then over a period of time you should do well.
So how do we apply this to life? Some thoughts:
- You'd be silly to wager on a binary bet based on a astrological prediction unless the odds are very good. Perhaps this is why hardly anybody predicted the World Cup outcome successfully?
- If you've tracked the accuracy of a specific forecaster for a while, leave the door open to their forecasts being correct.
- Think about other ways of predicting the event in question that might give you a better or worse feeling of likelihood.
Some more thoughts in time.
- horoscope predictions are right more often than can be explained by pure chance;
- horoscope predictions are right less than 50% of the time;
- there is a little consistency between astrologers. This doesn't mean astrology is rubbish, or at least no more than some people making better food than others means that cookery is rubbish.
You might not agree, but this is my opinion based on careful observation and thinking. Anyway, this is my blog.
The question then is "so what"?
First, a digression. Lets say that I had a way of predicting with 25% accuracy which horse would win a race in which (say) 12 horses start. If I chose a horse at random I have a 1/12 = 8% chance of being correct; so this prediction is much better than random but still a long way short of 50/50. Of course there are many non-random ways of choosing a winner, of which I might adopt some if I knew anything about horses. BTW the existence of other methods of prediction might or might not be beside the point -- see later.
In such a case the logical thing would be to back the predicted winner if the odds compensate you for the 75% probability that it would lose. But if you could know which outsiders had a 25% chance of winning, then over a period of time you should do well.
So how do we apply this to life? Some thoughts:
- You'd be silly to wager on a binary bet based on a astrological prediction unless the odds are very good. Perhaps this is why hardly anybody predicted the World Cup outcome successfully?
- If you've tracked the accuracy of a specific forecaster for a while, leave the door open to their forecasts being correct.
- Think about other ways of predicting the event in question that might give you a better or worse feeling of likelihood.
Some more thoughts in time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)