[QUOTE=begbert2]
Oh, and a totally unrelated ‘technical’ question: what precisely is the information required to do an astrological reading? Do you need the person’s name? Or would their precise birthdate and birthminute suffice? Do you need to know locale, time zone, area code, etc?
[/QUOTE]
Birthdate, time and location should be sufficient. Name and such are nice if you want to branch off into numerology and the like, but for strictly an astrological forecast they aren’t needed.
Birthdate, time, location. There are reference books available (called “Time Changes in the USA”, IIRC) that record all of the local variations in Daylight Savings time, I would assume that such are available online now, but don’t actually know. And total precision in birth time is not that crucial, a minor difference in the ascendant sign is not that big a deal, unless the astrologer suffers from an overdose of Virgo, with its resultant nitpickitis. Birth time can be a bit tricky, of course, since people in birth rooms are rather busy, but anything within a few minutes is acceptable. (That is my opinion, and not univesally accepted. Yet.)
Local Mean Time is the desired fact, which varies according to whether you are east or west of the meridian for your time zone, but that is easily done.
I am given to understand that the Dutch test, referenced above, is perfect in all respects and only an asshole would deny it. My mileage varies.
[QUOTE=SparrowHawk]
That’s the nature of the beast. It’s not science. It does work. We make it work because we make symbols and meaning.
[/QUOTE]
Yah, well, in this instance I believe we’re disagreeing as to what the phrase “it works” means regarding astrology. I never claimed or posited that it was ineffective as a springboard for navelgazing. I just have doubts that it can tell you anything that you don’t already know, or describe an individual with remarkable accuracy independent of the individual ‘inputing’ that information via non-astrological methods.
Antinor01 and elucidator, thanks for the dope about the input parameters for an astrological reading. Though, I gotta ask:
“Yet”? Are you planning a coup? 
The astrological community will be my springboard to world domination.
It may have been lost at the bottom right before the page transition, but I’d like to ask again: Suppose someone had been misled all his life as to the actual time and location of his birth and such things, but remains entirely unaware of this. Would you expect an astrological reading for such a person to be significantly less successful, by whatever the appropriate criteria are, than one for a person whose beliefs about his birth time, location, etc., are accurate?
That is to say, if a sincere believer in astrology supplies, in good faith, erroneous information about their birth time and place, will their readings suffer for it?
[QUOTE=begbert2]
Yah, well, in this instance I believe we’re disagreeing as to what the phrase “it works” means regarding astrology.
[/QUOTE]
Yep, that’s one reason I mentioned dickering about wording. I guess I’m not True Believer, just a Sorta Believer. And I have broken 'Luc’s Law, so I will undoubtedly be shot with the rest of you when he takes over. Though honestly, 'luc, I found genuine and practical insight in my own chart, so I hope I may be forgiven if I do enough penance.
[QUOTE=Indistinguishable]
…That is to say, if a sincere believer in astrology supplies, in good faith, erroneous information about their birth time and place, will their readings suffer for it?
[/QUOTE]
I talked about this above, somewhere. Happened to me three or four times, all women, all trimmed a couple three years off their actual birth year as they didn’t realize the significance. The readings floundered immediately. I’d rather be waterboarded. But once the truth came out, we managed to get back on track.
So, yeah.
I don’t mean to put astrology down.
I know little about it, which is why I’m asking for information. I assumed that you study some charts and make the reading from that.
But how did you learn to do it? Was there a single method, or are there schools of astrology?
I am hoping you’ll change your mind. This is my chance to learn something, from someone who clearly believes and understands astrology.
Again, I meant no offence. I meant that you can play chess for example at a distance. I assumed that you could do astrology readings likewise (because many astrologers advertise their services that way).
I just want to learn. An example of an astrologer I don’t wish to consult would be those who put short summaries in newspapers.
I should have qualified that statement. :o But it is true that talking to someone face-to-face sometimes tells you something about them.
All I know about astrology is that there are daily readings in many newpapers, and that they are based on charts.
Oh and Jonathan Cainerearns about £2 million ($4 million) a year :eek:
Well obviously - but not from me. My thread on remote viewing proves that.
As I said, I don’t know much about astrology. I would like to learn more.
I appreciate you would normally charge a fee, but there have been loads of Dopers who have talked about their knowledge here for free (as I do with chess).
[QUOTE=SparrowHawk]
Yep, that’s one reason I mentioned dickering about wording. I guess I’m not True Believer, just a Sorta Believer. And I have broken 'Luc’s Law, so I will undoubtedly be shot with the rest of you when he takes over. Though honestly, 'luc, I found genuine and practical insight in my own chart, so I hope I may be forgiven if I do enough penance.
[/QUOTE]
I was teaching, I had students. You get to talk that way when you got students. I am fortunate in that my natural modesty keeps me in check.
But, in my opinion, if you want to get serious about it, you’ve got to work for strangers.
[QUOTE=SparrowHawk]
…
Yes, a reading can reveal information, the issue is the quality of that information. I don’t think it’s possible to get a “decent” (whatever that is - useful? meaningful? accurate?) reading without input from the subject. I would not call this cold/hot reading, because it wouldn’t involve intent to deceive, it would be a mutually agreed upon exploration. You may consider it cold/hot reading even without intent to deceive, and I won’t dispute with you over that opinion.
There may be information in a reading done without input, but I would expect it to be, as you and others have charged, either too vague/contradictory to be useful, too general to be meaningful, and… I guess I reserve judgment on the source of any specific accuracies that might emerge. My tendency is to think they would be coincidence/luck, but some might be due to skilled experience in evaluating lots of different interactions. I see the primary value of the system in its structure and integration, not in magically producing information that would be otherwise hidden.
That’s the nature of the beast. It’s not science. It does work. We make it work because we make symbols and meaning.
[/QUOTE]
Sparrowhawk, would you consider contributing to my proposed thread asking for an astrological reading?
If you needed dialogue, we could do that by posting (a bit slowly, but at least you wouldn’t have to rush!)
[QUOTE=glee]
Sparrowhawk, would you consider contributing to my proposed thread asking for an astrological reading?
If you needed dialogue, we could do that by posting (a bit slowly, but at least you wouldn’t have to rush!)
[/QUOTE]
And there’s elucidator just above telling me I have to deal with strangers if I want to get serious! Thing is, I don’t really want to get serious. I don’t think I have that level of confidence or knowlege, with the system or with myself.
Still, I think I would find it a fascinating exercise, as long as it was undertaken with the full understanding that I have little clue what the fark I am doing. Is there some stated purpose to your thread? Because I’m not out to prove anything.
[QUOTE=elucidator]
I am fortunate in that my natural modesty keeps me in check.
[/QUOTE]
I was just marveling at your modesty. You should be proud of it.
[QUOTE=elucidator]
These “professional” astrologers? Does that include vile conmen who use the techniques of the cold read to fleece their gullible victims? Whats the metric here, you cashed a check, you’re in? How do you propose to test for competence in a subject for which you have utter contempt?
[/QUOTE]
Aye, there’s the rub, Luc. The only way we could possibly test for competence in astrology would be to give astrologers a test that has them draw a chart and then measures the accuracy of the chart. The problem is that the “vile conmen” and the “skilled astrologers” would score exactly the same on the test (please see post #202). In hundreds of years that astrology has been practiced, no astrology seems to have ever devised a test that would separate the sheep from the goats, so to speak. I wonder why that is? Perhaps there is no difference between the sheep and the goats?
[QUOTE=SparrowHawk]
And there’s elucidator just above telling me I have to deal with strangers if I want to get serious! Thing is, I don’t really want to get serious. I don’t think I have that level of confidence or knowlege, with the system or with myself.
Still, I think I would find it a fascinating exercise, as long as it was undertaken with the full understanding that I have little clue what the fark I am doing. Is there some stated purpose to your thread? Because I’m not out to prove anything.
[/QUOTE]
My purpose is to learn about astrology. Here is a subject which is strongly supported by many, hugely profitable for a few well-known astrologers ($4 million a year - leaders of countries don’t earn that much!) and yet never taught in any public school.
I’d like to know (for example):
If things went well (and posters stayed polite), I would then be interested in seeing if the astrologers and I could agree some sort of test to see how well astrology performs in one case (I would offer myself as a subject in the thread.)
[QUOTE=glee]
My purpose is to learn about astrology. Here is a subject which is strongly supported by many, hugely profitable for a few well-known astrologers ($4 million a year - leaders of countries don’t earn that much!) and yet never taught in any public school.
I’d like to know (for example):
If things went well (and posters stayed polite), I would then be interested in seeing if the astrologers and I could agree some sort of test to see how well astrology performs in one case (I would offer myself as a subject in the thread.)
[/QUOTE]
I think the second, fourth, and fifth questions have been answered recently in this thread, and one can infer some things about the answer to the third question as well from elucidator’s comments. We haven’t quite reached agreement on the first question yet, though.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
I think the second, fourth, and fifth questions have been answered recently in this thread, and one can infer some things about the answer to the third question as well from elucidator’s comments. We haven’t quite reached agreement on the first question yet, though.
[/QUOTE]
Um, is the answer to the second question that you not only need the precise birthdate, but also to discuss things with the subject?
And what was the answer to the fourth question?
[QUOTE=glee]
Um, is the answer to the second question that you not only need the precise birthdate, but also to discuss things with the subject?
[/quote]
Absolutely.
[QUOTE=glee]
And what was the answer to the fourth question?
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely not.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
I think the second, fourth, and fifth questions have been answered recently in this thread, and one can infer some things about the answer to the third question as well from elucidator’s comments. We haven’t quite reached agreement on the first question yet, though.
[/QUOTE]
Also we haven’t had the subject’s reaction to the reading (question 5).
[QUOTE=glee]
Also we haven’t had the subject’s reaction to the reading (question 5).
[/QUOTE]
I wouldn’t mind getting reactions to the four examples I gave in post #306.