--- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "hugheshugo" > <richardhughes103@> wrote: > > > > --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "hugheshugo" > > > > <richardhughes103@> wrote: > > > > > >> Yeah, but in fact, the premise of astrology--the data > on which it is based--has to do with how the sky > appears from earth. There's no conceivable evidence to > the contrary for that premise!
This where I've not explained myself very well. When you look at a horoscope you see the earth at the centre and the sun and planets all orbiting in their "houses". We know the maths to draw up this illusion is there simply to make it look how it appears from earth, but look what happens when you adjust the scale of the map and put everything in its proper place, it becomes meaningless simply because any force exacted by the planets and the sun becomes hopelessly confused because the ancients didn't know about the relative sizes and distances of the things they were looking at. Look at the size of the sun compared to mercury! And how about titan, saturns largest moon if distances don't matter that would have been "cognized" as having an effect, or however you want to see it,too. Except as we've seen nothing beyond saturn was known aboout by jyotishees. Even if you say that they never exerted a force at all and it's all just a coincidental measure of events here you can't escape the anthropomorphism of calling venus the planet of love and mars the planet of war simply because of their colour. Whatever way you think it works this is the evidence to the contrary that it does or measures anything here at all. > > If you think about it for a moment, astrology doesn't > depend operationally on the idea that the earth is > flat, or even that the earth is the center of the > universe, nor that the celestial bodies actually > influence affairs on earth. > > What's in question is whether the appearance of the > sky from earth is *correlated* with affairs on earth, > such that predictions about the latter can be derived > from what the sky is going to look like at some > future point (which astrologers can determine with > great precision). > Exactly, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. And I've never been even remotely convinced by astrologers, western or eastern. Do you remember the yearly predictions by TM jyotishees? they were rubbish every year. I once asked someone high up in the movement why this was the case, given that it was supposed to be an exact science, and he said "Our collective meditation has changed the karma of the planet and the original crises never arose" I'm serious, please don't think I made that up. I answered well why didn't you predict that was going to happen and tell us about that. Shane they abandoned this obviously pointless exercise as I would like to have seen the prediction for 9/11. I don't see how it works on an individual scale either. I knew someone who was told to stay in one tuesday as it was a bad day to be stung by bees! She stayed in and wasn't stung, apart from the cost of the reading. I saw a jyotishee once when I was on a course. It was fun and apparently I'm going to be fully enlightened and win loads of money and have nothing but good luck from now on as all the bad dashas (is that the word?) in my life have passed. Funnily enough I agreed with this and am looking forward to it all. > In other words, astrology *could* be valid even > though the earth is flat, goes around the sun, and > isn't the center of the universe, and even though > science tells us there's no possible mechanism of > influence. It doesn't *have* to involve an accurate > description of reality in terms of how the solar > system really operates, as long as it *does* > involve an accurate description of what the sky > looks like from the earth. The sky's appearance > from earth has its own very solid reality. > > > So the question is not "is astrology an accurate descritption of > > reality" but "why do so many continue to believe in it?" > > I think the person who said astrology has "stuck to > the wall" was referring to what he perceives to be > the record of accuracy of the predictions astrology > makes. That's certainly questionable--it's extremely > difficult to do any kind of valid scientific test-- > but it isn't inherently faulty reasoning. It should be very easy to do a test with this as predictions are easy, they come true or they don't. Actually many have been, none of which returned data outside of that expected by chance except people born under Aries are 2% more likely to become doctors. This is another reason why no-one believes it. If you know of any others with evidence to the contrary I'll be interested to have a read. > > > I think it > > sticks to the wall because it's such a seductive idea that > > we can see the future and avoid returning karma, it can > > even help with relationships and tell us how wonderful we are! > > Sure. The accuracy of predictions and personality > analysis can be very much a matter of wishful thinking, > no question about it. > > > I also think there is a fear of loneliness or that we are > > truly responsible for ourselves and all that happens in our > > lives, blame is better to give than recieve. > > On the other hand, science fulfills the same needs > in many respects, e.g., genetics. > So the meme continues to propagate to every new generation. Most > > people encounter astrology in some form long before they come > > across physics or cosmology but they have taught us much more > > about the universe and ourselves than jyotish ever could but as > > you say that was the starting point. > > Tangentially, I recently copy edited a book with > a fascinating premise. The author suggests that > the ubiquitous ancient myth in virtually all > cultures of the "fall" of humankind from divinity > is a result of the discovery over time of the > precession of the equinoxes--the perception that > the "slippage" of what had been seen to be a > perfect system of heavenly cycles indicated that > something had gone wrong with the harmonious > relationship between humans and the gods (the > stars). > > If so, what an agonizing and prolonged existential > crisis that must have been, the slowly dawning > recognition that humankind and divine perfection > had parted company and were no longer aligned. > > It almost seems as though the human race may be > still suffering corporately from a kind of deeply > buried, archetypal post-traumatic stress syndrome > passed down through the generations as a result of > that awful ancient discovery. Gives me chills just > to think about it. > It's an interesting idea, a paradigm shifting without warning might indeed have upset ancient rituals. Was the book anything to do with pyramid alignment, as I read something about orion lining up with one of the openings of the largest pyramid in giza and the author thought they were abounded because they alignment stopped and thus they couldn't send the bodies of pharaos of to the next world anymore. See how much better of we are with science ;-)
