Eise Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 i am asking it because i have found that astrology is based on geocentric model of cosmos. we test it on heliocentric model and it failed. is not it obvious? something is tested on a model on which it is not based. is not it bound to fail? but if we took geocentric astrological data and convert them into heliocentric data, will astrology fail? I don't even understand why you think that astrology would be based on a geocentric model. It has arisen in 'geocentric' times, yes, but I do not see why a heliocentric model would invalidate it. Astrology is based on the relative positions of celestial bodies to the earth. The relative positions of planets and constellations is the only scientific aspect of astrology: it can just borrow it from astronomy. As a small story: in my time as a student, I once visited an extreme 'new age believer'. He immediately wanted to know my birth day for drawing my horoscope on his PC. Then I asked him if he could make the horoscope of the present moment. Of course he could, and showed me the diagram. I said ,yeah, that fits.' He reacted with astonishment and asked 'what do you know about astrology?'. I asked him to go outside, and look to the western horizon: 'You see, these two bright stars there? They are no stars, those are Jupiter and Venus, close behind the sun that has just set. Exactly as you can see in your horoscope diagram'. 'Wow, I did not know that you could see that!'. Isn't that great? The only point where astrology touches science, he did not know anything of... It is not even pseudoscience. It is based on making general enough statements so that any individual will find some parallel with their own lives. On the few occasions I have read my horoscope in the news paper I an surprised just how 'accurate' they can be. There is a real art in this, but no science. I wonder why you call it 'not even pseudo science'. I think it has all aspects of pseudo science: it suggests it is a body of knowledge, suggests it has methods to determine outcomes etc, where in reality it has no methodological basis at all. There is no empirical program of gathering knowledge, of falsifying wrong hypotheses etc. Astrologists do not even get at the same results (except the diagram they draw with PC programs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiskers Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 Astrologists do not even get at the same results (except the diagram they draw with PC programs). So true. If you ask 6 economists, you'll get 7 opinions. Economists have predicted 8 out of the last 5 recessions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acme Posted February 28, 2015 Share Posted February 28, 2015 It is not even pseudoscience. It is based on making general enough statements so that any individual will find some parallel with their own lives. ...... I wonder why you call it 'not even pseudo science'. ... Perhaps he was making a play on the phrase 'not even wrong'. If so, arguably it's redundant. Forgive my impudence is so responding; Uranus is on my cusp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 (edited) I wonder why you call it 'not even pseudo science'. I think it has all aspects of pseudo science: it suggests it is a body of knowledge, suggests it has methods to determine outcomes etc, where in reality it has no methodological basis at all. There is no empirical program of gathering knowledge, of falsifying wrong hypotheses etc. Astrologists do not even get at the same results (except the diagram they draw with PC programs). Most 'good' pseudoscience tries to hide as science, they have methodology, a proposed mechanism, they have hypotheses etc. Astrology does not even try to be a science. Any attempt at a mechanism via gravity, say, is quickly shot down. Perhaps he was making a play on the phrase 'not even wrong'. If so, arguably it's redundant. Forgive my impudence is so responding; Uranus is on my cusp. Indeed, it is not even not even wrong! LOL Edited March 1, 2015 by ajb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 1, 2015 Share Posted March 1, 2015 If you're a Gemini, you need to expect the unexpected. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 ! Moderator Note More general discussion on pseudoscience has been split http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/87982-what-are-examples-of-pseudoscience-split-from-astrology/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonDie Posted March 2, 2015 Share Posted March 2, 2015 (edited) Astrology doesn't utilize the physical sciences to formulate hypotheses, and astrologers can't even agree amongst themselves. Some are tradional hellenistic or Vedic types, while others dig the "psychological" astrology we know today. Still others like to use miniscule asteroids, dwarves, or even mathematically derived points like "Lilith" (the lunar apogee). Some divide the circle endlessly into smaller and smaller "aspects". The "esoteric" astrologers give different interpretations for even the traditional inner planets. Others do heliocentric astrology, or use right ascension instead of ecliptic longitude. They often use a multitude of charts: the natal, transits, and secondary or tertiary progressions, etc.. (It's been years now, but I still deeply regret all the time I wasted. ) The variations are endless, yet they haven't even given a satisfactory verification of the claims they do agree on. You're bound to find some weak links if you look hard enough, but astrology can't be considered a distinct area of inquiry. A study on rats suggested a potential effect of the perinatal photoperiod on behavioral differences. Perinatal photoperiod imprints the circadian clock (Ciarleglio, Axley, Strauss, Gamble, McMahon, 2010) Who knows what else might cause some correlations. Seasonal depression will affect people's sex drives to varying degrees. The seasonal availability of crops might effect the health of the fetus. I wouldn't call any of this "astrology" though. Biology, pscyhology, or sociology would be preferable labels. The only person I know to have proposed a totally original physical explanation was Michel Gauquelin, but his ideas were never accepted by the scientific community. (He also had his own idiosyncratic style of astrology, by the way). In short, yes it is a pseudoscience, a non-science that pretends to be a science. Edited March 2, 2015 by MonDie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad For Science Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 Some people think they have a method that does work. Some people think they have a system for winning the lottery too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koala Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 astrology works on the idea that if you believe in something it is more likely to happen. If someone believes that they will be happy today then it is more likely they will be happy. You should test it from a psychological standpoint not one based on the physics of stars. It is something that works, but not for the reason that everyone thinks that it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eise Posted March 3, 2015 Share Posted March 3, 2015 In short, yes it is a pseudoscience, a non-science that pretends to be a science. That's what I would say too, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 We tested it the real world, and it failed. There is only one universe and it's not one where astrology works. What tests did you did ? As a chemist ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 What tests did you did ? As a chemist ? See post #7, for example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted February 11, 2016 Share Posted February 11, 2016 What tests did you did ? As a chemist ? I didn't do any. The word "we" has a wider meaning than you seem to imply. And whoever did the tests they wouldn't be doing them "as a chemist" so that's just silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daecon Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 How exactly would astrology work anyway? Quantum resonance in the aether, something something fractals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 How exactly would astrology work anyway? Quantum resonance in the aether, something something fractals? The question is mute, there is no real science behind astrology... minus the mapping of the stars itself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now