Do you think zodiac signs have any merit in marriage relationships?

No! However, I know some women or people out there that are deeply into that crap that it actually affects the relationship and they make a big deal about it. When all along its not true at all. But some people just don't listen to their spouses-as human beings but instead, they listen more to their zodiac crap.


If you are going to follow those zodiac signs-Never use it in a negative way, but use in a more positive form.Do you think zodiac signs have any merit in marriage relationships?
Why seek zodiac signs for the future or to understand your spouse when basically they can all be generalized to somewhat fit the person in question? Instead, seek a relationship with Jesus Christ and read God's Word (the Bible) to know about who we are, and what our future holds.Do you think zodiac signs have any merit in marriage relationships?
at first i thought they did.. i was with a libra... and im an aquarius... we should have been able to do anything... turns out.. that well we didn't... he left me for drugs... apparently there are more important things than the person you love... or loved i would say... but then i met my husband... he's a taurus.. i admit.. we are both stubborn.. he's a taurus... but other than that we always try to work things out in a good way where we both just get along... lol.. its funny most of the time cause were always arguing but.. you know in a playing around way... then we just say oh what ever come here you... i love you.... and that's it... so... yeah.. oh and taurus and aquarius.. not so much a good match...
It's for entertainment purposes only


Some are susceptible to the 'power of suggestion'


It's mankind's first school of psychological thought


It's as accurate as Phrenology


I'm a Leo, Virgo, Pisces %26amp; Cancer all rolled in to one and once added up, I take the form of a Penguin.
When I was young and gullible I did. Now I older and a little bit wiser I think it's all a bunch of crap. If what your reading or hearing is what you want than I think it's great. But when it all turns to Sh!t, your wondering what happened. Only God knows the future. But in answer to your question NONE.
No, none at all....Astrology can be fun, but is basically silly.





I tell everyone that I was born under the sign of Feces
NO! You it's you not a crab,fish,lion or anything else that decides how your relationship flows!
I am in the playpen with Mildred, crawl into our secret society
No.
A simple NO
not in the least bit

this works

Why are verbal and non-verbal communication skills important in relationships?

Any sort of communication is very important in a relationship.





Nonverbal: Shows sometimes what you're truly feeling without actually saying it.





Verbal: When you can't really gesture it, words never fail.





:)

Do you think most people are faithful in their marriages/relationships now a days?

and what makes one cheat?Do you think most people are faithful in their marriages/relationships now a days?
People get married too young, without understanding what marriage really is. Then when they get bored or frustrated, they seek outside affection to compensate for what is lacking in their marriages instead of working at improving what they have.Do you think most people are faithful in their marriages/relationships now a days?
It's interesting, in my psychology class, we learned that people who don't try out marraige (meaning live together before getting married) are more successful in marriage because they are more committed to a lifelong relationship. People who live together before, as an overall trend, don't do so well because they aren't bought on committing to one person for life.





I just thought that was weird.





As for what makes someone cheat...sometimes it has nothing to do with their spouse. Sometimes it's just them feeling insecure about their life, bored with their accomplishments and they need something to make them feel adequate.





Sad, I know.
It depends on the person, honestly. People are more tempted to cheat now a days because of the media. And people are probably tempted to cheat more because their spouse wouldn't be giving them that much attention because of all of the distractions modern day life has to offer. IE: The internet, Ipods...
nope, and the reason they cheat is because a, they are lonely, or b, they are just excited about cheating... it keeps them busy i guess.. and interested in sex and keeps their lives full of chaos.. people like chaos...


some do it because of a mental need to push people away... push their own feelings down, to make sure they aren't totally commited for many reasons.. like my sis, she does it because she doesn't want to fully give herself to someone, because she doesnt believe that she can truly be loved by one person.. and the one she cheats with loves her loads, until she's tired of him.





people are goofy.





i don't cheat in my marraige, because no one is good enough to replace my hubby, and i know this is fact, and he wont cheat because i'd kill him lol.. kidding, but he wouldnt, because we are just like that. i know for a fact that he wouldnt and isnt.... because we spend every waking moment together, unless he's at work, and even then, i'm there a lot, too. wow, guess this little question made me realize how lucky i am...


for once, i'm lucky... if you knew my life history, you'd understand how great this is for me... but um.. not enough patience to write it, and i'm sure you wouldnt want to hear it





but just know a person, and spend loads of time with them. its a feeling beyond puppy love.. and they will show their faithfulness to you.. sometimes they screw up, but it doesnt mean that in the future they will. if it feels right, keep going or whatever, unless you have a gut feeling they will do it agian. follow that, too i guess.


i'm extremely tired, so i hope this made sense... i'm really loopy ha
Not really, spose there are some who stay together but mostly people dont consider marriage to be such a commitment anymore.



no because they dont have no guidelines and the best guidelines to go by is in the bible not some imperfet person whos been taught by another imperfect person
No. And the sad part is that they are the ones who will go out and vote to take away the rights of people who simply want to marry.
SURE........if you mean faithful with quotes-----%26gt; ';faithful';
i think you would be very suprised how many people are unfaithful due to being mistreated or thinking they are mistreated
i kno people who have cheated and i kno those that have been togethr for years and been completely loyal dont know why people cheat
Everyone cheats. Everyone. In one way or another.
Men are more likely to be more faithful.





That's why men freak out at the end of any relationship.






I don't bother concerning my self with others issues, but busy myself living my own life.
Emptyness
No


Boredom
Must be a new fad to cheat on each other.
I really wish I could say yes. But judging from my own and every other relationship around me...no. My childhood dream of the existence of a fairytale love was recently shattered...Love sucks lol.
Yes.





its to do with everything speeding up and having longer lives.





that's just my opinion though.
NO!!!! selfishness.
I am...but who knows? Real life is different than movies and what you see on Jerry Springer...for most people, anyway...
No, most people are whores now a days.
not me...


i never ccheated cuz i never had a bf


but im pretty sure i will
Yes
Nooooway.


but i don't know, you'll have to ask a cheater
Yes.
yes. =]
ask brad pitt.

What star sign(s) is shallow when it comes to relationships?

in my case it was a libraWhat star sign(s) is shallow when it comes to relationships?
Any sign could be. In astrology, it's the interchange between the two people and how hard those two people work at it, that determines if the relationship is going to work or not.





A person may have aspects that predispose them to ';shallow'; relationships, but it's not a Sun sign thing, and it takes two to tango.What star sign(s) is shallow when it comes to relationships?
not a libra at all we just are harder to tame in relationships and you have to be strong enough and qualified enough to keep us put lol! if youre not good at sex hey youre good as gone lmao! when youre with a libra you better be amazing in bed or were gone to find it elsewhere!
Cancer men. They spoil everything, they hold grudges and don't know how to let go of bad times in their past. I'm an ARIES, but I happen to be impatient. I've tried so hard to be patient with CANCER MEN. But it was always a no go.
I'm a Sagittarius guy and I'm not shallow, I just believe that looks are are an important part of relationships (Who honestly doesn't)
The shallowest girl I ever dated was a Gemini. One of my best friends though is Gemini and he is anything but shallow.
in my case it was a Virgo. it was too awkward.
I'm so sick of the generalizing, you don't need to be an earth or water sign to have depth Thank You Very Much.
I don't think it is the star sign, I think it is the person.
Scorpio


Leo


Virgo
Aquarius, Sagittarius

What star sign(s) is shallow when it comes to relationships?

in my case it was a libraWhat star sign(s) is shallow when it comes to relationships?
Any sign could be. In astrology, it's the interchange between the two people and how hard those two people work at it, that determines if the relationship is going to work or not.





A person may have aspects that predispose them to ';shallow'; relationships, but it's not a Sun sign thing, and it takes two to tango.What star sign(s) is shallow when it comes to relationships?
not a libra at all we just are harder to tame in relationships and you have to be strong enough and qualified enough to keep us put lol! if youre not good at sex hey youre good as gone lmao! when youre with a libra you better be amazing in bed or were gone to find it elsewhere!
Cancer men. They spoil everything, they hold grudges and don't know how to let go of bad times in their past. I'm an ARIES, but I happen to be impatient. I've tried so hard to be patient with CANCER MEN. But it was always a no go.
I'm a Sagittarius guy and I'm not shallow, I just believe that looks are are an important part of relationships (Who honestly doesn't)
The shallowest girl I ever dated was a Gemini. One of my best friends though is Gemini and he is anything but shallow.
in my case it was a Virgo. it was too awkward.
I'm so sick of the generalizing, you don't need to be an earth or water sign to have depth Thank You Very Much.
I don't think it is the star sign, I think it is the person.
Scorpio


Leo


Virgo
Aquarius, Sagittarius

What is the differnce between male/female relationships in England and male/female relationships in the US?

I am American was wondering what in general is the difference between male/female realtionships in England than in the US?What is the differnce between male/female relationships in England and male/female relationships in the US?
you re from long isalnd? relationships are relationships any where you go. different cultures, but a relationship nonetheless. england is not that much different than the us. if you were wondering about some other culture i would understand. oh well.


jade from the bronxWhat is the differnce between male/female relationships in England and male/female relationships in the US?
i am from england, living in usa, there is no difference,
American are more pervert and hypocrits

Which are the relationships between Kantian epistemology and radical constructivism ?

Sounds like you are wondering if both are a form of solipsism. Schopenhauer continued this track in his tome, ';The World As Will and Representation.'; Pretty dense stuff, but worth the read.Which are the relationships between Kantian epistemology and radical constructivism ?
Great question.





Kant proposed that to the extent that knowledge depends on the structure of the mind and not on the world, knowledge would have no connection to the world and is not even true representation, just a solipsistic or intersubjective fantasy. Kantianism seems threatened with ';psychologism,'; the doctrine that what we know is our own psychology, not external things. Kant did say, consistent with psychologism, that basically we don't know about ';things-in-themselves,'; objects as they exist apart from perception. But at the same time Kant thought he was vindicating both a scientific realism, where science really knows the world, and a moral realism, where there is objective moral obligation, for both of which a connection to external or objective existence is essential. And there were also terribly important features of things-in-themselves that we do have some notion about and that are of fundamental importance to human life, not just morality but what he called the three ';Ideas'; of reason: God, freedom, and immortality. Kant always believed that the rational structure of the mind reflected the rational structure of the world, even of things-in-themselves -- that the ';operating system'; of the processor, by modern analogy, matched the operating system of reality. But Kant had no real argument for this -- the ';Ideas'; of reason just become ';postulates'; of morality -- and his system leaves it as something unprovable. The paradoxes of Kant's efforts to reconcile his conflicting approaches and requirements made it very difficult for most later philosophers to take the overall system seriously.





'Radical Constructivism' (see Fischer 1995) is part of a larger 'constructivist' movement in the philosophy and sociology of science (Schwandt 1994). Its founder and most prominent proponent is the American psychologist Ernst von Glasersfeld (e.g. 1987a; 1991; 1992a; 1995). Among his followers and critical supporters are Gebhard Rusch (1987; 1990), Siegfried Schmidt (1987) and Niklas Luhmann (1992; 1993). Glasersfeld's thinking is highly interdisciplinary, but it is mainly built on the work of the French psychologist Jean Piaget, as well as on insights from cybernetics, i.e. the study of self-contained systems (Glasersfeld 1994; Portele 1994). Piaget's studies on the cognitive development of children led to the often cited conclusion: ';Intelligence organizes the world by organizing itself'; (Piaget 1937: 311). This means that knowledge is a self-organised cognitive process of the human brain; it is not aimed at a 'true' image of the 'real' world but at a viable organisation of the world as it is experienced. Similarly, cybernetics deals with continuously recursive, i.e. circular, processes of observing and learning, but from an entirely technical point of view. Self-regulating devices only know what they have sensed by feedback. A 'second order cybernetics' (Heinz von Foerster) in turn observes how such systems observe, and in this reflexive manner it includes the current observer in the field of study. Radical Constructivism is, if you will, 'second order knowledge', taking into account its own procedures too.





Radical Constructivism puts forward two main claims (Glasersfeld 1989: 162):





';(a) knowledge is not passively received but actively built up by the cognizing subject;


(b) the function of cognition is adaptive and serves the organization of the experiential world, not the discovery of ontological reality.';





Both Kantian epistemology and radical constructivism are concerned with how we experience the World.Which are the relationships between Kantian epistemology and radical constructivism ?
The relationship between Kantian Epistemology and Social(radical) constructivism is first, that knowledge is constructed by individuals' brain. Kant held that we could only know the appearance of thing(noumena) not the thing itself(phenomena) Thus knowledge is based on what the mind sees as the appearance. So in both cases the individual's brain construct the knowledge. Social Constructivism, view of is a construct of the mind, not compilation knowledge similar to Kant in a distant way. Second, there is no solid foundation for knowledge to rest on, since in Kant's Transcendentalism we don't really know the object, as in Social Constructivism, knowledge doesn't necessarily reflect ';ontological reality.'; Third, in both cases the individual forms the knowledge based on his personal view. Though Social Consrtuctivism is more akin to consensual knowledge(group based knowledge) Knowledge is not truly objective in the sense of traditional epistemology. Because of that there is a tendency to a relativistic view of knowledge.

this works