• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Astrology - Are you a believer?

Do you believe in astrology?

  • Yes

    Votes: 32 18.2%
  • No

    Votes: 137 77.8%
  • I have no idea what it is? So I'm not sure.

    Votes: 7 4.0%

  • Total voters
    176

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I'm not sure whether I've even heard the sound of an open mind on this thread, aside maybe from ragashree's (but I didn't really read his/her posts to carefully, so...)

You said you liked the point about astrological predictions working for 1 in 12 people...?
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I'm still waiting for Victor to give me evidence that Jung sexually abused his patients and started a cult. :newwink:

Victor likes to make unsupported claims of truth for which he has no evidence.

He then squirms like a worm when called out on it.

I'm not sure whether he likes the latter part...
 

Forever_Jung

Active member
Joined
May 23, 2009
Messages
2,644
MBTI Type
ESFJ
Okay, evidence is nice and all for empiricism, but to demand evidence that astrology is false is a bit rich. I am banging Meaghan Fox right now. Prove that I am not. This seems to be astrology's grand argument.: Prove otherwise.
 
G

Ginkgo

Guest
In a normal conversation you would just express your opinion, you would not demand evidence.

Demanding evidence seems to me to be somewhat peremptory.

What constitutes "normal" is highly ambiguous. Some of us may think that liking green smoothies, dancing, ideas and poetry might be abnormal. So it is only fitting that we abandon any notion of normality instead of using it as a failsafe when we are lacking in evidence.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Okay, evidence is nice and all for empiricism, but to demand evidence that astrology is false is a bit rich. I am banging Meaghan Fox right now. Prove that I am not. This seems to be astrology's grand argument.: Prove otherwise.

The point is that, if you make the claims that it's falsifiable and has been falsified, then you should provide your proof.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
What constitutes "normal" is highly ambiguous. Some of us may think that liking green smoothies, dancing, ideas and poetry might be abnormal. So it is only fitting that we abandon any notion of normality instead of using it as a failsafe when we are lacking in evidence.

Good Libra.

:wink:
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
The point is that, if you make the claims that it's falsifiable and has been falsified, then you should provide your proof.

It's falsifiable but has not been definitively falsified because no one cares enough about it to fund the studies.


But here is one study suggesting that it doesn't do anything:

A double-blind test of astrology

You can't read it without paying for a subscription, but Wikipedia references this study by saying:

Wiki said:
Studies have repeatedly failed to demonstrate statistically significant relationships between astrological predictions and operationally-defined outcomes.

Now, I know Wikipedia on its doesn't count as a reliable source, but here they've cited an actual academic journal study (and it seems quite unlikely that they'd be lying about its content.)
 

Alchemiss

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2009
Messages
106
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
5w6
I took an astrology class a couple months ago supposedly just to learn the vocabulary and basic concepts for another class I was taking and, much to my surprise, I now find parts of astrology compelling and useful. I was startled by the accuracy of the planet descriptors and where they were in my natal chart. One example was a conjunction of two of my natal planets indicative of higher math and science ability (I have a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering). Could this alignment be chance? Of course, but there was enough applicable detail to make it an interesting and helpful exploration. I find the houses and signs less useful and standard newspaper horoscopes not useful at all.

For what it's worth, my astrology instructor doesn't advocate using astrology for predictive purposes.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Well, we already ruled it out as predictive about ten pages ago, so that test is essentially about something that we're not even trying to argue.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
People will blindly believe anyone is type ABCD just because they post it in the forum.
People will blindly believe what their exact function order is.
People will blindly believe what MBTI says is true of them, and others, in a profile.

In the typing threads, you will see lists of "characteristics" which are then used to type someone:

Hits brown dogs.
Watches rain fall.
Uses Charmin brand toilet paper.
Eats microwave dinners.

And of course the clincher is:
Wears black shoes.

Then the erudite members shout out a type.

But. . . Astrology must be proven.
Fascinating.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
^ plus one.

Jag, an hour or two ago I remembered that you also have sounded open-minded in this thread.
 

simulatedworld

Freshman Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5,552
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Well, we already ruled it out as predictive about ten pages ago, so that test is essentially about something that we're not even trying to argue.

I don't understand--if it can't predict who will have which personality traits based on birth information, what exactly do you use it for?

Is it just a personality categorization system with no objective variables, like typology?


But. . . Astrology must be proven.
Fascinating.

The difference is that Jungian type categories can't be tested and thus have no objective value. They're just one way of many to group personalities.

Astrology claims an objectively measurable connection between birth information and personality traits. If it didn't do that, it would be functionally identical to typology and I'd have no problem with it.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
I don't understand--if it can't predict who will have which personality traits based on birth information, what exactly do you use it for?

Is that what the test from the Wikipedia link was testing for?

(I'm doing this all from my phone, so I didn't look at the link.)

I just figured that by "predict", they were talking about astrology's efficacy (or lack thereof) in foretelling future events (which some believe it can be used for).

Was I wrong about this?

If so, and it was about predicting personality traits, I would have to see the methodology.

I think it's a particular trait of Ni to catch errors in experiment's methodologies.

Always been good at it.

Is it just a personality categorization system with no objective variables, like typology?

I was gunna preempt Jag by just putting :doh: here, but, considering he already responded and refrained, I'll consider playing along in your little Ti terminology game.

Ehh, here goes nothing:

I can't say I'm certain what you mean here by objective variables...

The difference is that Jungian type categories can't be tested and thus have no objective value. They're just one way of many to group personalities.

Can't be tested = no objective value = :BangHead:

What?

Are you saying things that can't be tested can't be true?

Astrology claims an objectively measurable connection between birth information and personality traits. If it didn't do that, it would be functionally identical to typology and I'd have no problem with it.

I'm not sure it ever claims to be "objectively measurable"...

Hence why I said it's not verifiable or falsifiable.

The fact of the matter is: it's very difficult to measure qualities....
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Tell me about it.

But does that mean that equality would be a default position, or would you rather settle for approximations?

You need to shift your thinking away from a mode of thinking more suited to quantitative measures and towards a mode of thinking more suited to qualitative measures (i.e., critical thinking).
 
Top