What are the principles on which astrology rests?

[quantumdude]

This stems from the threadThe purpose of pseudoscience. Astrology was referred to as being dismisses as pseudoscience. Is it unscientific? Or is it just getting a bad rep from its identification with the daily paper horoscopes?

I have no idea, as I have never looked into the matter. So let me ask:

1. What are the foundational principles on which astrology rests?
In other words, what are its axioms?

2. What are the claims of astrology? In other words, what does one mean when one says that "astrology works"?

3. How is #2 deduced from #3? Or are the axioms identical to the claims?

Thanks,

 

[(Q)]

I am at a total loss to think how planets and stars can have any influence or effect on our future in terms of astrology.

 

[russ_watters]

My take on astrology: Before the scientific revolution, atronomy and astrology were pretty much the same thing. There were a few true astronomers though who called themselves astrologers because that's how they got access to the King's research money. When science was invented (discovered?) during the Rennasance, astronomy separated itself from astrology. Since then, any science having to do with the stars is astronomy. If there WERE a scientific theory to arise from astrology, it would not be astrology, it would be astronomy.

I am at a total loss to think how planets and stars can have any influence or effect on our future in terms of astrology.

Not so fast. Any pshrink will tell you that there is more depression in the winter than the summer. WHY? Even the tides can affect your mood (Surf's up! duuuuuude). So there ARE effects and there is real science to describe them. But that's not astrology.

Astrology is not science (and never will be) because it is not studied in a scientific way. Any junior high kid could conduct a scientific study on astrology. But scientific studies are rarely done. WHY?

 

[Kerrie]

Thanks for your interest on one of my favorite subjects


What are the foundational principles on which astrology rests?

The same force that moves the planets, move us.



What are the claims of astrology? In other words, what does one mean when one says that "astrology works"?

Astrology is a tool that claims to show strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies by interpreting the aspects of the planets to one another. It is like a blueprint of one's soul...why it works is because so many people fall into the auto-pilot syndrome and forget to excercise their free will (or complete awareness/developed intuition in my book)...



How is #2 deduced from #3? Or are the axioms identical to the claims?

Can you be a little more specific on this question?


Being objective on astrology (and I feel obligated to do so that I do not lend bias to it because my ego tells me to claim its validity), I would say that the major weakness on astrology is how varied the interpretations of the aspects can be...thus, my reason I study people myself over learning from a book...

I would be most happy to answer any more questions

 

[(Q)]

Kerrie

What are the foundational principles on which astrology rests?

The same force that moves the planets, move us.

Could you be more specific, please? What force are you referring?

Astrology is a tool that claims to show strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies by interpreting the aspects of the planets to one another.

This is what I don’t understand. Planets are millions of miles away from us and have been and will continue to orbit the Sun for millions, if not billions of years. A very tiny bit of gravitational pull is about the only influence they can have on the Earth and each other, aside from the joy we might get from viewing them with a telescope.

What would happen, for example, if a large brown dwarf rogue made its way into our solar system and completely destroyed one of the key planets used in astrology? And what if this collision had such an effect as to knock other surrounding planets out of their orbits? Would astrology need to be re-written?

Why couldn’t one simply gain knowledge of strengths, weaknesses and tendencies from studying people instead?

 

[quantumdude]

Originally posted by Kerrie
What are the foundational principles on which astrology rests?

The same force that moves the planets, move us.

So, gravity then?

What are the claims of astrology? In other words, what does one mean when one says that "astrology works"?

Astrology is a tool that claims to show strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies by interpreting the aspects of the planets to one another. It is like a blueprint of one's soul...why it works is because so many people fall into the auto-pilot syndrome and forget to excercise their free will (or complete awareness/developed intuition in my book)...

Is there some systematic way to determine these these strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies? What input data do you use (birthday, etc)?

How is #2 deduced from #3? Or are the axioms identical to the claims?

Can you be a little more specific on this question?

Sure. You said that the foundation of astrology is that the same force that moves the planets also moves us. From this principle, how are claims regarding our strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies logically deduced?

Being objective on astrology (and I feel obligated to do so that I do not lend bias to it because my ego tells me to claim its validity), I would say that the major weakness on astrology is how varied the interpretations of the aspects can be...thus, my reason I study people myself over learning from a book...

OK, that's fine. Let's just focus on your interpretation of it.

 

[Kerrie]

Astrology is like a reflection...

(Q)~

The same force that moves the planets, move us.

you tell me, what does move our planets, satellites, asteroids, etc? this is where the debate of "God" could come in, but I really don't want to lead this discussion there...Gravity is a part of it, but what motivates the movement, do we know?

This is what I don’t understand. Planets are millions of miles away from us and have been and will continue to orbit the Sun for millions, if not billions of years. A very tiny bit of gravitational pull is about the only influence they can have on the Earth and each other, aside from the joy we might get from viewing them with a telescope.

see my comment above...astrology is a theory obviously at this point, but those who study it long enough begin to understand it's "language"...

What would happen, for example, if a large brown dwarf rogue made its way into our solar system and completely destroyed one of the key planets used in astrology? And what if this collision had such an effect as to knock other surrounding planets out of their orbits? Would astrology need to be re-written?

i guess we will find out what happens if and when that happens...astrology does not claim to be the final answer...which leads me to your next question...

Why couldn’t one simply gain knowledge of strengths, weaknesses and tendencies from studying people instead?

i do study people along with their birth information and compare their tendencies, etc with the aspects in their chart...more often then not, people are a match to their chart...

Tom~

Is there some systematic way to determine these these strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies? What input data do you use (birthday, etc)?

for the natal chart, I use the birthdate, the EXACT time and EXACT place of birth (latitude and longitude) to calculate where the planets were in relation to the person at the time of their birth...now, one could argue why the chart is not calculated at the time of conception, and my answer to that would be that the fetus does not have free will until it is completely separate from their mother...most astrologers now use a computer program to input the birth information, as hand calculating takes a long time..

You said that the foundation of astrology is that the same force that moves the planets also moves us. From this principle, how are claims regarding our strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies logically deduced?

i deduce them by comparison of the aspects to the individual, or event (astrology can be used for a an event as well)

here is my favorite example of astrology into play:

11/2000 (presidential elections)
Mercury in Retrograde in Scorpio~
Mercury = planet of communication, media, facts, etc.
Retrograde = planet appearing to move "backwards", but generally interpreted as "fowling" up the typical characters of the planet in retrograde
Scorpio = planet of power (more US presidents have been Scorpio then any other sun sign )

so, with these typical characteristics, it is easy to see a "reflection" from the sky to the events occurring to earth, much like a mirror...
what i would like for all to remember is, astrology isn't a science, but a tool...

 

[(Q)]

Kerrie

you tell me, what does move our planets, satellites, asteroids, etc? this is where the debate of "God" could come in, but I really don't want to lead this discussion there...Gravity is a part of it, but what motivates the movement, do we know?

I would much prefer the natural laws explanations as opposed to debating gods. Gods have yet to be shown to exist. As well, there is a vast amount of varying interpretations for gods and no one interpretation is valid.

From the General theory of Relativity, there is a well-known metric called the Robertson-Walker metric. This rather complicated mathematical model forms a basis for representing the current model of our universe. It explains the possibility of how the universe first came into existence (Big Bang Theory) and describes quite accurately the current expansion of the universe. Many of our current observations agree with this theory. A few unknowns still exist, but they are working on solving them.

In a way, you could say this theory might describe the motivation of movement that you refer. And since the theory is derived from General Relativity, we must be talking about Gravity.

Back to the question at hand – how does gravity move us?

astrology is a theory obviously at this point

Technically, I would have to disagree. Astrology cannot be considered a theory, nor can it be even considered a hypothesis. It does not fit the criteria required for theory development.

I believe Tom has outlined those criteria in another thread regarding Pseudoscience.

more often then not, people are a match to their chart...

Perhaps that’s why Astrology is considered Pseudoscience. If the results are not consistent each and every time, it cannot be considered valid. But I do agree with your methods of studying people. I think if you spent more effort on that part alone, the consistency of your results will increase. And if you spend enough time studying people without comparing your results to Astrological charts, you may develop your own theories that could be accepted into the scientific community.

And that would be a major achievement!

what i would like for all to remember is, astrology isn't a science, but a tool...

The problem is, as I stated above, the tool you are using is not consistent; therefore your results will always have varying degrees of uncertainty. It might be better for you to replace Astrology with another tool that will give you more consistent results.

 

[quantumdude]

Originally posted by Kerrie
Is there some systematic way to determine these these strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies? What input data do you use (birthday, etc)?

for the natal chart, I use the birthdate, the EXACT time and EXACT place of birth (latitude and longitude) to calculate where the planets were in relation to the person at the time of their birth

OK

You said that the foundation of astrology is that the same force that moves the planets also moves us. From this principle, how are claims regarding our strengths, weaknesses, and tendencies logically deduced?

i deduce them by comparison of the aspects to the individual, or event (astrology can be used for a an event as well)

Is it a simple matter to write that system down, or is it too cumbersome? Perhaps there is a link online?

here is my favorite example of astrology into play:

11/2000 (presidential elections)
Mercury in Retrograde in Scorpio~
[?]Mercury = planet of communication, media, facts, etc.
Retrograde = planet appearing to move "backwards", but generally interpreted as "fowling" up the typical characters of the planet in retrograde
Scorpio = planet of power (more US presidents have been Scorpio then any other sun sign )

OK, I have inserted a [?] icon at the part I don't understand. How did you determine what kind of planet Mercury is? It would seem that this represents another axiom of the theory, along with the first one you mentioned.

what i would like for all to remember is, astrology isn't a science, but a tool...

A tool to be used for what end? Prediction? Explanation after the fact? Pardon my ignorance, but that example is the first I have ever seen of "Astrology In Action".

I guess my fundamental questions are:

What does astrology claim to offer, and how does it deliver?[/color]

I realize that you say, "astrology isn't a science", and I am having no trouble accepting that so far. What I am wondering is whether or not it is pseudoscience, or just plain mystical.

 

[Kerrie]

www.astro.com i highly recommend this reputable site

Is it a simple matter to write that system down, or is it too cumbersome? Perhaps there is a link online?

see the link above, it is very informative..

OK, I have inserted a icon at the part I don't understand. How did you determine what kind of planet Mercury is?

based on the years of studying, it is traditionally accepted as so, and from what i gather when mercury does go into retrograde every couple of months, communications of all kinds TEND to get messed up...

A tool to be used for what end? Prediction? Explanation after the fact? Pardon my ignorance, but that example is the first I have ever seen of "Astrology In Action".

i hope that people don't use astrology as prediction, it is a map of your psychological tendencies...it is up to the individual to become aware of those tendencies and decide if they are positive or negative in their life..

(Q)~

Back to the question at hand – how does gravity move us?

this question i will admit that i do not know, do you?

If the results are not consistent each and every time, it cannot be considered valid

The problem is, as I stated above, the tool you are using is not consistent; therefore your results will always have varying degrees of uncertainty. It might be better for you to replace Astrology with another tool that will give you more consistent results

Free will of that person is what makes it inconsistent...see my comment above to Tom...

logically, what keeps me motivated to continue to study and learn it is the fact that MOST people do match up to their chart because (in my opinion anyway), most are on auto-pilot..
(Q), a better way to prove what validity astrology does have is for me to do a natal chart for you, if you choose...this is the real way i can have the opportunity prove it, not just by debating it...

it might be better to understand the perspective that astrology is more of a human "psychological tool" then a scientific one..

here is a quote that i like to use in describing astrology:
as above, so below
as within, so without
as the universe, so the soul

 

[quantumdude]

Originally posted by Kerrie
see the link above, it is very informative..

I don't see it.

 

[chroot]

Mercury is a Roman god similar to the Greek god Hermes. Both served as messengers between mankind and the gods, and thus Mercury is held to be a symbol of communication.

The planet was named Mercury by its Greek discoverer, Timocharis, circa 260 BC. It was so named because it moves so quickly from night to night.

The coupling of these two facts leads to the conclusion "the planet Mercury itself represents communication." Whether or not the coupling makes any sense is up for debate. Man invented the god Mercury, and stipulated that he move so quickly between gods and earth. Man named the planet Mercury. As a result, the only real connection between the planet and the concept of communication is one formed by man himself. This leads me to question the validity of any conclusions based on that connection.

There are a total of four (known) fundamental interactions in the universe. The only two that operate at sufficient range to allow the planets to interact with us are electromagnetism and gravity.

Gravity is extremely weak. Saturn exerts less gravitational force on you than does a nearby housecat. While it certainly cannot be said to have zero gravitational influence, it has a neglible influence. The electromagnetic interaction comes in the form of light, allowing us to see the planet as a bright dot in the night sky. How the presence of this tiny amount of reflected sunlight can be said to affect one's life and personality is beyond me.

Like many good movies, astrology requires a suspension of disbelief -- in other words, if you're not willing to stop thinking so damn much, you can't appreciate astrology. I'll let it be known right now that I cannot stop thinking so damn much.

Astrology is a psychological game masquerading as an astronomical phenomenon. Astronomical bodies really have no bearings on the subject of astrology -- you can derive similar psychological "readings" from tarot cards, or the bumps on the skull. Astrology is persuasive because it uses something that seems overtly scientific, even though it doesn't use any actual science. You can plug in your birthday, or the latitude and longitude of your birthplace, and do a lot of numerical manipulations -- this seems very precise and scientific. It seems that the profile that pops out of is somehow derived from those numbers. However, if the birthday and birthplace are used to calculate the positions of planets, and the planets are themselves unrelated to actual human behavior, then the birthday and birthplace are unrelated to actual human behavior. You might as well plug in your dog's birthday and the coordinates of Saddam Hussein's secret bunker -- you'll probably come up with a profile that is similarly successful at describing your personality.

There are many adjectives that one can use to describe someone's personality, and all such characteristics are spectra -- virtually no one is entirely kind, or absolutely happy, or completely devoid of fear. As a result, almost anyone will match a good portion of almost any randomly-generated psychological profile. Try it, you'll see.

What I find funny about astrologers is that they are thrilled when 75% of an astrological profile matches their subject. A psychologist, however, would see the same 75% as an overwhelming failure.

- Warren

 

[Loren Booda]

Astrology is right in that heavenly bodies do affect us, but physics takes that qualification and makes it a quantification. Effects supercede emotions, force supplants fate, determinism replaces prognostication.

When the stars were "gods" and the planets "wanderers," man projected his hopes and fears against the sky, a predictable yet metaphysical pattern of lights. Now the science of astronomy has brought astrology down to earth, but the fundamental passion to explain our place in the universe remains.

 

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by chroot
What I find funny about astrologers is that they are thrilled when 75% of an astrological profile matches their subject. A psychologist, however, would see the same 75% as an overwhelming failure.

- Warren [/B]

so, you would say then that you had your natal chart interpreted? would you also so tht these were "credible" astrologists, or just interpreting from a book? the fact that you threw this comment in here shows me that you have a pre-disposed bias against it already, and therefore would not be willing to look at it objectively...

i desire to see astrology on the most realistic level, and welcome valid questions (such as Tom's) to challenge what i have learned...i do not want to be led by something false, however, as i mentioned before, the coincidences i have witnessed in people against the basic accepted interpretations of the aspects are quite high for not being that well accepted by the scientific community...

one thing also to remember is that most serious astrologers do know a lot about astronomy and often keep up on astronomical news...so, some of you skeptics can at least give us the credit for basing our interpretations on the astronomical facts

 

[(Q)]

Kerrie

this question i will admit that i do not know, do you?

Quite frankly, gravity doesn’t really move us – it actually resists our motion. Our movement is governed by the strength of our muscles to overcome the force of gravity.

(Q), a better way to prove what validity astrology does have is for me to do a natal chart for you, if you choose...this is the real way i can have the opportunity prove it, not just by debating it...

I’m game – how would you like to proceed? I can PM you any information you require.

Chroot – are you up to the challenge?

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by (Q)
Chroot – are you up to the challenge?

There's a challenge?

- Warren

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by Kerrie
"credible" astrologists

What's a "credible astrologist?"

you have a pre-disposed bias against it already, and therefore would not be willing to look at it objectively...

Of course I have a bias against it -- I thought I made that clear. However, I am more than willing to look at it objectively. I hold the objective opinion that it is pseudoscience. You hold the subjective opinion that it is meritous despite of all its logical and practical flaws, and despite the fact that it cannot be demonstrated to actually mean anything.

- Warren

 

[FZ+]

Astrology a science

Yes, study of Astrology is a science. But it doesn't tell us about our futures. It instead shows the vulnerability of the human psychology to finding significance where it simply does not exist.

 

[Kerrie]

(Q)~perhaps it's this balanced force of resistance and gravity that is synonomous with the reflection of astrology to our own personal motivations...i truly do not know though...

pm me with your birth info...

 

[(Q)]

chroot

There's a challenge?

Sure, just PM your birth info to Kerrie and let's see what she comes up with.

 

[Kerrie]

credible astrologists are those who study it with integrity, as much objectivity, and do not use it to "foretell" futures, but to advise people of their tendencies to help them better understand themselves...

You hold the subjective opinion that it is meritous despite of all its logical and practical flaws, and despite the fact that it cannot be demonstrated to actually mean anything.

you haven't allowed me to prove to you anything about astrology, because of your predisposed bias...

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by Kerrie
you haven't allowed me to prove to you anything about astrology, because of your predisposed bias...

No one's stopping you.

- Warren

 

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by chroot
No one's stopping you.

- Warren

in order for me to prove it, i will need your birth info (date, time and place of birth)

 

[chroot]

May 3, 1979, roughly 3 pm.

Presbyterian Hospital, Charlotte, NC: lat 35.227230 n, lon 80.842972 w.

- Warren

 

[chroot]

My chart:

sun in taurus in 9th house:
you enjoy a stable routine, and you seek high levels of thought (you are a thinker), yet this can battle with a sense of materialism (common for taureans),the key is to balance your drive to think with your desire to enjoy the physical pleasures of life...taurus is known to be stubborn too , but are very dependable...

Yeah, I like to think and I like my car. I don't know anyone who doesn't consider themselves a thoughful person. I give this part an 80%.

moon in leo in 11th house:
you may feel that you need to be the center of the stage among social situations, and can have a tendency to need a lot of love and admiration, balanced with this however, you are a very affectionate and loving individual yourself, in my own experience, i have known many individuals with the leo moon, and the most important thing to them is for them to be appreciated for their generosity...

I don't like being center stage. I don't need love and admiration. I'm usually rather aloof and uninterested in people. I give this a 0%.

mercury in aries in the 8th house:
you may have a tendency to be very forthright in your communication, but as a taurus sun, this steady pace of taurus can slow the urgency of aries, patience might be something that isn't native to you (and it isn't for me either :) ) you might have a great intution too...logic plays a big role in your perspective of life

I'm a very patient teacher. I do tend to be rather up-front, though. I'll give this one an 80% too.

venus in aries in the 7th house:
you might be impulsive in relationships, especially so with being placed in the 7th house, however, your partner will always know where they stand with you, you may have a natural likeness for the mysteries of life and death...your venus and aries are conjunct, and individuals i have known have a remarkable physical appearance (otherwise good looking) and strong sexual drive...

I'm usually pretty private, and sometimes have trouble telling my partner how I really feel about things. I don't have any interest in the mysteries of death. I do have a strong sexual drive, and I guess I'm decent looking. I give this one a 70%.

mars in aries in the 8th house:
this is a powerful placement, and you might have a tendency to be finely tuned (generally speaking), effective, productive and well guided, you take action, and can be competitive...the key is to make this a healthy competition if you find yourself in this situation, also, typically this is a very um...sexual...tendency

What does it mean to be "finely tuned?" I'm generally pretty productive and proactive. As I've said, yes, I'm very sexual. I give this one a 90%.

virgo rising...this is part of the Earth's ecliptic was on the eastern horizon at the time of your birth, it is possible you could have issues with your lower back or lower digestive track or nerves even...you are also a very mentally alert individual, are you tall by chance?

I have no health problems. I'm 6 feet tall. I give this one a 30%.

also, with the taurus sun and leo moon combo (ego vs emotion), you are a very strong individual, and do not let others walk on you as well as taking things too personally at times...

I rarely take anything personally. I give this one a 50%.

you may have a diverse career interests too, and your saturn points out that you are extremely self reliant, reliable for others and yet conservative...as you get older, you may develop a solid sense of self assurance...

I already have a solid sense of self-assurance. I don't think I've very conservative. I give this one a generous 80%.

At least 1 out of every 3 sentences you posted was completely wrong. The other 2 out 3 are at best similar to my personality, even though in many cases I wouldn't describe myself as you did.

Draw your own conclusions -- I've already drawn mine.

- Warren

 

[Kerrie]

my keyword in many of my statements was "tendency", and that is far from "absolute"...

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by Kerrie
my keyword in many of my statements was "tendency", and that is far from "absolute"...

If the strongest statements that astrology is capable of making involve the word "tendency," then how exactly can you assert that it is scientific?

- Warren

 

[Kerrie]

chroot...i already admitted in an earlier thread that astrology is not science, it is a reflection...

take my interpretation as you like, as you have free will to choose what you believe...just as i do and many others...

i am done conversing with you in this thread because i sense a strong will to argue rather then discuss on a objective and rational level..

for Tom...the site is

www.astro.com

 

[chroot]

Originally posted by Kerrie
discuss on a objective and rational level..

Oddly enough, I feel that I am being excruciatingly objective and rational, and that it is you who is being subjective and irrational.

- Warren

 

[FZ+]

You see, the problem with tendencies is that it requires bias and opinion to determine them. There is no reasonable scale to describe the accuracy of the tendencies, instead much more reliant on your own opinions regarding the prediction. The characteristic ambiguity of astrology results in the fact that any correlation comes not from the prediction, but from the user's own mind. A more scientific method would be to set up a controlled test. ie. give two predictions, for 2 different birthdates, and then compare them to see which is the most accurate.

So Kerrie, you game? My data is one of the following:
(a) 3 am 20/1/86 Chungqing, China
(b) 12 pm 5/5/84 Beijing, China
(c) 7 pm 23/7/85 Manchester, England

No cheating! Give the results in random order, to have a "double blind" test.

 

[Kerrie]

FZ...i am unsure of what you want me to do? taking this data and interpreting it is a time consuming process, this last chart took me an hour...i can give a very brief outline if you like..

You see, the problem with tendencies is that it requires bias and opinion to determine them.

exactly, as you stated:

It instead shows the vulnerability of the human psychology

i am not claiming it is science, but it is a study of cycles, human cycles within the rotations of the celestial bodies...

 

[russ_watters]

You see, the problem with tendencies is that it requires bias and opinion to determine them.

Not really. Pretty much all of medicine and psychology are based on "tendancies." The way you deal with that scientifically is through statistical analysis.

There are very different ways of thinking associated with different sciences. I like engineering because it is very "real." A steel cable can support x amount of weight. Put much more on it and it will break. Direct cause and effect. Medicine isn't anywhere near as simple. Thats why to test a drug you need a sample of a thousand cases. Then you analyze statistical probabilities of things like side effects.

Astrology *CAN* be approched in the same way. But it isn't and won't ever be. The reason is that by being vague or describing common human traits (anyone ever meet a person who is NOT curious?) you can achieve a very high degree of accuracy without actually saying anything. The test for this is quite simple. Using the technique chroot did, you rate the accuracy of the readings. Then you randomize the readings and do it again. Then compare.

 

[FZ+]

A brief outline would do.

 

[Kerrie]

Originally posted by Zefram
Maybe this is the wrong place (or time) to ask this but when someone says "I believe in astrology" what exactly are they professing a belief in? That semi-accurate charts describing personality traits can be drawn up based on birth date or location? That the stars or planets or both account for this? Or something else?

the correct term would be to "understand astrology"...i see it as understanding personality traits another invidual may tend to..

 

[Kerrie]

zefram, i am afraid you are asking me to "scientize" astrology...stronger tendencies to do such-and-such over another individual due to the reflection of aspects of planet xyz to abc...does that clarify?

 

[LURCH]

I do not personally ascribe much credence to astrology (at this time), but I will say this; so far in this topic, much has been made of the fact that astrological data is based on "tendencies" and "will always have verying degrees of uncertainty". Am I the only one who finds these descriptions rather familliar-sounding? Is QM psuedoscience? Or is statistical analysis to be discarded as having no validity?

If these are the chief reasons for which astrology is rejected as a science, then that rejection is invalid. Kerrie has stated that this is not a science, but surely there must be better reasons than these for that conclusion.

 

[Kerrie]

interesting perspective Lurch...for the years i have studied astrology, i have analyzed it, just like scientists would in certain studies...

i say it is not a science because it is not exact like science is, free will of the human being is what makes it not exact and reliabel

 

[(Q)]

Kerrie

Perhaps I don’t quite understand your inference to free will. Are you saying scientists have no free will when they conduct experiments and postulate theories?

BTW – did you get a chance to finish my chart?

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by (Q)
Kerrie

Perhaps I don’t quite understand your inference to free will. Are you saying scientists have no free will when they conduct experiments and postulate theories?

I'm not normally one to speak for others, but I'm fairly confident I see the point of missunderstanding in this case. I think the distinction being made here is that when scientists conduct experiments, the subject which they are observing has no free will.

Even with the HUP, the path of an electron is more predictable than the path a person will take in their personal developement. An electron cannot look at where it is going and "decide" that this is not the way it wishes to go. But predicting the course a person's maturation process will take, or the traits and tendencies they will have is more difficult because the person may become aware that they have these traits or tendencies, and choose to change them.

 

[Kerrie]

thank you lurch...human free will is not predictable, therefore can be be deemed as "unreliable" for studying it scientifically...

 

[Kerrie]

great question, after doing some research, i found these words from a well known astrologist, Kevin Burke:

Astrology operates on the Ketheric level of existence, the level of a spritual blueprint.

So, I would say no, astrology does not have an impact on weather, but the spirituality of those with free will.

 

[arivero]

Astrology works!

It is only a question of context. But astrology accurately
predicts:

- the adequate timings for fishing according to sea levels.
- the adequate timings for farming activities.

In some places, it also predicts acurately weather-related
events, such as for instance the rising of the Nile river.

My guesses: the invention of calendars pushed astrology to a secondary role. The accumulated corputs grew out of context trying to do predictions unrelated to their primary goals. It could happen catastrophically or gradually. For instance, trying to predict dayly weather for state activities, battles, demostrations, etc... and then even evolving to try to predict individual events. Or it could be a case for an stablished sicence expanding to illetered hands, as happens with pseudoscience nowadays.

Aside: Liver omen works! It is explained in Vitrubio books. Check it.

 

[Kerrie]

okay, to be objective in my assertion of the validity of astrology, can you provide links or any kind of other reference to show proof that astrology has an impact on fishing and farming? this is news to me as an avid student for 12 years...

 

[selfAdjoint]

I presume he means the "moon sign books" used by some farmers and fisherment. But to assert "accuracy" he should be able to site specific controlled experiments showing them to be accurate. For example give fake moon sign books - with different numbers - to a random sample of fishermen, and the regular books to another random sample of the same size. Then see of there was any statistically meaningful difference between the fishing success (defined by some objective criterion) of the two groups.

I'll bet he can't do that. It's just the usual phony spin.

 

[LURCH]

I almost forgot!

Tom, in your initial post in this topic, you asked about the reasons for astrology being dismissed as "pseudoscience". The main reason that I have heard relates to the zodiac. For example, I am an Aries. This means that, back when the Egyptians (?) Charted the first zodiac calendar, the sun rose into the constellation Aries on the day that I was born.

Due to gyroscopic precession, and the Earth's "wobble" by axis, the sun no longer rises into that same constellation on that day. In fact, all of the zodiacal signs are off by approximately one month. Many astrologers claim that, in spite of this fact, astrological predictions made for an Aries back then would still apply to me, today. Their reasoning for this is that the sun is still rising into "the same area of space", even though the constellation Aries has moved. This presupposes some supernatural or intangible quality of space that can somehow make location absolute, in spite of the motions of the natural, physical objects in the universe.

This, however, sounds like a very different kind of astrology from that which Kerrie describes.

 

[Kerrie]

exactly so lurch, IF you use the actual constellations (only needed for rising signs ...it is the Earth's ecliptic (360 degreee circumference divided by 12 suns) that are what are referred to as "sun signs"...

there are actually 13 constellations in the zodiac ban, one is between scorpio and sagittarius called ophiuchus...but because astrologists do not base the "signs" on the actual zodiac ban in the sky, it doesn't apply...

 

[thed]

Originally posted by Kerrie
there are actually 13 constellations in the zodiac ban, one is between scorpio and sagittarius called ophiuchus...but because astrologists do not base the "signs" on the actual zodiac ban in the sky, it doesn't apply...

Interesting. Does the facr that our position in the Galaxy has altered over 2,000 years also have bearing. That is, the shapes of the constellations have altered subtly in 2,000+ years. what affect does this have in say, 10,000 years when the constellations have altered a lot. Plus due to precession the zodiacal constellations will have altered again.

 

[quantumcarl]

Originally posted by Tom
This stems from the threadThe purpose of pseudoscience. Astrology was referred to as being dismisses as pseudoscience. Is it unscientific? Or is it just getting a bad rep from its identification with the daily paper horoscopes?

I have no idea, as I have never looked into the matter. So let me ask:

1. What are the foundational principles on which astrology rests?
In other words, what are its axioms?

2. What are the claims of astrology? In other words, what does one mean when one says that "astrology works"?

3. How is #2 deduced from #3? Or are the axioms identical to the claims?

Thanks,

I see astrology as explainable by way of the mechanics noted in Chaos theory.

You know... like when a bird is startled and beats its wings in Kuala Lumpur there is a hurrican in Jamaca. That kind of synergistic progression. Only in this case, its a planet(s) and its relation to a constellation and the Earth and a person on the Earth and the positioning of these and other factors.

If astrology is considered a psuedoscience then I would imagine that psychology could be considered as being one as well... since there are as many correlations and confirmations calculated in astrology, if not more, as there are found in psychology... yet neither is considered (by some) a proven, exact science.

 

[Kerrie]

Important information to break a common myth of astrology!

Originally posted by LURCH
I almost forgot!

Charted the first zodiac calendar, the sun rose into the constellation Aries on the day that I was born.

Due to gyroscopic precession, and the Earth's "wobble" by axis, the sun no longer rises into that same constellation on that day. In fact, all of the zodiacal signs are off by approximately one month. Many astrologers claim that, in spite of this fact, astrological predictions made for an Aries back then would still apply to me, today. Their reasoning for this is that the sun is still rising into "the same area of space", even though the constellation Aries has moved. This presupposes some supernatural or intangible quality of space that can somehow make location absolute, in spite of the motions of the natural, physical objects in the universe.

constellations do not matter with sun signs...it is the Earth's ecliptic-this is the plane of the sun's apparent orbit around the sun...the equator is tilted approximately 23.5 degrees to the ecliptic and astrologists measure the relative positions of the planets based on where they appear along this ecliptic...

so you see, as i stated previously, the constellations have nothing to do with interpretation, but it is the earth's relation to our planets, sun moon, (and some planetoids) that is interpreted...this is the most subjective part of astrology-interpretation of these aspects on human psychology...

one thing all skeptics should know as a fact is when planet such-and-such is conjunct/trine/in opposition to planet so-and-so, this is factual information...it is clearly objective the positions of the planets in relation to our earth...so i can say that astrology is based on facts

 

[arivero]

Originally posted by Kerrie
okay, to be objective in my assertion of the validity of astrology, can you provide links or any kind of other reference to show proof that astrology has an impact on fishing and farming? this is news to me as an avid student for 12 years...

Ok, ok, let me to clarify: there are an evident impact, from the positions of Sun and Moon. It is just that modernly this impact is fully understood, thus it is labeled astronomy. So it is not rare for you to miss it. The position of Sun against the fixed stars tell us of the year station, the relative position of Sun and Moon tell us of tides.

Secondly there is a minor impact from the visibility of known stars. It relates to weather prediction, as it informs of the humidity conditions in the atmosphere. Note that this prediction is not only important to farming, but also to other activities, for instance to decide if engaging or not in a battle.

Thirdly it comes a pseudoscience degenerating from all the previous, it still perdures as "farming calendars", and surely it is the origin of astrology as pseudoscience, before to be applyed to persons.