From: s0jrej@exnet.co.uk (James Ellis-Jones)
Newsgroups: alt.astrology
Subject: Re: newspapers
Keywords: scientific method
Date: 30 Aug 92 22:17:03 GMT
Organization: ExNet Systems Ltd Public Access News, London, UK

Before I start could we keep to 80-character lines? - I'm having trouble
reading some people's postings - many thanks.

In article <28AUG199210071010@vxcrna.cern.ch> casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:
>
>In article <Btn9Lq.2M5@exnet.co.uk>, s0jrej@exnet.co.uk (James Ellis-Jones) writes...
>
>> [stuff written criticising Caspar's argument by my flatmate (I am the real
>>  J Ellis-Jones and he has his own account now) with which I generally
>>  agree]
>
>Since you refer to strong points of "the theory", could you briefly summarize
>what those might be?  ... To wit, not even
>Gauquelin, nor anyone else, has ever validated the use of the zodiac as a
>delimiter of any quality, trait or event.
>
>You might also explain whether and why Western astrology is the one True theory,
>or whether all forms of astrology throughout the world are equally valid even
>though they largely contradict each other.
>
>So if you have or know of evidence that natal, mundane, Horary, progressional,
>transitional, and midpoint astrology work as advertised, I'd be glad to hear
>about it so I can examine it in a fair way and we can have a "proper
>intellectual debate" (that's what I'm here for after all).  I think "seem to
>work" is the operative phrase in your final statement.  Regretably, there
>appears to be no such evidence, except what people manufacture anecdotally out
>of their own willingness to believe uncritically.

The reason I believe astrology works is because I have personally
experienced its effectiveness many times.  I am a scientifically educated and
fairly sceptical person (Mercury on the MC!) and when I first encountered
the subject I was interested in testing it out in an open-minded sort of way
and found that it work.  I do not believe I am psychologically-illiterate
and therefore unable to spot generalities about human nature dressed up as
specific facts about my own nature.  I do not believe astrology works because

> of my own willingness to believe uncritically

and I find that the majority of professional astrologers I have met are
highly intelligent people mostly educated to degree standard who take a very
academic approach to the subject.

Therefore, I do not accept the 'explanation' of people's belief in astrology
as merely wishful thinking.  However, I do agree with you that there is very
little 'hard' evidence, i.e. evidence produced by scientific method of the
effectiveness of astrology.

I found myself for a few years left with a problem that in scientific terms,
astrology was groundless, but in my own personal experience (and do not tell
me I am deluding myself) it works.  The only way I found to resolve this (and
also a lot of other problems in parapsychology and related areas, of which
I do not have direct experience, but which a lot of intelligent people also
seem to think work) is to assume that scientific method is an inadequate tool
for the analysis of something as 'high level' or irreducibly complex as
astrology.

There seems a lot of philosophical basis for this point of view, as it is
generally agreed scientific method cannot be used for analysis of unique
events - and the astrological configurations in place at any given time
and place are (effectively) unique.  This leads to the symbolism of
astrology having to be constantly used in new ways to determine the meanings
of new configurations.  Thus to form an 'experiment' to verify astrology is
nearly impossible.

So it often appears that astrology is merely *suggestive* and is essentially
unreliable - however in my experience it *does* work efficiently and
effectively enough to be of use.  An interesting astrological coincidence
which is not merely anecdotal as it is documented in previous news postings,
is that in my posting of 23 Aug 92 (Troubled Times!) I mention having
crashed a car the previous day (22nd) - the next but one posting (from
kenneth@ducvax.auburn.edu 23 Aug 92 Car something, retrogrades and psychic
ability) mentions that the poster has also had problems with his car on the
same day.  I presume he didn't read my posting before making his.  He
mentions his date of birth which is 2 days before mine.  It seems the
configuration I was 'blaming' for my crash had also caused problems of a
car-related nature to someone with a very similar chart to my own - and we
had both been prompted to talk about it on the net at much the same time!

Just to cover the multiple astrological systems point, the symbolism used in
the different systems is not identical - therefore they cannot contradict
each other, only provide symbolic indications which are hard to reconcile.
But this happens within a single astrological system anyway when two seemingly
contradictory indications arise in one chart - both the indications will be
true, it is just a matter of finding an interpretation which includes both.

James
'As above so below'
Newsgroups: alt.astrology