Here we go again!!!!!!! (Astrology)

Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports
1

It seems to me that if you want to ‘prove’ astrology, just have your birth horoscope done, and see what it says about you…

As the old saying goes, 'if you haven’t studied it, you shouldn’t knock it".

I went to a professional astrologer many years ago…I’d studied it a little, and knew ‘my way around it’ so to speak…I told a few little white lies and this lady told me that I either had the wrong birthtime (which is very important when doing the chart), or that I was testing her…I admited that I ‘was a believer’ but did want to test a few things with her…she then proceeded to tell me what I had lied about…anyway, I’ve studied it now for many years - it’s a lifelong study, believe me…there are many branches to it; vocational guidance, financial, world affairs, etc…it all boils down to: you must have the date, time, and place of birth for a complete birth chart…then you go from there…as far as predictions, etc., of course there’ll be some wrong calls…no one seems to notice when a doctor makes a mistake involving human lives, but when an astrologer gets it wrong, there’s no end of ‘tsk tsk-ing’…but when they get it right, you seldom hear about it…

Come on, let’s be fair…get your own horoscope done, or get a forecast for a month or 6 mos. or a year, and follow through with it…

By the way, the birth horoscope for a newborn baby is the best thing new parents could do, both for themselves, and for the baby!! it will help them understand their child, in all his/her good and negative points, which way to influence them in their upbringing, etc…

Thanks for listening!!

2

Hello BG43214 @YAHOO.COM.

Just FYI, here it is considered a courtesy to provide a link to the column in question.

Is this the one you are on about?

3

Here’s a better test:
Round up 50 of your closest friends. Get the information a professional astrologer needs to do such a birth horoscope for all of them. Randomly distribute the results and ask them if they seem accurate.

Studies like this have been done before. Inevitiably, the participants give the horoscopes high scores for accuracy, whether they got “their” horoscope or not! The human tendency is to want to believe nice things written about oneself. Professional astrologers know this, so horoscopes are always positive, with some highly-couched partial negatives to look “balanced.” Furthermore, they are so vague that almost any person can say agree that they have the traits given by the horoscope.

A horoscope is not a professional inventory or assessment of a person’s psychological or personality traits. If you want to see an accurate (within certain limitations) assessment, get a Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and then compare that with your birth horoscope. Unlike horoscopes, the MMPI contains internal tests for validity and has externally validated against large populations. One PhD thesis actually compared MMPI results to horoscopes and found the horoscopes were wildly inconsistent. If “the stars” had an affect on personalities, they would be the same.

The problem with your experiences is that they are not controlled. They are not in any way a scientific test of astrology’s accuracy. You are invested in astrology, both emotionally and financially. Therefore, you want to find patterns of confirmation in the horoscopes. This is one reason why anecdotal evidence is not persuasive in sciences.

4

So, the best way to test is to pay a professional to do my horoscope?

There’s a little catch in that. The “professional” soothsayer gets paid, whether it’s phony or not. :dubious: :smack:

I couldn’t do it if I wanted to take the bait. By the time I got around to asking, neither parent could tell me what time I was born. It’s not on my birth certificate, either.

Here’s another test for you. Buy one or more newspapers a day for three weeks. (No, The Onion doesn’t count.) Don’t read your horoscopes until the next day. Was it: a) too vague to be meaningful, b) predictively right, or c) wrong?

5

And there you have it. Astrology is a pretty low-risk, low-reward thing that most people do on a lark, and confirmation bias being what it is, people disregard the mistakes and pay attention to the hits. That doesn’t change the fact that it’s crap.

What? Doctors can get sued for million of dollars in malpractice when that happens. If people could sue astrologers for that making mistakes, there wouldn’t be many astrologers, by your own admission. The difference is that doctors usually go wrong based on a lack of information or human error, whereas astrologers go wrong because they’re making it all up as they go.

A friend of mine once worked for a newspaper in India and had to fill in for the horoscope writer for a while. She was told to keep her predictions vague. There is no way to know for sure, but I’m betting her columns weren’t any less accurate than those of the person she filled in for.

6

If you want to prove something, you test it scientifically. Not by sending money to frauds.

Would you like to ‘prove’ perpetual motion’?
I have a machine that will supply you with free energy for the rest of your life. Just $5,000 (including postage and packing).
No refunds.

It’s been studied. It failed every time. I can knock it. :smiley:

Be fair. I can let you in on sharing the millions of dollars in my bank account. Just send me your bank details and within hours your balance will change dramatically. :rolleyes:

Actually the worst thing parents can do is spend money on woo-woo pseudo-science - instead of on their baby’s health. :smack:

7

And, of course, when it’s done viva voce, the skills of cold reading also come into play.

8

Yep. If you’re interested in learning a little about how horoscopologists, psychics, etc can seem to be so accurate, learn about cold reading: How come TV psychics seem so convincing? - The Straight Dope

9

You can read about the tests if you look for the Forer effect.

10

Jonathan Swift had the measure of astrologers long ago. The most well-known astrologer in London in the early 18th century was one Jonathan Partidge, who cast horoscoped for the famous and issued general prognostications yearly in his almanack.

Swift knew a charlatan when he saw one and decided to have some fun. He set himself up as a rival astrologer, Isaac Bickerstaff, and printed his own almanack, Predictions For the Year 1708, Wherein the month, and day of the month are set down, the persons named, and the great actions and events of next year particularly related, as will come to pass.

One of the events predicted was the death of John Partridge!

Partridge was not amused, and was even less amused when another Bickerstaff pamphlet appeared a little later.

*The Accomplishment of the First of Mr Bickerstaff’s Predictions; being an account of the death of Mr Partridge, the almanack–maker, upon the 29th instant, in a letter to a person of honour. *

In this the touching deathbed scene of the noted astrologer was feelingly delineated, and more Swiftian pamphlets followed in quick succession, the funniest being a supposed lambaste by Partridge himself, Squire Bickerstaff detected, in which the supposed Partridge relates the woes of being hounded by funeral directors for the costs of the funeral, by doctors demanding payment for their deathbed treatment, etc.

All the wits of London were soon in on the act and a flood of pamphlets followed. Swift’s contributions may be read here, and they’re still some of the funniest pieces in the English language.

Sadly though, for all our progress in other areas, our scientific achievements, etc, the mass of humanity remain as credulous and gullible as it has always been.

It is indeed, Cecil, taking longer than you thought.

11

Of course she did. You were sitting right in front of her. Astrologers aren’t practicing “science.” They’re just really, really good at reading people. She could tell you were lying.

Next time you want to throw away some money, get your horoscope cast again, and ask for SPECIFIC DETAILS. Don’t meet the astrologer face-to-face. Don’t give any personal details other than birth date, time, and location. Look at how much of it is either (a) wrong or (b) applicable to just about anybody you know.

Astrology has been tested over and over and over and over. It has failed every single scientific test. Not many. Not most. All

You’ve been defrauded.

12

Dat’s der bunny. I couldn’t remember Forer’s name, thanks.

13

You really, truly didn’t want Swift to set his sights on you. Rather anyone, even Doug Piranha. Sarcasm, dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and satire? He held all of them, in spades.

You’d rather Dinsdale nailed your head to the floor.

14

One error in that, though, where it says “It has nothing to do with…gullibility…” Of course it has to do with gullibility! That’s what the word “gullibility” means – the ability to be gulled!

15

Not quite. In a column called The Crucial Experiment, John W. Campbell ran a year-long test of astrological long-term weather forecasting in Analog, ca. 1962, in which Astrology gave better than random results. (The US Weather Bureau did worse than random.)

16

If you pick a whole bunch of methods for predicting something, some will be “better than random” and some will be worse – even if they’re all random. What was the standard deviation, though?

17

John W. Kennedy said:

I think, perhaps, what Cecil was trying to convey was that a person who is normally perceptive and questioning but unaware of the methods of cold reading could be as easily duped as someone who easily accepts other people at their word. He was trying to characterize the person’s behavior and personality as a whole rather than their response to any one incident or type of incident.

18

What!? WTF are you talking about? This statement is false in so many ways, I can’t even comment on it! Do you honestly believe this? WOW!

Why don’t you go get your own charts done 50 times by 50 different so-called psychics and let us know how it turns out?

I always say “If you don’t like your horoscope and you want to change it…buy a different newspaper!”:smiley:

19

I suspect our good friend BG43214, isn’t coming back…

20

… and I suspect you managed to predict that without paying an astrologer. :smiley: