What do you think of astrology?

People have always longed for ways to make more sense of ones lives. For some, astrology will serve to fill in the gaps of some of the unknowns. As a real science, IMO, astrology is a hoax.

Then again, I think that religion is a hoax, but if people are able to get through their lives in a more comfortable manner with it, and don't attempt to push their ideas on other people, who am I to knock it?

0 Replies

@existential potential,

existential potential wrote:

What do you think of astrology?

Some people find it entertaining. That's fine. Others believe it's actually true. That's pitiful.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

yes, I find Tarot card reading far more beneficial in making important life decisions.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Each of these women gave up psychology for astrology because they felt that as astrologers, they could offer clients more concrete, active help rather than simply passive listening.

They probably can, since their clients would have less serious problems, believe in the advice given (since it's from the stars) and the astrologers can give whatever advice they think is appropriate.

1 Reply

Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

Which words did I put in your mouth?

0 Replies

@Chumly,

Chumly wrote:

Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.

What? There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy. In the same sense they are both invalid is probably what you meant (but usually people don't talk that way).

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

All I am going to say is that here in MA, the astrologers I have met hold the following degrees:

Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Michigan

Masters of Divinity in pastoral counseling from Boston University

MSW from Smith College

Masters of Education in counseling (university unknown)

Masters of Science in psychology (university unknown)

Each of these women gave up psychology for astrology because they felt that as astrologers, they could offer clients more concrete, active help rather than simply passive listening.

I fear for those women.

1 Reply

Phoenix32890 wrote:

Then again, I think that religion is a hoax, but if people are able to get through their lives in a more comfortable manner with it, and don't attempt to push their ideas on other people, who am I to knock it?

It's not wrong to knock sense into people from time to time. If you see that something is a hoax, or is wrong, point it out.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

You can have degrees up the ying yang and still have no common sense.

Silliness.

1 Reply

@dyslexia,

I once had some one read my palm - it was at a work party so I didn't pay (anyone who does is throwing their money out the door) - this was 5 years ago. He told me I was going to have a career change soon and was extremely concerned about my marriage as if it was going to be destroyed/divorced or some such thing soon.

I'm still at my current job and still with my husband - and unless I'm missing something - we are not destroying each other.

0 Replies

A friend asked me if I read my horoscope and I answered, 'sometimes'. He asked, 'Do you believe in it?' I answered, 'Only if it says something good.' And then he asked, 'Why don't you just write your own every day then?'

I thought that was pretty astute.

I think it's more of a self-fulfilling prophecy than anything else- sort of like how people grow into their names - I think if you buy into it and you believe you're supposed to be an Aries - you might start acting like an Aries is supposed to act or something.

1 Reply

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

Chumly wrote:
Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.
What? There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy. In the same sense they are both invalid is probably what you meant (but usually people don't talk that way).

Nope I meant what I said. At-the-very-least google the history of science as it relates to astrology and alchemy before further demonstrating your state of being uninformed.

2 Replies

@Chumly,

Modern connections are irrelevant. That there are sciences which evolved from both, does not mean that the practices of either psuedo-science are true (especially not in astrology). For instance, that alchemy has connections with modern inorganic chemistry, does not mean that the alchemic practice of turning base metals into gold, as was traditional tried, is possible (we know now it possible through nuclear reactions, not from the "philosopher's stone").

0 Replies

@Chumly,

Chumly wrote:

Zetherin wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.
What? There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy. In the same sense they are both invalid is probably what you meant (but usually people don't talk that way).
Nope I meant what I said. At-the-very-least google the history of science as it relates to astrology and alchemy before further demonstrating your state of being uninformed.

Do you think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth? Because otherwise you are saying something very strange, something like "clouds are green in the same sense that the sky is green". Something can't be valid in the sense that it isn't valid.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

All I am going to say is that here in MA, the astrologers I have met hold the following degrees:

Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Michigan

Masters of Divinity in pastoral counseling from Boston University

MSW from Smith College

Masters of Education in counseling (university unknown)

Masters of Science in psychology (university unknown)

Each of these women gave up psychology for astrology because they felt that as astrologers, they could offer clients more concrete, active help rather than simply passive listening.

If so, then it tends to put modern therapy about on par with astrology and the soft-sciences in no better light.

Astrology = therapy = soft-sciences = Rolling Eyes

1 Reply

@Jebediah,

Jebediah wrote:

Chumly wrote:
Zetherin wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.
What? There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy. In the same sense they are both invalid is probably what you meant (but usually people don't talk that way).
Nope I meant what I said. At-the-very-least google the history of science as it relates to astrology and alchemy before further demonstrating your state of being uninformed.
Do you think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth? Because otherwise you are saying something very strange, something like "clouds are green in the same sense that the sky is green". Something can't be valid in the sense that it isn't valid.

The fact that you would ask if I think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth demonstrates your inability to understand basic argumentation as per logical fallacies, let alone your ignorance of the history of science and the meaning of the word valid in the context I have referenced.

1 Reply

@Chumly,

Chumly wrote:

Jebediah wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Zetherin wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.
What? There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy. In the same sense they are both invalid is probably what you meant (but usually people don't talk that way).
Nope I meant what I said. At-the-very-least google the history of science as it relates to astrology and alchemy before further demonstrating your state of being uninformed.
Do you think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth? Because otherwise you are saying something very strange, something like "clouds are green in the same sense that the sky is green". Something can't be valid in the sense that it isn't valid.
The fact that you would ask if I think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth demonstrates your inability to understand basic argumentation as per logical fallacies, let alone your ignorance of the history of science and the meaning of the word valid in the context I have referenced.

All you meant is that there is history between alchemy and astrology and modern sciences, and that's true. People misunderstood you. No need to start bringing up this logical fallacy nonsense.

1 Reply

@Zetherin,

Zetherin wrote:

Chumly wrote:
Jebediah wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Zetherin wrote:
Chumly wrote:
Astrology is valid in the same sense that alchemy is valid, they are both predecessors to modern hard science; perhaps most notably astronomy and chemistry.
What? There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy. In the same sense they are both invalid is probably what you meant (but usually people don't talk that way).
Nope I meant what I said. At-the-very-least google the history of science as it relates to astrology and alchemy before further demonstrating your state of being uninformed.
Do you think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth? Because otherwise you are saying something very strange, something like "clouds are green in the same sense that the sky is green". Something can't be valid in the sense that it isn't valid.
The fact that you would ask if I think astrology is justifiably grounded in truth demonstrates your inability to understand basic argumentation as per logical fallacies, let alone your ignorance of the history of science and the meaning of the word valid in the context I have referenced.
All you meant is that there is history between alchemy and astrology and modern sciences, and that's true. People misunderstood you. No need to start bringing up this logical fallacy nonsense.

Nope, I meant what I said, not what you claim I said. The fact that you appear ignorant about the history of science as to astrology and alchemy is your burden not mine. Your specious claim as per "People misunderstood you" (sic) is a further example of your ignorance as per logical fallacies and the basics of argumentation, again your burden not mine.

The fact that you claim "There's nothing valid about astrology or alchemy" when they are (arguably in part) the birthplace of modern astronomy and modern chemistry again shows your ignorance especially in light of the fact that both astrology and alchemy are (in part) based on empiricism and are (in part) predictive; two of the essential components of modern hard science.

I am rather convinced at this point that your ignorance goes so far as to lack an understanding of the validity of astrology as it relates to early farming practices and of the validity of alchemy as it relates to early metallurgy.

However I note with some humor that you now claim validly as to the historical integration between alchemy and astrology and modern sciences however you still fail to see the deeper continuity and methodologies as discussed.

I also amuses me that you take the time to argue with me but do not take the time to learn...Wiki is your friend likely more than I am.

1 Reply

@Chumly,

It really doesn't appear as if you even want to discuss the matter civilly. You're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and being brash for the sake of being brash. I explained what I meant, and it is clear that I misunderstood what you meant. There's no need to take this any further.

3 Replies

What do you think of astrology?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know