I was thinking about the latest wave to "black magic" and "astrology" spam in QA
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
"These are pseudo science: nobody with any form of rational thought believes in it."
I consider myself a rational person and have no problems believing in black magic (or white) or astrology. You may think that's really weird, but it doesn't cause any conflict for me. Now, mind you, I try to be discerning -- there's a lot of new age noise out there that sadly has risen to the level of a shriek in the last 20 years. Anyways, I just thought I'd speak up here, as a person of "rational thought." ;) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Ghosts, vampires, fairies and little people that live at the bottom of the garden as well or is it just the pseudo sciences that you cannot refute one way or the other? I am constantly astonished by the things rational, sensible people can believe in, this includes all religions of course.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Ghosts, vampires, fairies and little people that live at the bottom of the garden as well or is it just the pseudo sciences that you cannot refute one way or the other? I am constantly astonished by the things rational, sensible people can believe in, this includes all religions of course.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
It is great hubris to think there are not vast areas of knowledge yet to be understood or discovered or that if it can't be proven, it can't be. Scientists are often so smug. As far as pseudo-sciences, I am reminded of economics. Here, two "experts" can argue about some economic principle and throngs will line up behind each expert fully convinced their side is correct. One side, if proven wrong, would be denied acquiescence by their ego and\or their vested professional interest in their conceptual framework. Astrology has a batting average on par with economics. I used to think I knew it all. The older I get, the more I realize I don't understand.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
Isn't it all predicting a person's future from lumps of rock and gas following Newtonian laws a seriously long way away?
Personally, the "predicting the future" part is where I feel the layman's understanding of astrology has taken a wrong turn because of all the charlatans out there. I like wikipedia's definition: To ancient astrologers, the planets represented the will of the gods and their direct influence upon human affairs. To modern astrologers the planets represent basic drives or urges in the unconscious,[ (planets, of course, including the sun and moon in addition to the 5 visible planets in ancient times -- yet another interesting discussion.) A good astrologer can be very insightful (and cost a lot less than a shrink) into "forces" that potentially are behind your personality. And yes, I do believe there are things we don't understand, know about, or can measure (yet) that can affect personality and therefore, "destiny" (in broad brush strokes) as well. It's sometimes useful to get insights in these things, and if you accept those insights, you can work on improving them, becoming more "conscious", so those forces aren't just "unconscious drives/urges" as the wikipedia quote states.
OriginalGriff wrote:
ollowing Newtonian laws a seriously long way away?
Heck, even the planets and gasses don't follow Newtonian laws -- you need a sprinkling of relativity to actually get everything right -- Newtonian laws are just a decent approximation when velocity and mass are in some sort of a "normal" range :) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Newtonian laws are more than a decent approximation, if you use telescopes on earth to do your astrology, you cannot see or account for the small discrepancies introduced by relativity. Besides, when astrologers begun their "art" there was no real understanding of the motions of the planets or the laws governing such motions. Astrology, puff! ;P X|
programmer, astronomer, reader, etc...
-
Ghosts, vampires, fairies and little people that live at the bottom of the garden as well or is it just the pseudo sciences that you cannot refute one way or the other? I am constantly astonished by the things rational, sensible people can believe in, this includes all religions of course.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
this includes all religions of course.
I make a distinction between religion and spirituality. :) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
-
Newtonian laws are more than a decent approximation, if you use telescopes on earth to do your astrology, you cannot see or account for the small discrepancies introduced by relativity. Besides, when astrologers begun their "art" there was no real understanding of the motions of the planets or the laws governing such motions. Astrology, puff! ;P X|
programmer, astronomer, reader, etc...
Luis M Cabrera wrote:
if you use telescopes on earth to do your astrology, you cannot see or account for the small discrepancies introduced by relativity.
Sure you can. Gravitational lensing, red/blue shifting, both are examples of relativity in action. Einstein's theory that gravity bends light was proven with terrestrial telescopes.
Luis M Cabrera wrote:
Besides, when astrologers begun their "art" there was no real understanding of the motions of the planets or the laws governing such motions.
True indeed! But I don't need to understand my mother-in-law to know that I want to move as far away from her as possible! ;) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
-
Luis M Cabrera wrote:
if you use telescopes on earth to do your astrology, you cannot see or account for the small discrepancies introduced by relativity.
Sure you can. Gravitational lensing, red/blue shifting, both are examples of relativity in action. Einstein's theory that gravity bends light was proven with terrestrial telescopes.
Luis M Cabrera wrote:
Besides, when astrologers begun their "art" there was no real understanding of the motions of the planets or the laws governing such motions.
True indeed! But I don't need to understand my mother-in-law to know that I want to move as far away from her as possible! ;) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Marc Clifton wrote:
Sure you can. Gravitational lensing, red/blue shifting, both are examples of relativity in action. Einstein's theory that gravity bends light was proven with terrestrial telescopes.
Exactly, but astrologers have failed to update their craft to include those observations, besides, they don't use the motions of the stars, only the "planets", relative to the background stars, so gravitational lensing induced changes on apparent position will not change the odds of a baby born in January to be a great ruler, or astrologer. ;P
-
Yes - but they'll have to post that on SO...:EvilLaughSmiley:
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
-
It is great hubris to think there are not vast areas of knowledge yet to be understood or discovered or that if it can't be proven, it can't be. Scientists are often so smug. As far as pseudo-sciences, I am reminded of economics. Here, two "experts" can argue about some economic principle and throngs will line up behind each expert fully convinced their side is correct. One side, if proven wrong, would be denied acquiescence by their ego and\or their vested professional interest in their conceptual framework. Astrology has a batting average on par with economics. I used to think I knew it all. The older I get, the more I realize I don't understand.
MKJCP wrote:
two "experts" can argue about some economic principle
I work in a bank and KNOW these guys make it up as they go along, comparing the track record of astrology and economic theory does a disservice to astrology practitioners. I do like something more substantial than "faith" or "belief" before I put any credence in something.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
this includes all religions of course.
I make a distinction between religion and spirituality. :) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
Marc Clifton wrote:
I make a distinction between religion and spirituality
Absolutely. [slap] do not get started on religion.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
I make a distinction between religion and spirituality
Absolutely. [slap] do not get started on religion.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity RAH
Mycroft Holmes wrote:
[slap] do not get started on religion.
Amen! ;) Marc
Imperative to Functional Programming Succinctly Contributors Wanted for Higher Order Programming Project!
