As a skeptic, I aim to balance open-minded curiosity with empirical discernment. When evaluating fields like astrology, I look to evidence and principles of science. While astrological systems may appeal to our desire for order and meaning, studies have not shown conclusive predictive correlations between personality traits and zodiac signs. Research on human psychology indicates our personalities arise from complex factors of genetics, environment, neurobiology and more. And principles of probability suggest any generalized predictions made without knowing unique life circumstances are unlikely to consistently match reality. The alluring precision of astrological wheels also faces challenges when applied to relationships. Large-scale behavioral studies find non-astrological factors like shared values and compatible personalities better predict relationship fulfillment than zodiac matches. And in color theory, the psychology of vision observes that color harmony depends on context, not just wheel position. That’s not to say astrology and color wheels lack value when viewed metaphorically. As guides for introspection and possibilities, rather than rigid rules, they can provide insights into human tendencies and color aesthetics. But fulfilling relationships and art require embracing nuance beyond these frameworks. As Carl Sagan said, extraordinary claims require proportionate evidence. My aim is not to categorically dismiss fields like astrology, but maintain measured skepticism, intellectual humility and scientific rigor. With open yet discerning minds, we can explore life’s mysteries while staying grounded in empirical knowledge. This allows discovery of deeper truths than any wheel could contain.