Sorry, but I just had this argument in another thread. Just because you don’t know something doesn’t make it subjective. Whether astrology works is an objective question. You may bring subjective evidence to bear on it, but that doesn’t make it a subjective question immune to objective evidence. You don’t get to just say, “Well x is true is just, like, my opinion. Opinions can’t be wrong, man!”
You don’t get to make the rules because scientist and mathematicians have already decided how science works. You said that it would be impossible or impractical for science to find evidence about whether astrology works. This is untrue. You should not lie if you do believe this; I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming you believed that science works, even if you doubt its conclusion here.
Wny is it necessary that I abandon science? I see something that doesn’t fit, I am compelled to overturn the entire gigantic structure? How about if I accept both the anomaly and the hard-one truths that make it an anomaly? What, I can’t do that? Who says?
As a former practitioner and amateur astronomer, though he recognizes (and documents on his site) the lack of scientific evidence for the latter view, he also recognizes the value the system has for making meaning out of myth and metaphor. I’ve already said something about why I think this is true myself. I think the mixture of what’s real or objective (seasonal and psychological stuff) and what’s concocted or intuited or selectively chosen is such that the two extremes of opinion are not going to find meeting ground because the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Back off lucid you greedy hyenas! Why do you want to take the magic and mystery away from the life of someone who has done you no ill? Not everybody can or wants to live in a cold and indifferent world of facts and empirical evidence.
I say that astrology is a very inventive way to create wondrous life stories from a universe where causality laws are based on human ingenuity rather than some mysterious forces that baffle the best of mathematicians and physicists. Astrology is another tool that can give meaning to our lives and comfort to those of us who are able to believe in it. Astronomers have their Dark Matter and 37 parallel universes, why can’t astrologers have Mars ascending and having sex with Virgo or something?
I choose to believe that my kitten is a small furry ninja at heart and this belief makes her more precious than just some other cat. I’m sure some people love each other more because they are the same sign or something. It’s a complicated world out there.
Then let’s differentiate between “Astrology is a psychological tool used to obtain insight”, and “Astrology works as advertised.”
I believe Musicat hit the nail on the head by mentioning the Forer Effect. Professor Forer gave a personality test to each of is students, then asked them to rate the results of the test as to its accuracy. The students returned an average score, on a scale of 1 to 5, was 4.26.
What he didn’t tell them was that he gave each of them the exact same evaluation, which read as follows:
“You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some personality weaknesses you are generally able to compensate for them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others’ statements without satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic.”
The topper? He had assembled these sentences from various horoscopes.
Ummm. I have no doubt about the validity of the Forer effect, would be more surprised if it weren’t. But just one quibble - he got those sentences from “horoscopes”. What do you mean, “horoscopes”? (Or, maybe better, what did he mean?) The term lacks some definition, as it means different things to you and I.
If that is your example of “astrology as a tool to gain psychological insight”, I will agree that it is a piss-poor example. In cobbling together sentences from “various horoscopes”, did he stop with the vague generalities and ignore anything that might have been actually helpful? Perhaps not. There are plenty of piss-poor astrologers to collect from out there. It is certainly more open to abuse and charlatans than traditional therapeutic practice. It’s also cheaper. While I wouldn’t recommend it as a substitute for anyone with serious psychological issues, I don’t think it would make a bad complement to genuine therapy, as well as a fascinating and useful exercise for ordinary folk who take an interest. I’d say a certain amount of self-knowledge, common sense, and brutal honesty are necessary when exploring this kind of thinking, as well as a knowledge of things like the Forer effect, confirmation bias, etc., in order to avoid them. Caveat emptor.
You can’t hardly lose that one, Czar, deck is stacked. It it sounds like total bullshit, you win. If it sounds valid, its the Forer effect.
And after a bit of Googling, can’t find anything that clarifies what “horoscopes” means in the context of Dr. Forer. Still hoping you might clear that up.
I can’t give you what I think you are looking for. It isn’t canned. Done from this point of view, it’s a conversation between two people, or possibly a solo exploration. There’s nothing magic about it.
I can give you a sort of explanation of how I approach it, though I hesitate to give personal examples here. People are so eager to rip one to shreds. Oh, well. Transiting Mercury is trining my natal Jupiter, so here goes.
I look at my natal chart. I see I have Mars in Scorpio. I gain some understanding of what Mars and Scorpio traditionally represent*. Activity, aggression, anger. Jealousy, compulsion, passion. I examine myself and my activity. What do I see evidence of, in light of the picture this gives me? It makes me more self-aware about whether I am acting out of jealousy or compulsion. I can choose more consciously to direct the trait this represents into passionate activity I consider good, instead of anger and aggression. Perhaps I have a particular example in mind that I can apply this to when I think about it, perhaps it’s a general consideration.
Of course you don’t “need” astrology to see such a thing or to become more self-aware. And it’s not the only method I use. But I like it. It works well with the way my mind works. I’ve compared looking at a chart to hearing a piece of music. You can concentrate on one theme or instrument, or you can step back mentally and let the whole thing wash over you and grant you an integrated and intuitive experience.
*This, BTW, takes a long time. You build up a sort of picture or feeling for the layers of meaning a symbol has and how it interacts with others. Yes, it’s fuzzy and intuitive and inexact. Art, remember, not science.
Seems fair, you’re not going to answer my question about the “horoscopes” either. I mean, since its such a big deal, being a “topper” and all, surely you wouldn’t want that misunderstood. I mean, your insinuation is that such verbiage is present in “horoscopes”, yes? To take advantage of the Forer Effect, if I follow.
Well, did he go around and ask various astologers for their sure fire phrases to con the moronim? Or did he get them from astrological publications (my guess)? I was kind of assuming that you knew, being as this was a “topper”, and all.
Now, if you don’t actually know, not a big deal, I guess. Does let a little of the air out of the tires, don’t you think?
Aren’t you the one that won’t accept any scientific cites as evidence? Wouldn’t want to waste your time, and I certainly don’t want to waste mine any more.
Well, if you won’t tell me, will you tell somebody else? Seems like it was a pretty important point for you, sure proved something. Maybe when you have more time.
Hardly fair, Czarcasm. elucidator didn’t dispute the validity of the Forer effect. What he disputes (as do I) is that that sloppy collection of phrases in any way resembles an astrological reading. The study is useful for exhibiting a particular psychological effect. It’s not useful for exhibiting anything about astrology as it is actually practiced.
That is the specific reason I asked for a proper astrological reading-to see for myself if it resembled what Professor Forer showed his students. I would like to see how an astrological reading differs from cold reading.
Does astrology add something to a reading that is not there if the astrologer merely uses their own intellect and knowledge of human behavior to read the subject? Does it contribute additional knowledge, or is it a focus or tool used to filter already acquired knowledge?
You mean, is it a sincere practice, or just the scam of a cold and callous crook? Is that what your insinuation is about? Mighty dumb question, if that’s it. 'Cause if I’m a liar, I would be telling you I’m sincere. If I’m sincere, I’m going to tell you I’m sincere.
Oh, wait, I’m getting a reading! That twitch in your eyelid…yeah, that one!.. that tells me that you can’t answer the question because you don’t know, and you don’t want to admit it. So you’re covering it up by changing the subject.
How’d I do? Probably not very good at it, never tried it before.
