From: uri@watson.ibm.com (Uri Blumenthal)
Subject: Re: Zodiac Constellations
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:17:07 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: uri@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: House of Mars (:-)


Well, I'm not an astrologer, nor do I think I really believe
it works, but let me try to answer you two, cock-sure guys:

In article <...>, casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:
> In article <...> kappa@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Glenn Capuano) writes...

> >2) I noticed in the FAQ a lot of "science does not know everything, there
> >are more things in heaven and earth" sort of talk. This is true, but how
> >can you claim to know this privileged knowledge that even science can't
> >find? It seems to me to be the height of arrogance to claim this.

Well, you're not the first who stupidly assumes, that if today's
science can't explain something, then that something doesn't
exist at all... Such an arrogance + ignorance amazes me.

Also, what the heck have you forgotten here, in this
group? You don't like astrology - fine, go to the 
newsgroup which has information for you... Isn't
it the most logical way for a sane person?

But for some reason you aren't comfortable,  so you
go [uninvited]  to this  [ridiculous for you] group 
and try to mock the group itself and its 
participants...  

Why?  Do you go to every religious group with statements 
like that also? Or does science agree today that God 
exists?


> "The true height of arrogance is to assume that science is the only way of
> finding knowledge".  After all, don't you know that people were a lot smarter
> back in those days when astrology was invented, you know, back when they thought
> the planets were Gods, that the four humours governed temperament, that
> the universe could be reduced to the 5 platonic solids, etc., etc.

Well, whether those people before us were smarter, or not - still
scientists have problems explaining exactly how acupuncture works
(which has been in use for how many years?), how and why hypnosis
works (and can achieve effects beyond comprehension);  for a long
time "extrasense" medicine (or whatever it's called here) was
considered a charlatany (and some practitioners definitely
are :-), though there are documented [positive] results;
should I continue the list? People even before us (who
didn't have "advantage" of familiarity with modern
science) apparently had and used something which
not only works well, but is still beyond
comprehension of our knowledge...

Why should astrology be any different in this prospective? 


> 1) Tests done by skeptics are not fair since they cheat to make 
> the astrologers look bad.

Don't know about astrology, but in medicine this sometimes 
is true (of course more often it's false, but so what?).
The statement in general doesn't thrill me...

> 2) Astrology does not work in a repeatable way, so there is no way to predict
> events with this kind of precision before the fact.  When we examine the chart
> after the events, with full knowledge, of course everything makes perfect
> sense.

I always thought that astrology predicts PROBABILITY of an event,
rather than the EVENT. It says: "You're likely to ...", rather
than: "You will ..."

I hope my explanation is simple enough for you?


> 3) Astrology is a form of personal counseling and it would be impossible to
> make these kinds of predictions without a close personal acquaintance with the
> subject.  Of course, people here have no problem holding forth in great volume
> about minor features in the charts of people they have never met, but I guess
> this constitutes "research in progress".

Bull... Think yourself - even you must be able to repude this.


> 4) Fuck off and die you troublemaker, we don't want you here questioning our
     ^^^^^^^^
> beliefs.

Actually true. What good are you bringing to this group,
and what good is this group for you? If one doesn't
believe in chiropractice -  one doesn't go to
chiropractor... If one doesn't like  herbal
medicine - one doesn't go to that type of
doctor, rather than ridiculing the
doctor himself, and his 
patients... 


> Anyhow, cheers Glenn.  I hope you stick around - it does get interesting here
> occasionally.

Interesting for who? And why should he stay?
--
Uri.
------------
<Disclaimer>
Newsgroups: alt.astrology