Is Astrology True?

[Hardheaded1]

I just noticed that our forum has a built in star sign display. What's up with that ? lol

It means that the canned software package that the site owner bought is dated (pardon the pun) to an earlier decade when dating sites assumed starsigns were a given, like a pickup line. It has been raised as an objection but considered a bother to fix. There is a general denial that it is a spiritual label rather than just a fun schtick to bandy about.


To the OP, you have the burden of proof if you endorse astrology. It isn't a proper noun in English, by the way, unless the name of a course or a book. It is simply the name of a study like virology or biology.

The basic premise of astrology is that human lives, nations, the planet, are all controlled by the position of the objects in the cosmos. We study science and even behavioral science to understand cause and effect. Astrology mandates effects without understanding any known force that could be the actual cause. That is acceptable as a theory is being devised, but not without proofs. It must conclusively prove its claimed effect over and over and over again, as it is a constant force if applied equally to people born at the same time. That assertion is easily disproven, and Lex's example is but one. It cannot be that the star Sirius works today on one person but simply opts not to on the next person tomorrow. That is caprice, not science.

Astrology is indeed a belief system. No one discusses science in similar terms aside from evolution when it is attacked by religious detractors, making it religion for them. No one goes around saying, "I believe in mitosis" or "if you open your mind up to inorganic chemistry, you'll see that it is true." Science can be replicated, over and over and over. Astrology cannot, making it belief.

If someone does research on astrology, either neutral, hostile, or supportive, that same research is open to peer review. It's biases are open for criticism. That is science.

Over its long history, astrology has been a euphemism for fate in many cases. The idea of free will and individual paths was muted by the invocation of the zodiac and the determining of personalities, events, and outcomes. It is undeniably a form of determinism and fatalism. As societies progressed and democracies arose, astrology was gradually modified to make it less of a dominating factor and more of an influencing guide. This made is less offensive to Western peoples who would otherwise reject it out of hand.

Also, it operates very much like most superstition. It takes observed phenomena after the fact and then imputes the cause, even if erroneously. A parallel is the common superstition that people die in three's. It's general, not specific. Three people may die in a car crash. That's three. A president may die, a stand-up comedian a week later, and a great author within the same month. There were many thousands who died at the same time but were not counted. The airliner that went down and took 238 people with it did not fit the rule, so was ignored. Astrology is similar. It ignores the inconsistencies and dismisses them as too complex.

Choose whatever belief system you want, and ask to be respected for that right to believe, but do not ask that the world accept your beliefs as facts, or be damned. That is jihad.

[DreamMaker]

That's what I'm asking man, the be respected, not to FORCE people to believe what I believe!
The whole point of the research I did was to -maybe- show people that ridiculing someone on enjoying and practicing Astrology is -maybe- not the proper thing to do.
And then again, I'm not your mother. You do whatever you want

[Hardheaded1]

The perception of the forum is that you are asking the members to consider it, which is an endorsement of it.

For them to respond with their reasons why they do not consider it is then met with recriminations that they are being disrespectful and close-minded.

Asking that your right to believe be respected, and asking that your beliefs be respected are two different things.

We may respect you and your rights, but it does not follow that astrology, when brought up for consideration, be treated with kid gloves.

[DreamMaker]

Ok. I agree.

[Hardheaded1]

Friend, I respect you. I also respect your right to cherish astrology. I would not think less of a friend because of his faith in it.

[Doofus89]

Astrology isn't science. I never claimed it is. I never claimed it was proven as well.
Astrology has both subjective and objective factors, that cannot be measured.
However, I still see it work in my experience.
Lexignton, I don't know exactly how the process was and what exactly the Astrologers told you,
but it is interesting. I'm open to see exactly how the process went.
Meridan, I said that not because I want you to "follow" it, or believe it.
It's ok if you're completely uninterested. But I don't like the attitude of ridicule and disrespect.
And that's about being a person, a human being, doesn't have to do with anything else.

Astrology in my eyes, isn't religion at all. It has its wisdom and mythology, but it's not religion.
Astrology for me, is more of a tool than a belief. It's just works for me and many others.

The reason I published this thread, isn't to convince you guys. I hope your mind can be a bit more open, and see that there are tests that were conducted by skeptics who were highly biased and irresponsible SCIENTIFICALLY. Because they were a part of a Skeptic Committe or something like that.
The research by Ertel, is interesting...
It's ok if you still don't want to look at it. I get it.
But if you claim to -know- the "truth", look again.

Sorry to disappoint you, but science doesn't know everything.
It is still progressing and evolving.
Lucid Dreams were once a fiction, a contradiction, impossible, illogical,
and yet it was proved by science later.

Adding on to Hardheaded, I respect that you have Astrology in your life. God knows I have a few friends into it. But if you want us to respect your beliefs you must respect ours, too. Saying, "Sorry to disappoint you, but Science doesn't know everything" doesn't help your cause. You're right, Science doesn't have all the answers. But, they are working on discovering all the answers. It's a very long process and requires time and effort. Science is working on finding the origins of life but it can't happen over night. Now, I can't speak too much for Astrology but I can't find the process used for discovery.

From what I've read of Astrology over the years, comparing Astrology to Science is like comparing apples to oranges. You know more than me, but I cannot see how Astrology is "progressing and evolving". Science isn't some sort of arbitrary practice people flock to because they don't like religion nor Astrology. Science is an actual practice. We have medicine and technology because of Science. We wouldn't have had any of this if it was up to religion alone. Some would argue, but for the most it was Scientific practice. I could hardly imagine Astrology doing anything remotely close to what Science has achieved over the last few hundreds. Last hundred in the very least.

[East]

I have no problem at all respecting beliefs that do not interfere with anyone else's lives.....

I do keep my spiritual beliefs to myself though. I am pagan and, for example, in suicide threads...I would have to use my spiritual beliefs in order to give advice....so I don't say anything.....

They give me a lot of personal comfort and strength and insight and frankly it is no one else's business really...spirituality is intensely personal anyway and since it has no effect on anyone else what I believe or don't believe it really shouldn't matter...eh?

I think the respect is a mutual thing so in order to be respected you have to give respect....

I think the OP is very respectful....

Also...it is impossible to defend beliefs...because they are beliefs. They are true for the person who believes them or feels them ...now if certain select Christians and Muslims could just learn this and stop trying to ram it down everyone's throats...and stop trying to legislate it or "prove" it to anyone else..we would have a much nicer world to live in.

[meridannight]

[MENTION=21866]Hardheaded1[/MENTION] put it very well.

nobody disrespected you (the OP). i don't even know you. i don't know if you deserve any respect or not. i disrespected your religion (which astrology is), and showed contempt towards it. you were the one to interpret it as a personal insult against you.

i have a friend who thinks paranormal phenomena are real, and that UFOs visit this planet. i find believing those things ridiculous but i respect him as a person. he's a great guy, and still my friend.


respect has to be earned. just because someone is born and believes something doesn't automatically grant them respect. i have respect for science because it has achieved flight, satellites, it has put a man on the Moon, it has gotten data on distant galaxies and planets, it has developed film technology, musical reproduction, new building materials, cures and relief for a huge number of medical conditions that would otherwise severely degrade the quality of life for many people, science has SAVED LIVES...and these are just SOME of the examples. what has astrology achieved?

this said, i have nothing against a person believing it if they want. that's their freedom and i support that freedom as long as they don't try to interfere with other people's lives with their religion (like christianity and islam have done). sadly, that's rarely the case.

[MikeW]

I still won't consider Astrology science, but it has little to do with Astronomy. Doesn't mean it doesn't work.

It's complicated, isn't it? When you ask a question such as the subject of this thread, "Is Astrology True?," it begs a philosophical question: What is "Truth"? Not to mention epistemological questions such as, "Can Truth be known?" and, even if it can, "Can we know that Truth?"

Along those lines, we then have to define what we mean by "know". Is "knowledge" merely an accumulation of data, or is it the relationships between the singular datum? Or is "knowledge" something else entirely, say, for example, a kind of skepticism that eschews all the following: "Subjective opinion, mechanical logic, and authoritarian belief." In this latter case, "knowledge," is *certainty*; That about which we have no doubt and upon which we would stake anything and everything, including our own life and the lives of those we love. Such certainty, especially absent the three noted aspects mentioned, is, in my experience, very rare.

One possible help is to suggest that Astrology is a kind of "map" -- and as Korzypski pointed out "the map is not the territory." In other words, ANY model OF reality is NOT the reality so modeled. Thus all languages and language systems (such as Astrology) are "maps" that are intended to help us find our way in the real (experiential) territory. The map, no matter how well drawn, *always* leaves out details that are present in that territory. Too, a map, no matter how detailed, may be inadequately or improperly interpreted.

Taken in that context, then, the question could be reworded: "Is Astrology A Reliable Map?"

IMO, this is a much more interesting question because, via Korzypski, we can say that no map is "True" (capital T) because the map isn't the territory. That doesn't mean the map is useless -- it depends on how well drawn, detailed, and readable it is.

It's also allows for the fact that *there are different kinds of maps* -- many of them may be "useful" depending on what one needs to use them for. Perhaps all I need to find buried treasure is something with sufficient landmarks that I can locate where X marks the spot. But if I'm an architect planning to design a house to sit on a steep hillside, that isn't going to cut it.

So the question is, what does Astrology MAP, exactly? For sure, on the surface of it at least, it is based on spacial relationships between astronomical bodies and their correlations with temporal and spacial coordinates on Earth. But I would argue that isn't what it MAPS -- those are just the landmarks. What is being mapped are INFLUENCES (which, at this point in our discussion, are *hypothetical*).

So, [MENTION=21882]DreamMaker[/MENTION], do you have any objections to what I've said so far? No point in going further if there are, or if they're not addressed.

[Virge]

here's some scrap quotes I picked up as i read this thread.
______________________________________________________

I believe that astrology is real and dangerous. Birth charts, in particular, can attract negative entities or spirits or whatever you want to call it to your home. Stay away from that filth, that's my advice.

Mister Love's comment is hilarious on levels most people won't get. "Birth charts, in particular, can attract negative entities or spirits" <<< That's 15th century Christian bullshit describing 5,000 year old Egyptian and Persian bullshit that Christian scholars and priests secretly believed in, depended on and practiced into the 18th century. They just didn't want 'the common people' or the gypsies or the jews or any imaginary devil worshippers messing with it.

It's also funny because Mister Love has a track record for trying to convince everyone he has proof of life after death which would require us to put a wheel chair ramp to the front door of common sense just for his proof to make it to the door. There's no difference in Mister Love's attempts to get us to believe his "proof" of life after death and DreamMaker's attempt to get us to believe Astrology. But we did get a CLEAR illustration of Mister Love's Dark Ages mentality and intolerance for the beliefs of others.
_________________________________________________________

yeah. because astrology is so complicated to comprehend you have to 'research' it to make up your mind on it. *laughing out loud*

Good point Meridan,
Accepting Astrology requires to some degree for you to put reason and tangible evidence aside in the same way you must do it to accept Mister Love's quadraplegic evidence for life after death.
___________________________________________________________

That's exactly the disgusting attitude. Yes it is complicated. But you won't know.

WOW! That's EXACTLY the same attitude Mister Love showed to DreamMaker for Astrology and that DreamMaker is showing for disbelievers in Astrology AND MisterLove shows for people who don't accept his lame evidence for life after death.
______________________________________________________________

And here we have a fine illustration of why people who put belief ahead of evidence are all pretty much the same when you boil them down.
______________________________________________________________
[MENTION=21882]DreamMaker[/MENTION] -- Others in here already know this about me. In the marines I wrote horoscopes that went out on the weekly bulletin from our commanding officer & staff. It was just a fun addition in which I personalized horoscopes specifically for marines whose birthdays I knew and could find out. I made up funny horoscopes just to fuck with the guys. Guess what? They all took them serious and talked about them, worried about them and were excited about them for the rest of the week. They were all pretty much amazed at how accurate their horoscopes were.

It doesn't matter to me that you have chosen to believe in astrology or that Mister Love chooses to believe in Life After Death. HOWEVER.... when you or Mister Love start presenting your beliefs as reasonable and being provable by evidence.... You will have stepped off into deep doo-doo. The blue words at the bottom in my signature are why.