Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Astrology      Home login  
 AUTHOR
AstrologyPage 4 of 6    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)

We've had, essentially, this same conversation before which is why I will not get into a substantive discussion with you.
See generally pages 9 & 10: http://forums.plentyoffish.com/8446739datingPostpage10.aspx
See specifically posts 223, 230, 237 & 240.

Ok, that's it...I've looked at that thread, and as a result a couple of you have just lost all credibility instantly. And I mean that the cork floatation underneath the stone has just completely disappeared, and the stone is heading to the bottom of the ocean with nothing to save it. It's that bad.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ANYTHING about astrology here. I'm not saying it's valid or BS. I'm pointing out WHY I'm not participating in a conversation about astrology.


Let me be more explicit - I'm not here to argue with nonbelievers. Go about your merry way in peace. [from the other thread linked to]

You need to make up your mind. You're going to say something about it, or you're not. You're going to engage in conversation about it, yet not quite do so and say that you're not, while you almost are. Huh?

I've requested that you explain what astrology really is, since you say that these people have it wrong. If it were valid and important, I'd hope that you wanted to shed some light. But if you're only going to say that you're not, while also still reacting to things said about it, shouldn't you just not bother at all in the first place? One way out for you is that you've already said some things about it in other thread(s)...but, at least what I saw at your link doesn't do anything at all. Any other previous discussions on this or other related subjects don't seem to be cutting the mustard - not that you've encountered disagreement...you can't hide behind that...but that you and like-minded individuals haven't even made any sense to begin with, before any agreement, disagreement, or understanding can have an opportunity to take place.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 77
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 1/27/2014 11:50:16 AM

Really? You're MORE familiar with a system of astrology that doesn't exist by that name or anything close to it? Saying "western astrology" is like saying the 'North America' - again demonstrating total lack of knowledge what you're saying. Maybe try a google or two before you post again.


It's not even close to "demonstrating a total lack of knowledge". Western astrology is an umberella term for systems like horoscopic astrology, natal astrology and sun sign astrology. It's a kin to saying "western medicine". People know what you're talking about. You're trying to mislead people by saying that term doesn't exist when it actually does exist. You keep avoiding the fact that there isn't a shred of evidence that confirms that any system of astrology is anything more than a superstition. I brought up specific points in my last post. I guess I'll restate them. There's no reason to believe that natal astrology is true due to the lack of evidence and the fact that we're alive nine months before we're born. And again, sun sign astrology isn't true either. One of the reasons being that they are still using the old signs when everyone should be assigned the sign of the previous month.


Hoo, boy...

Your boy JR "proves" negatives all the time: he disproves *ONE* psychic (or a statistically insignificant number of them), and his fan-boys run with that and say, in effect, "He's disproven *ONE/A FEW* claimants to psychic powers; therefore, *ALL* claimants to psychic powers, anywhere and at any time, *MUST* be fraudulent!". Very unscientific of them...


No, that's not how it works. That's how you think it works. In reality, there isn't a shred of evidence that suggests that psychics can do what they say they can do. He doesn't need to disprove any of them because they haven't proved it themselves yet. The burden of proof is on the psychics, not James Randi. He simply exposes their scams and offers them a million dollars if they can do what they say they can do. No one has ever said all psychics must be fraudulent because a few were exposed, you made that up. The default position is that there is no such thing as psychics, mediums, etc. You can think of it like this. No one needs to go out and disprove that a black cat crossing your path gives you bad luck because there's no evidence that suggests it is true and anything more than superstition.
 CynthiaSM
Joined: 2/24/2012
Msg: 78
Astrology
Posted: 1/27/2014 12:28:15 PM

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying ANYTHING about astrology here. I'm not saying it's valid or BS. I'm pointing out WHY I'm not participating in a conversation about astrology.

Let me be more explicit - I'm not here to argue with nonbelievers. Go about your merry way in peace. [from the other thread linked to]



You need to make up your mind. You're going to say something about it, or you're not. You're going to engage in conversation about it, yet not quite do so and say that you're not, while you almost are. Huh?

Sorry drinks but I guess I overestimated your abilities. I am not debating the subject of astrology, nor psychic abilities (on the other thread). I was not attempting to cross-pollinate the subject of psychic abilities to this thread.

I am (and repeatedly) pointing out the ‘rules’ for a rational discussion. I may have even ignored this thread altogether except for this exact history with CW, which is (again) that to have a rational debate/discussion/conversation about any subject requires:
- speaking apples-to-apples (define your terms) and
- some support for your own position other than ‘because everyone knows it’ or ‘I don’t have to prove a negative’ and
- some refutation of the other side other than ‘you’re an idiot’ or ‘you’re ignorant’.


I've requested that you explain what astrology really is, since you say that these people have it wrong. If it were valid and important, I'd hope that you wanted to shed some light.

I didn’t say it (astrology) is valid and/or important. I thought about answering your last inquiry but, again, I’m not getting into a discussion about the subject of astrology. I thought my position was pretty clear – ALERT! HERE IS THE POINT: the people stating they’re scientific and rational are being anything but.

If someone wants to claim they are scientific and rational AND say ‘x’ is BS, then they need to define what ‘x’ is to them. If someone wants to say they are scientific and rational AND say ‘y’ is BS BECAUSE (i.e. causation) it doesn’t work, then they must, in addition to defining what ‘y’ is they must explain the failed causation path or mechanism.

I could throw out a definition of astrology to work from but I’m not here to debate the subject so I’m certainly not going to frame the topic.
Astrology
Posted: 1/27/2014 2:28:10 PM
CynthiaSM:

But that's v the trick, isn't it? -

I am (and repeatedly) pointing out the ‘rules’ for a rational discussion

- speaking apples-to-apples (define your terms) and
- some support for your own position other than ‘because everyone knows it’ or ‘I don’t have to prove a negative’ and
- some refutation of the other side other than ‘you’re an idiot’ or ‘you’re ignorant’.

You're not really doing this. Not so much. I've seen this before, and it's a trick that many of us are quite familiar with. What you're really doing is hiding behind the pretense of being the rational one. Trying to create the image that you're doing what the other is doing, and that the other is doing what you're in fact doing. Some kind of politically persuasive debating deception ole switch-er-roo.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 80
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 1/27/2014 7:50:14 PM

Yes, you're right, two plus two *DOES* equal five...


What I said made sense to everyone else. I'm sorry that you don't understand it.


If someone wants to claim they are scientific and rational AND say ‘x’ is BS, then they need to define what ‘x’ is to them. If someone wants to say they are scientific and rational AND say ‘y’ is BS BECAUSE (i.e. causation) it doesn’t work, then they must, in addition to defining what ‘y’ is they must explain the failed causation path or mechanism.


This was already done. Astrology refers to systems of divination that are based on the belief that the movement and position of celestial bodies has an influence on people and the natural world. Using an umbrella term like western astrology makes it easy for people to understand that you're talking about systems like horoscopic atrology or natal astrology. There's no need to explain "why" something is nonsense when it's never been proven to be true. I'm not making a claim. I'm pointing out that the claims made by astrologers have never been verified or tested with positive results. The fallacy of an argument from ignorance is created if someone tries to shift the burden of proof from those making the claim to the challenger.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 81
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 1/28/2014 5:02:22 PM

*sigh*

You keep harping on this phrase, "burden of proof", like you know what it means. In a TV courtroom drama, it sure makes for an interesting clip, I'll admit. However, scientific truth doesn't kow-tow to clever word-play. You can natter on all you like about "Wh0ever makes the claim has the burden of proof!", but the burden of a scientific proof will not, and never has been, stymied by a clever, though meaningless, turn of phrase. Scientific *PRINCIPLES* are founded on *TRUTH*, not clever word play...


I do know what it means. All you're doing is trying to talk down to people who actually know what they're talking about. I think you have your own made up phrase mixed up with the scientific burden of evidence which has to do with accumulating evidence to support a theory. A claim made by astrologers is a philosophical burden of proof where they need to provide evidence to support their position. You're trying to discredit what I said by mixing apples and oranges and comparing a claim made by astrologers in the public sphere to the scientific method. You completely failed because I'm using the correct phrase "burden of proof" to describe the responsibility that astrologers have to support their position.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 82
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 1/29/2014 12:38:18 PM

Stop trying to shoe-horn yourself into the category of "people who actually know what they're talking about."


What would you know about that category? Wasn't someone going on about juvenile debating tactics and ad hominem fallacies earlier?


Not at all. *YOU'RE* putting forth the claim that "astrology" is bunk; when asked to substantiate your claim, you start babbling about "burden of proof", and "can't prove a negative"; occasionally, you'll throw out something like "Randi has disproved it; besides, he has a cheque for one million dollars that no one has collected on, so he *MUST* be right!" You're like a hiker who happened on a grumpy, hungry bear: running away, peeling off your clothes and throwing them to the ground, hoping that the bear will stop and take the time to sniff each item of clothing so you can make a clean getaway...


An observation is not equivalent to a claim. Something that hasn't been proved doesn't need to be disproved. It's like making the observation that no one has ever proved the existence of imaginary creatures like big foot or unicorns. You don't need to disprove the existence of big foot or unicorns because their existence hasn't been proved in the first place. If someone claimed they had evidence, such as a video of big foot, you could find flaws in their video to expose and debunk their so called "evidence". It's absolutely correct to use the phrase "burden of proof" when it comes to psychics because they say: "well, you just have to believe" instead of actually coming forward with evidence. A person claiming that big foot exists or that there is an alien base on the moon also has the burden of proof. The person making the observation that these things are still in the realm of fantasy and pseudoscience (because there isn't a shred of evidence to support them) doesn't have to substantiate anything because they're not making a claim.
 LennyPane
Joined: 2/2/2011
Msg: 83
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 1/29/2014 5:46:24 PM
For all those who think astrology is legitimate. I have an honest question for you.

I have a friend who was born the same day and same year as I was. I really do. Not just for the sake of this post. Me and him are COMPLETE opposites. I'm not exaggerating. We're not alike at all. If you read the general Sagittarius horoscope, it seems to describe me. My buddy with the same exact birthdate, not at all. Not even close.

At the same time, my late best friends birthdate was two months later than mine. (I think he was a Libra) and we were a lot alike. Our personalities, goals, ideas, you name it. If you had not known our birth dates and you subscribed to astrology, you would think we were the same sign.

So what is the explanation? I'm really not trying to be a smart ass or anything here. It's an honest question for proponents of astrology.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 84
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/3/2014 12:02:04 PM

Too many people seem to think that "astrology" and "horoscopes" are the same thing.


I don't think people think that astrology and horoscopes are the same thing. However, western astrology is predominantly horoscopic, so it makes sense that people in Western cultures focus on what they're exposed to and what others are familiar with.
 LennyPane
Joined: 2/2/2011
Msg: 85
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:29:14 PM
^^ Ok so let's say we're not talking about generic newspaper horoscopes. In Astrology aren't people with identical birth dates supposed to be similar in personality and whatnot? Forgive me for my lack of knowledge about the subject but I've always understood that this was the case. In my previous post I asked a question about this. Do you have an answer?
 LennyPane
Joined: 2/2/2011
Msg: 86
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/3/2014 3:58:07 PM
I was just asking for an explanation of what I've understood to be the base of Astrology. You say astrology may refer to something other than horoscopes, well what's being marketed as astrology IS horoscopes and I think that's what most people are criticizing since that IS being labeled as astrology. It seems that you're claiming something to the degree of 'well there may be something more to it, so don't criticize the superficial version', but you're not giving us any insight into your apparent esoteric knowledge of this subject.
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 87
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/3/2014 9:36:49 PM

You misspelled "fling verbal feces like monkeys on a keyboard"...


Why did you highlight the word "focus"? I'd have to agree that it's a bit silly for people to be spending money or taking horoscopes seriously.
Astrology
Posted: 2/4/2014 6:35:04 AM
Ok, first let’s have a couple of examples of the commercialization of astrology:

http://www.astrology.com/
http://www.horoscope.com/

Next, at least a mention of Wikipedia. To sum up how it might define astrology, despite whatever else it says (I won’t list other online dictionaries for they say the same thing):

“…several systems of divination based on the premise that there is a relationship between astronomical phenomena and events in the human world…in its broadest sense, is the search for meaning in the sky… lost its academic and theoretical standing…has been rejected by the scientific community as a pseudoscience… sociologist Theodor W. Adorno concluded that astrology was a large-scale manifestation of systematic irrationalism [and] drew a parallel with the phrase ‘opium of the people’, by Karl Marx, by commenting ‘occultism is the metaphysic of the dopes’…”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrology - Does have a pretty comprehensive and clear run-down on astrology though. Some ought to visit wiki’s take on it.

As a by-the-way, I noticed that wiki included a player for Gustav Holst’s The Planets, compositions that I always liked. Check those out if one is so inclined. If I ever stumble upon a billion dollars and make an epic sci fi movie, a testosterone-injected rendition of Holst’s Mars will be in the soundtrack.

And finally…I was going to show at least one site which takes astrology more seriously (from a believer’s or practitioner’s view) or treats it in a more esoteric way, if that so applies, which it may not…but there doesn’t seem to be any. However, here is one as an example of the rhetoric used to make it seem legitimate:


http://www.astrologycom.com/astrol.html
 LennyPane
Joined: 2/2/2011
Msg: 89
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/4/2014 11:58:42 AM
^^ Typical Capricorn behavior.
Astrology
Posted: 2/4/2014 1:10:45 PM
^ hehe, yea baby, yea! Capricorn - the one sign which encompasses the very end and very beginning of every year. Of everyone else.
 CureCurious
Joined: 2/22/2014
Msg: 91
Astrology
Posted: 2/25/2014 10:57:17 PM
ahh if only astrology was true... according to last month's reading apparently I was supposed to be super duper in love and this magical thing was supposd to happen... zoink, nope, unless they were using "metaphors for suicidal thoughts and heartache and loneliness.... they never say how they get to their conclusions... how do they get "qualified"... whats the process of being qualified.. can anybody do it? Why is there so much variation?
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 92
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/26/2014 12:58:31 AM

ahh if only astrology was true... according to last month's reading apparently I was supposed to be super duper in love and this magical thing was supposd to happen... zoink, nope, unless they were using "metaphors for suicidal thoughts and heartache and loneliness.... they never say how they get to their conclusions... how do they get "qualified"... whats the process of being qualified.. can anybody do it? Why is there so much variation?


Anyone can do it! Sylvia Browne charged hundreds of dollars for half hour "psychic readings". Astrologers can rip off people just as badly.

Curecurious: I read your profile and I was surprised that you used the word "b*gan" in the first paragraph. I guess it means something different outside of NorthWestern Ontario, but here it's one of the most offensive words you can say.
 CureCurious
Joined: 2/22/2014
Msg: 93
Astrology
Posted: 2/26/2014 1:48:58 AM
Really? Theyy use the word bogan here in mainstream media... they make comical shows like "The housos" that depict them, lmao. They call the infamous drug smuggler that's been on TV that name in the media. It's not academically appropriate, but hmm... anyway, whoever takes offence to it, probably is one, and won't attempt to correspond, I suppose. What's a more sweeter term to describe the same thing?
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 94
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 2/26/2014 10:34:53 AM

Really? Theyy use the word bogan here in mainstream media... they make comical shows like "The housos" that depict them, lmao. They call the infamous drug smuggler that's been on TV that name in the media. It's not academically appropriate, but hmm... anyway, whoever takes offence to it, probably is one, and won't attempt to correspond, I suppose. What's a more sweeter term to describe the same thing?


Really? Does bogan mean a a red neckperson? It's never used in that way here. If you say it here, it's a really bad word for an Aboriginal person. It basically means an Aboriginal person that doesn't want to work and is always drunk. It's almost as bad as calling people the n-word. I'm not sure why it has a different meaning here, but that's really interesting. I don't think I would date a redneck person either. My diet is almost vegetarian, minus some fish. Do they call the drug smuggler that name because he's Australian?
 bamagrl68
Joined: 11/14/2010
Msg: 95
Astrology
Posted: 3/20/2014 2:27:16 PM
greenIsis777-Being a Leo, I demand you believe, Lol :D
Seriously though, according to the personality descriptions I'm more like Cancer.
I don't take it seriously, but from time to time it is spooky accurate.
Astrology
Posted: 3/21/2014 1:08:53 AM
Got a little $1 thrift store clock radio, use it somewhere to just plug in and is already tuned to some classical. Clock part is broke. But somehow, from time to time the clock is spooky accurate. And I mean spooky accurate. Spooooooky, man! *sound of ghost moaning down the hallway*

bamagrl68 - 0x0x hehe
 Coma_White
Joined: 9/15/2013
Msg: 97
view profile
History
Astrology
Posted: 3/21/2014 2:22:37 PM
bamagrl68: Do you mind if I do a reading for you? Let me know if I was accurate.

You have a tendency to be critical of yourself. You also have a great deal of unused capacity which you have not turned to your advantage. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. Security is one of your major goals in life. And finally, you feel as though you haven't been drinking enough water lately.
 bamagrl68
Joined: 11/14/2010
Msg: 98
Astrology
Posted: 3/21/2014 7:54:41 PM
drinkthesunwithmyface- So you are saying a broken clock is right at least twice a day?
Say it isn't so, shoeless joe (am obscure baseball reference that probably almost no one else understands, so not my best attempt at returning your, hopefully, playful attempt at humor :).
Astrology
Posted: 3/22/2014 5:21:33 AM
^ Yes, it's right twice a day...but that fact isn't going to fool me into suspecting that the clock is working in any way, and I'm not ever going to start relying on it to tell me the time. Even at those two instances when it happens to be right, because I know better. I know that even then, it isn't really correct at all.
 CureCurious
Joined: 2/22/2014
Msg: 100
Astrology
Posted: 3/24/2014 8:48:51 AM
So, I had a dream on Saturday morning. A voice was telling me to wake up, I think it was like my dad's voice. He was saying "you've got 11 notifications waiting for you, wake up." I didn't wake up immediately, but I did shortly after until I came to.

I reached over to my phone and I had 10 notificaions awaiting. I thought "blahh dreams" then phone vibrated.. I now had "11 notifications".

Does this make me psychic? lol. If so, pay up.. i'll read your wrinkles.



though, I'm sort of a voice expert. I can usually tell how someone looks, or is even dressing by their voice and manner.. well the outfit thing is more to do with news presenters that I've tried on... eyes closed etc..
Show ALL Forums  > Science/philosophy  > Astrology