Slashdot Mirror
Should Scientists Date People Who Believe Astrology?
YourAstrologer writes "Wired Science asks: Should scientists date people who believe in astrology? Apparently, the argument is quite complex. Astrology is sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world, but so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs. Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines, so it is normative for them to believe it even if they are otherwise highly logical. Smart people can convince themselves of silly things."
Which method - radiocarbon or by slicing thenm and counting the rings?
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
Must be for this to make the front page. It's not like anything *interesting* is going on elsewhere I suppose.
Don't mind my grumpiness. I think it's just the bad horoscope I read this morning. I should have stayed in bed.
I think they will be happy just to get ANY date, no?
But rememeber, you can fix a lot of things but you cant fix stupid
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
I'm kind of a scientist and I kind of believe that astrology might have some truth to it. Is spiritualism of any kind NOT for scientists?
Beggars can't be choosers....
Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?
Let's not forget historical astronomers that also dabbled in astrology.
http://informationthreshold.blogspot.com - Information Threshold
Seeing as this is Slashdot, lemme just say, you should probably take what you can get. Astrology, piercings, fetishes, just be glad a girl's talking to you and not asking you to do her math homework. Seriously though, sometimes breasts are big enough to make other things not important.
Why not? If you're only going to date people who agree with you on everything then you're likely to die alone.
That said, if there was anythig to astrology I'd have gotten laid Friday night. I look at horoscopes for the humor value, and one Friday said "a home cooked meal will provoke a romp in the sack". Too damned bad astrology is bullshit!
You might as well ask if a Catholic should date a Muslim.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
If its dating and sex then its fine, hell use it to your advantage by lying about your date of birth thus making sure you are always "perfect" for the gorm who believes in this crap. You can then use your superior education and knowledge to get laid more often...
If its marriage then forget it as you'll end up being convicted of murder.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
What's they're sign? If you two are incompatible according to the stars then you can forget about being compatible on Earth.
If this submission was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, it's trying a bit too hard.
A woman needs horoscopes like a fish needs a bicycle.
"Kinky sex involves the use of duck feathers. Perverted sex involves the whole duck." - Lewis Grizzard
As a Marxist, I have no time for pseudoscientific concepts that claim to explain the workings of human nature in their entirety while offering no evidence or falsifiability.
If you haven't made a developer cry, you've wasted a day.
They'll take any ideology necessary as long as it leads to spread legs. :)
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
I'd say they should date anyone who finds them interesting...it's not like they're gonna be pulling boy-band ass.
I have to take offense to this. Couple of years ago, the local paper's astrological peice listed for my birthday, 'If today is your birthday, you gonna get lucky today.' Now, yes I was dating the lady who was incharge of editing that section at the time; but by God, it was correct.
In God we trust, all others require data.
Smart people can convince themselves of silly things
Like that Linux is a good desktop OS
/me runs and hides
Understand that judging groups of people is as a rule wrong. It is called bigotry.
Even the question is bigoted since you are trying to say what a whole group should or should not do.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I always assumed that the solar system was put together in the configuration it was because I was born in September. This is a serious blow to my ego.
how does one buy astrology (probably moderated down)? more importantly, why?
If people can get past, can they get future? Best way to confuse a stoner
Think of the children... No, seriously, think of the children.
What a strange question.
For each person, it is up to themselves if they want to date somebody with these ideas or not. In my eyes, it's not exactly something which needs an "Oooh, no, if you're a scientist you should never date people like this!" argument.
Let people choose themselves.
As to myself: I've always dated intelligent human females. None of them ever believed in this astrology crap, but then they were simply not the type to do so. I assume there to be a connection: brains belief in astrology.
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
Astrology differs from most religion and "spirituality" in one very important way (especially to scientists): It is testable. While there is no way to prove or disprove most spiritual things (including the existence of any god or the Judeo-Christian-Islamic God), we know that astrology is 100% wrong. It has been studied scientifically (because it makes testable predictions and claims), and the results always come back the same.
Try this page for a start:
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html
G
I'm not a scientist, but I won't date women who buy astrology. I deal with enough ignorance at work, thank you. I won't date devoutly religious women, either.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
As a scientist I am likely to disregard most attempts at serious conversation on the subject of astrology.
That said, I would not, and I believe, nor would any other normal scientific single chap, turn away a hot chick just because she was pondering my star sign or wanting to read my palm. In most cases It's just another vector into a conversation anyway.
Especially when you read the horoscope and try to apply it to a yet unborn baby. Something along the lines of "You will discover buds that will grow into interesting relationships later ..." suddenly gets a completely new meaning - "Sure, those hands and feet will be interesting". Be very scared when the horoscope talks about things like "You're ready to face the world and meet new people." He he.
date people who are religious? These are both stupid questions. How about I date who I want to date and you date who you want to date and let me decide who I should date? I know, a novel question.
As mentioned in the post, a lot of otherwise highly intelligent people sometimes believe in silly things. Why? Because sometimes we find silly things comforting. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that as long as what you believe doesn't require hurting innocent people. What we really need, as a society, is to be less judgmental about people based on stupid things like this. Should you judge someone based on the fact that they believe in astrology? No more than you should judge them based on their religious beliefs, because really, there's very little difference between the two. Neither is really based on science (astrology is based on the location of planets in their orbits relative to Earth, but there's little science beyond that). Both rely entirely on faith.
Just what we need, one more issue to separate out some group that's "different" so that we can demean them and make them feel stupid.
Duh.
Apparently it is possible to subscribe to a "flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world," yet still be a scientist.
NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
From the comments on TFA:
(note, this is not even on /. !)
Which begs the question: Should anybody date someone who recommends taking a look at a 68k Mac software in 2008 ?
In Soviet Russia, our new overlords are belong to all your base.
I'm a Scorpio, Scorpios don't believe in astrology.
About people using 'normative' when 'normal' would do perfectly well. That for me would set off more alarm bells in the dating department.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Judging someone to be undateable because of her spiritual beliefs is somehow wrong? Why, because it would hurt her feelings? I'd say a woman's spiritual beliefs, especially if they are wholly incompatible with common sense (as so many of them are), are reason enough to not want to waste time trying to develop a close relasionship with.
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
Most western societies include a schooling system that splits children up into 'years', dividing the years by birthday being before or after September. (Using the UK as an example, as that's what I know) Children start school the September after they're 5 years old. So someone born in September will be nearly 6 when they start school, while someone born in August will be just 5 when they start school. So at that early age, the September child is 20% older than the August child when they start. That makes a difference, in confidence, learning and social skills, physical strength, all sorts. While the proportional age differences diminish over time, the headstart is always there. The social structure of the school career gets fixed at a very early stage.
Does your birthdate have a big determination on who you are? I think it does, it just doesn't have anything to do with the sun or the moon...
Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines, so it is normative for them to believe it even if they are otherwise highly logical.
a) Stupid
b) sexist
c) offensive
d) all of the above
Three Squirrels
I mean, what better excuse could you want for asking "Want to go outside with me to look at the stars?"
;)
Pretty sure it'll beat "Hey, haven't we met before?" or "Got a light?" any time
Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
I once went out on a date with a girl who was in an English PhD program at Lehigh University so she was no dummy, but she believed in astrology. I didn't realize she was serious at first so I started picking on her about it. She got really offended and tried to rationalize it by explaining that when you're born the stars in the babies star sign have a gravitational effect on its' brain. I tried to explain to her that the TV in the delivery room would have more of an effect. Her eyes glazed over at the term "Gravitational Constant" so I figured it was a lost cause and just gave up.
Founder, Americans Allied Against Alliteration
Only if you define a shortcut as a much shorter route that gets you to the wrong destination.
/.'ers I imagine - you can appreciate someone who's put a lot of thought into their belief system and come to their own conclusion and is happy with it and the way it helps them live their life - systems of belief are an entirely human construct and are thus irrational by default :) But people who have convinced themselves that astrology exists and then try to subvert physics with claptrap about subtle variations in gravitic attractions and how it aligns iron particles in your blood which short-circuit synapses into taking certain descisions? All without a shred of proof? All without a shred of evidence, even? You're a moron and I'm incapable of respecting your intellect.
/asbestos long johns
:)
As an often-scientific athiest, I'm prepared to date people from any different religions, as long as we're both content to let one anothers belief systems not interfere with our love life. But I have difficulty talking to anyone who believes a few miniscule globules of rock millions of miles away can effect something as complex as our personalities and day-to-day activities. Same for alot of
Yes, I realise it's not their whole personality (don't get me wrong, I've met hundreds of lovely people who happened to believe in something ridiculous), but to me it's just like talking to someone with LIAR tattoed across their forehead and taking everything they say at face value.
http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/astrology.html
P.S. A prize of fifty points and a bowl of raspberry jelly to the first person who correctly guesses my relationship status
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
I think some people are way too casual about having incompatible worldviews with a significant other, but then again, I'm a person with very firm Christian beliefs. Maybe if you are agnostic, for example, you can tolerate someone who believes something which, by your view, could potentially be correct.
But if your mate believes something which you see as patently foolish - like the idea that everyone born between certain dates each year will have the same personality/fate, despite all evidence to the contrary, and despite a total lack of explanation as to how the position of stellar bodies relates to human events - I think this deep disagreement about how life works will lead to bitterness and problems. It's hard to conceal contempt.
And yes, I'm braced for the blind atheistic mockery of Slashdot.
Seriously, headlines like this should not make it to print.
There's an old Bosnian joke about how Mujo decided which girl he should marry. He discussed about it later with his friend Haso:
H: I heard you got married. Congratulations! How did you decide?
M: Well, this was not easy. I had three candidates and I conducted a test. I asked the first one:
"What's 2+2?".
She said "4".
I though to myslelf, that's good, the woman is smart.
The second one said: "Well, it depends. It can be 4, but sometimes it can also be 3 or 5."
That's even better, the woman is cunning.
I asked the third one the same question and she says "I don't care. Whatever my husband says it is".
I thought to myself, this woman surely will respect her husband. This is good.
H: So, which one did you take?
M: Oh. The one with big tits, of course.
I don't think that scientists are THAT different to other men.
The human brain didn't really start getting bigger until we began walking upright. Ironically, that made birthing more difficult; the head has to be aligned just right to pass through the hip bones on the way out the birth canal, or there are birth complications.
Clearly, those of us (males) with big brains should mate with females that can safely deliver our big-brained offspring.
Full disclosure: both my kids were delivered by c-sections. (Don't do as I do, just do as I say.)
Oh, yeah, it's not easy to pad these out to 120 characters.
While I can agree that you shouldn't look for someone who is identical to you their beliefs, there is a lot to be said for having some common ground at least on some of the deeper/bigger belief systems.
Do you want a wife who is going to do something downright stupid because her horoscope/astrologer/tarot card/tea leaf reader told her she should do it? Do you want to have to try to convince her why it's a bad idea, even though it should be obvious to anyone with some common sense why it's a bad idea? Do you want her raising your kids to believe that stuff?
Seriously, if you're just trying to get laid, then I guess it doesn't matter what the person you are dating believes (as long as they believe one-night stands or short-term relationships are ok), but if you are looking for a longer-term relationship, these things really matter.
It can be the difference between every big decision (should we buy a house now? Should I take this new job offer? Should we get a new car? Have a kid? 2 kids, 3 kids. . ?) being an ideological fight, or a simple matter of discussion based on a common set of shared 'foundational' beliefs.
Is a difference in belief also going to be a constant source of friction with relatives? I know in the US the popular belief is fall in love with the person, worry about the relatives later. That can work sometimes. It can't work if the relatives believe some radical ideology that justifies them kidnapping your children in order to 'raise them right' instead of letting you raise them (that's an extreme example, and I don't think applies to astrology, but I'm just throwing that out as an example of the general concept).
Ultimately, whether a person who's fundamental world-view is based on science should date someone who's worldview is based on astrology comes down to those individuals, and how they can work it out (I suppose there could reasonably be a person who's scientific, but also can believe that there might be something to astrology, and can harmonize the two).
Still, having some beliefs in common can be a very good thing for the relationship.
It strongly depends on how "into it" the astrology-believing person is. If he/she is very much living and practising it, it will be a source of conflict. However, if it's just some kind of minor point of interest, it will probably NOT be the deal-breaker. There are/will be many more important issues that will need working on. Money, politics, religion, children and education, view on gender roles etc. those seem to make or break a marriage/romantic relationship much more often.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
If you can keep a straight face while asking if the signs indicate Leo is about to enter Uranus then it could prove useful.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
What am I wearing right now and why is water bluish?
Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday March 10, @09:38AM
from the one-time-I-ran-out-of-bread dept.
YourUser writes
"Scientists eat breakfast like everyone else, but why do fish have gills? Often times, women think differently than men and are stupider about astronomy. As a matter of fact, they can't tell the difference between astronomy and astrology. One time, when I was eight, I buried my Tonka truck in dirt and just left it. I planned on digging it up when I was 40, but I went back about a half hour later and dug it up instead. It was ok just dirty. Also, why did Pat Sajack get a late night tv slot once and even a news show, but Bob Eubanks didn't."
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
This is /. I think the saying, "Beggers can't be choosers" applies here. If she's cute, seriously, who gives a shit what she believes? As long as you can go out and have fun it's all good. I have seen some guys, however, get all caught up in their... smugness... and miss out on meeting & dating some cute girls.
Seriously guys, if the girl looks anything like Kelly from The Big Bang Theory would you really have a problem dating her?
So all in all, even though she's not really into it (just mentions things from time to time), I'm glad for it. It's a different viewpoint for me, just as Christianity is, except now I don't have to worry about if we're going to be sending our future kids to church.
"piercings, fetishes,"
... why is it that a girl who is obviously fun is somehow considered a "bargain" in your post whereas a boring normal person seems to be denoted as something to strive for?
I'm not understanding your logic here
Astrology has a scientific pedigree. Ptolemy's Almagest does not make the modern distinction between Astronomy and Astrology.
The core intuition works this way: "We can see that the sphere of the Sun has a distinct effect on our daily lives. When it's overhead, it's warm and light, when it's on the other side of the Earth, it's cold and dark. When it is in a certain part of the sky, it's winter, and another part, it's summer. The moon has a more tenuous effect on the the Earth, but one we can sense: the tides, for example, seem connected to the phase of the moon, and perhaps people too. Therefore, the spheres of the other five planets should likewise have a thin affect."
The core intuition is, of course, wrong, but there's a ton of scientific literature built on the subject. Most modern astrologers, however, ignore the thousands of years of careful reflection and study, and prefer to pull crap out of their asses.
It sure does seem to be accurate in some cases though. I enjoy it and I consume and process it even though I'm completely aware of how ludicrous it really is. Any system that's sufficiently complex will seem to have meaning. It's the human condition.
Should you date someone that "believes" in it? It's no more silly than believing a Prophet died for your sins 2000 years ago and is deeply concerned about your private sexual morality. I say, date the Astrologer. They're probably literate and that's pretty good.
Imagine if you weren't allowed to use roads because a bus company complained about your driving 3 times. --skunkpussy
If a woman chooses to enjoy astrology, it is within your right to make that an identifying characteristic of someone you wouldn't want as a mate. Although this summary reads like the person writing it is a bigot, I do agree that there are some things that cause me to flat out not date a woman.
For example, I will not date a woman who takes psychiatric medication and also drinks alcohol. Bad experiences in the past with that. It is within her power not to drink alcohol. Yes, I do think less of people who do that.
I won't, however, say I will not date a blind woman. I do not think less of people who have that disability.
The author might be too hasty, I know many women who find astrology fun and must confess I even enjoy reading the Onion's horoscopes. But I have met a woman who asked me for my birth order and then proceeded to judge everything I talked about or did on that and bring it up in conversation. I have also dated a woman who was Wicca and very very cool. Laid back, didn't push it on anybody and only spoke about it when asked about it. Which would you want to be with?
My work here is dung.
Even rational scientists disagree over all kinds of stuff, with many treating their pet ideas with every bit as much reverence and irrationality as any religion.
So, looking for a 100% rational mate? Good luck with that, buddy.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
This is a subtle arugument, but quite powerful in understanding why it's so widespread. It takes a lot of effort to carefully weigh all your choices and decide rationally what the best or optimal course would be to take. If there's some heuristic or rule that you can use to bypass all the consideration and end up making the right choice even just a majority of the time, it can often be worth the mistakes because you can put that time and effort into more beneficial tasks.
Being scared of people you don't know and giving keeping your distance may not always correctly identify people who wish to harm you from those that don't. But you avoid the costs in time and effort (and the risks) of evaluating each stranger on a case by case basis.
Now before you start jumping out with the exceptions and why this is wrong, the point isn't that it's a perfect rule, just that it has the possibility of being good enough to at the end of the day be more beneficial.
We do this with all sorts of things, we cull our experience down into simple rules that allow us to avoid having to waste time and effort.
Now here's the subtle part, we also like to have a good reason for doing what we do, and we're quite capable of inventing a rationale to justify a good rule. The rationale might be total bunkum, but it allows us to feel comfortable in doing what does indeed benefit us.
The only problem comes when we get more attached to the rationale than the rule, which leads people to invent new rules based on a rationale that isn't itself true, then they end up doing stuff that's harmful.
With astrology you can think of it as an ice-breaker to get to know people that might make good mates but you wouldn't normally consider. A rule to seriously consider 1 in every 12 people you meet would work just as well by the way lol. So I would just caution people not to confuse the rationale with the results. We all do it, just in different ways.
Sure why not? People believe in all kinda of crazy things like religion, astrology, string theory, and evolution.
A quick google search shows up this url http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html for those that were ridiculed, but later vindicated.
I think there is a ton of money to be made in astrology. With what we know now, it should be possible to work backward and find out if visible lights in the sky have had effects on a personal/societal level for the past few thousand years. There is a part of me that wonders if the gravity of other planets or the moon/sun has noticeable/predictable effects on us. With all the crazy crap that we fund, that sounds like a fun off the wall one. The only problem is if we discovered that "astrology" was actually real. I have a feeling that we could make astrology work.
What I find funny is that we'd find it impossible to fund NASA to observe all the asteroids that might hit the earth. We'd actually come up with the money to fund that for astrology though. Those asteroids might have a noticeable impact on our collective future if left unaccounted for.
I think astrology actually can match up fairly well under science. The thing is it would be that crazy blue sky science until we really started looking at it. For a means to predict the future though? Nope, I wouldn't buy that, yet. I do think daily horoscopes and the like are great fun. If some one takes one as daily instructions of a high priest/priestess that's their problem. I bet astrology would turn out some what like the weather. With enough data, we could predict it for 4 days or so. (I find funny is its not sky data that we'd need to determine your likely future, its knowledge about the person and what they are likely to do. Actual successful astrologers might be pretty good at reading people and learning to guide people into the directions that they want to go anyway. i wonder if anyone has studied the careers of successful astrologers and their impact on "important" people in business/government.
On topic: Astrology or religion are the same to me even though astrology at least have a cause --> action thing going...
I think the author overstates the prevalence of fashion magazines in women's reading materials. Or at the very least, the parts with a horoscope.
At least, I hope he does.
(DISCLAIMER: I leafed through a copy of GQ yesterday. This may make me a bad person, I'm not sure.)
I think it's maybe 'pretending not to be big fat planets'.
er, effect. Okay, fine. Busted.
he wants to lower his chances of getting laid.
"You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
Should anyone date a woman who reads fashion magazines?
Discuss.
Posting as AC only because I've forgotten my password and can't be bothered to resolve it yet...
This is what I say when I am a coward too. As a matter of fact I posted as AC because I forgot my password too...
COWARDs RULE!
There is nothing wrong with refusing to date people who assert things that are blatantly stupid. Just because something is part of a person's spiritualism doesn't make it blatantly stupid. I would also refuse to date someone who seriously asserted that the dinosaurs died because of the evil galactic overlord Xenu.
...until you meet a really hot girl that's into astrology. Then you're all, "hey baby, what's your sign?" and she says something other than "stop"!
stuff |
Scorpio: Beware of people who limp!
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
...if they put out....(rimshot)
Actually if mary matalin and james carville can get along any thing is possible.
Use your head, can't you, use your head,
You're on earth, there's no cure for that - S. Beckett
Hi,
My wife believes in Astrology in until strange phonomena like the Mars effect are not explained I don't think I can criticize her.
Last post!
apol
To any parent of girls reading this right now: please, buy your little angel a chemistry set, model rockets, and all that other science paraphernalia. The world needs smart women.
Model rockets, not makeup kits!
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
but my weekly astrology forecast this week says I will be successful with having the first post.
Ain't nobody in this world that sees it as it really is. We all impose distortions of perception, cognition and memory. So what's not to love about supernatural beliefs? If anything, rational minds should go out of their way to date those of an awkward reality, to help correct their mistaken ideas. Besides, couples are all about molding each other into "something better". If you don't date someone who needs some molding, what's the point?
I think most people believe something that can't be scientifically proven. So if he's gonna get in a snit about something like a horoscope, he'd better resign himself to marrying another scientist. That, or resign himself to being a bachelor for the rest of his life.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Women are not (as a group) dumber than men. And on the same kind of evidence the blurb mentions (out of my behind :), the only person I knew who really believed in astrology was a man. Many women will play-believe in astrology (read horoscopes etc) because it is fun for them, but few actually believe in it.
News to me.
Is she hawt? If so, is she willing to date an overweight, pale-skinned geek who hasn't been outside his parents basement in years?
If she meets those criteria, who cares what she believes? I say go for it!
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Why wrap dating, a personal choice that is driven by forces we have little control over, with how we intellectually chose to value people?
For a long time I perferentialy dated blond women. Does that make me a bigot? No, it means that there's some part of my lower brain function that found them more physically attractive than the alternatives (ie, non-blond women, or non-women). No matter how I might have rationalized it, there was no real choice in the matter for me.
For a comparably long time I have refused to engage in more than trite conversations with people who believe that the positions of the planets determine our lives in a meaningful way. Does that make me a bigot? In this case it probably does, because I have intellectually, and rationally, decided that everyone will be better off if I spend my limited time on earth improving society using other means.
Dating and intellectual engagement are two different things. They might on occasion overlap, but they are driven by two wholly different forces.
A far better question is: should we, as self-appointed keepers of rational examination of the universe, spend our time educating the ignorant, and working against forces counter to our views like, in this case, astrology? For some the answer is yes, for some the answer is no, and that makes for an interesting discussion.
Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
The Absolute Sound, back in the day, was a literate, thoughtful magazine devoted to high quality sound reproduction in the home. It was heavy on the "listen to it and describe what you hear" and tended to discount the "hook it up and measure it" methods of testing. Nevertheless, it was wonderful. The publisher, a guy named Harry Pearson, had some belief in astrology. He described it as just an indicator and didn't seem a slavish adherent but just the fact that a guy so dedicated to rigorous thought expressed precisely could assign any weight at all to such nonsense floored me.
Now, here's why I get twisted around. I let my subscription go. There were some problems getting it to me; their servicing bureau screwed up. The focus of the magazine had started to diverge from mine. And that whole astrology thing really bugged me; it put me over the top.
But...should it have? Pearson's writing was as good as ever. Pretty much all of the contributors were excellent. The magazine was worth the money just for the entertainment value. Yet I let it go because the head guy believed at least a little in astrology, even if it was just as a shorthand for understanding personality types. In the years since, I've come to believe that I acted wrongly and let prejudice against a perceived willful ignorance lead me to a decision not in my self-interest. I should be willing to ignore harmless affectations.
Yet I couldn't. *This* one really bugged me. Why, I wonder? And is the same true of others? Yes, I'm willing to denounce astrology as stupid but I shouldn't toss away its adherents, should I? After all, they can otherwise be wonderful people.
Why is astrology such a deal-breaker for so many of us who consider ourselves fairly intelligent and logical?
Okay so the women half of "people" are covered in the article!
Are we gonna discuss the men half of "people"?
Does anyone have an idea if "men" believe in "Astrology" or rather in "Ass-troll-gy" or "Ass-measure-ology".
A better question is: Do scientists really want to shrink an already small number of people that would consider boning them!?
I am scientist. Been for a long time.
I have seen so many scientists who are complete and plain retards in matters of ordinary life, who believe things that make just no sense at all, that I am kind of surprised the question is even posed here. Most of these scientists should be happy if a girl, any girl, loves them and tolerates their quirkiness.
Besides, it has been scientifically proven that the season in which a baby is born correlates with the qualities that child has, in terms of health, smartness, and even temper. Granted, correlation is very small, but this almost qualifies as astrology, doesn't it?
Oh well, rant off.
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe.
H.G. Wells, "The Outline of History"
A scientist should not engage in any discrimination or avoid ANY opportunity to reproduce based on a potential mates' cultural or spiritual composition.
In reality, science itself is a fiction that is like a cultural artifact possible only in the best of times where surplus is amazing. The same conditions allow for music, arts and a general amount of intellectual hedonism that include such activities as scientific pursuits.
Scientists are no different than anyone else and most I have worked with do absolutely nothing to reconcile the principles that dictate their research and discovery methods with how they interact and engage the world on a personal level. Rather, most successful scientists are marvelous manipulators of social order and perspective hence their ability to sequester funding in such financially homogenous environments as the United States with NIH, NASA etc.
The poster who has taco breath asking the question is not a scientist nor understands scientific culture. A scientist would not ask a question like this. Remember eugenics? Try and imagine any rational basis for who should reproduce with whom and you end up with bullshit. None of it ever makes sense in the long run because the algorithms and lessoned learned we all have in our DNA are more robust than any single generation could ever hope to appreciate.
I know general burrito didn't ask about reproducing, but dating, the definition of which in most casual discussions is a very tedious predictable and circular rhetoric. Again, if you want to sound like a scientist you don't float in that kind of ambiguity but go for the throat and ask a more essential question, or find one. I, masquerading as a scientist might approach the question with an answer fashioned toward reproduction.
Since scientists don't really exist, instead expressing conditions that select for this activity; the answer is overwhelmingly YES. Given the challenges and limits scientific acitivity have on socialization in general if a scientist can reproduce it is their obligation on many levels to make the attempt. The attempt I 'trust' being dating.
I read a year or two back that some study concluded that kids born during the summer have double the chance of schizophrenia. Pretty weak astrology, but it does make me wonder about friends with summer birthdays.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Just because she believes in astrology and forest spirits doesn't mean that she rejects science and logic. Most folks who believe in astrology believe that it works on a spiritual realm, where (to most folks, IMHO) science simply has no foothold - after all, we cannot point to a specific chain of chemical interactions and say with authority that one's soul resides in it. They use mathematics and intuition to derive what they believe to be meaning for something that most of us don't believe they can be applied to (of course, a good share of 'em also use it to con and scam, like any other endeavor).
Besides, this whole article as based on a bad assumption - that women generally regard astrology as some sort of religious/spiritual sign-post.
Long ago, I have regarded science to be a means of understanding the tools and constructs by which God runs things, much like how we (built in His image after all) do the same thing here in the secular world (e.g. right now you're staring at a prime example of Man using science as a tool to accomplish a goal - your computer. Who says God can't/doesn't do the same to accomplish His ends?).
You don't have to be an Atheist to love and pursue scientific endeavors (else Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, Galileo, and a whole host of other great scientific minds would've never bothered).
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
As a scientist there is much we have to "believe" in for our universe to work. We are awfully good at looking at the trees through the prism of the Scientific method but as far as looking at the forest, "Not so good". For instance, let's take the Big Bang. We all know Newtonian's laws and the modifications of the space time required for relativity as formulated by Einstein. All things work well until we wind down to the beginning. Then everything goes to hell. We can't explain what was before, why it collapsed, how the forces we know now broke down and why it exploded. We have to have a lot of "faith" and it's not understood.
I've been around enough to hear about how close the Grand Unified Field theory is and how close Quantum Mechanics is to being figured out with larger accelerators. The Higgs Boson ties it all together but we haven't found it yet. Without it we can't even explain mass or gravity. Understanding black holes, why the universe is not at Absolute zero and thus not moving, etc. requires a lot of "Then a miracle occurs" kind of logic.
So as scientists we're really good at the what and the description, we have a mixed record on the how and we're really lacking in the why.
Astrology is pretty determinant on the why and how and not so predictable on the what.
So as far as dating someone with different beliefs, look in the mirror. Other than your hubris, are you emperor wearing any clothes.
Wrong, quite frankly.
People seem to think that being a scientist is like working a day job, 9 to 5, then leaving it at the office. It'[s not. Science is a 27/7 way of life. You think it would be OK for your local pastor to go home and give up offerings to Zeus? Then why should it be OK for an astronomer to go home and read horoscopes.
Spirituality, outside of very general and non specific "feel good" pastimes, has no place in the life of a scientist. Belief in myths and superstitions shows a lack of rational thought and critical thinking, and suggests a poor understanding of the scientific method. Anyone applying for a scientific position who put something like homeopathy, astrology, UFO or werewolf hunting, or new age paganism on their list of hobbies would make me seriously reconsider their application. And yes boys and girls, saying you go to church every Sunday would have the same effect.
A lot of people will probably think I'm a bigot. There's not a lot I can do about that. I feel justified in my views here, and I don't hold anyone to any standard I would not keep myself. I don't think it's a lot to ask. A scientist is not defined by the experiments they run or the papers they write, but by the way they observe and explain their world. Any scientist who has a "spiritual experience" will not ascribe it to some transcendental force or mythical being. They will instead ask why they felt that way and look for the underlying, falsifiable causes and effects which explained what happened to them.
If you're not willing to do this, not willing to live your own life to the same standard as your professional logic, you're not a scientist. You're a Cargo Cult Scientist. You walk the walk, talk the talks, run the experiments and write the papers. But you only have the form and lack true understanding and willingness to espouse the scientific method.
But anyone can change, at anytime, and anyone can be a scientist. The first step, is a healthy dose of skepticism.
May the Maths Be with you!
StoneCypher is Full of BS
If you're more concerned with science vs. astrology than common belief systems about how to spend money and raise children, you probably shouldn't be in relationships.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
Actually, I'd find that a rather fascinating, creative delusion.
I can think of lots of different types of "stupid" and my guess is that you probably wouldn't find all of them stupid. Compare:
1. A mentally retarded person who is optimistic and happy. Seeing a pretty flower makes him happy even though he has no idea what it is called, or how it grew where he found it.
2. A genius level intellect who is always unhappy and irritated. There is nothing he can see which could make him as happy as person #1.
I find them both stupid in kind of orthogonal ways, and I am convinced there are many more dimensions of possible stupidity (your example being kind of stupid in the "reality" dimension, I suppose)....
The important thing is to determine if someone is attracted to you/loves you as much as you are to them. Lots of faking here.
BTW, astrology probably once had some rationale: pre-industrial life and diet was highly seasonal -- gestation and infancy would be affected and could generate certain tendencies.
The assumption being that men are scientists? The question makes it seem that women's magazines are the sources of astrology influences, implying it is the women who are possible believers in astrology.
So then it's implying that the "scientists" are men?
And we wonder why girls don't want to major in Physics.
Best read in good ol' Monaco 9 point.
I know I am going to get slammed on here for this, however Astrology is far more than just predictive. In fact the few Astrologers I know have said that the worse part of Astrology is trying to predict the future because it is so inaccurate. When you look at a person's natal chart, which is a snapshot of the planetary positions at birth, all you see are the Astrological conditions of that person's birth. One Astrologer told me it is just a tool to help you figure out what makes a person tick. It is akin to the Nature vs Nurture argument where the question is a person made up of his DNA or the environment in which he is raised? Now as I believe it is a combination of Nature/Nurture and Astrology. Look at all 3 aspects and you can get a good understanding of who you are. It is really just a tool for self-exploration, for looking inward and understand the whys of who you are more than any predictive tool.
Do an experiment. Date some girls who believe in astrology. Some will probably drive you crazy. Some might not.
Personally, if she wants to read the horoscopes fine. If she spends half her time drawing up charts and casting bones to tell her how to live her life, then I'm out.
Dammy
I believe that ritualized mysticism like astronomy, tarot, etc. is a great way to get an insight into your own subconscious (or not-so-subconscious) desires. It's a mental shortcut for people who need an excuse to act on what they really want to do, or find out what it is they really want in the first place.
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
Check out peteranswers.com That's sure to freak you out. Took me a while to get him to answer, but when you're with a group of people and he starts answering then come back here and start talking.
"Astrology is sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world, but so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs"
Disregarding someone because they believe in superstitious nonsense is a flawed mental shortcut? And opinion i suppose from someone with flawed mental shortcuts?
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
You can never agree on everything, so you have to decide whether your partner's beliefs are something you can live with or not. You may think you can live with their irrational and downright stupid beliefs, but even if you do, there is a strong chance that he/she can't live with your disrespect for those beliefs. Nobody wants to be made to feel stupid. If the conflicting issue is a minor stupidity that you can't respect (i.e. she loves vi/vim), then you can probably live with it. If it is a major issue, you should probably consider it carefully.
A partner with a strong, unmovable belief in astrology is likely to annoy the hell out of people with a scientific mindset, because astrology makes testable predictions about real life and can thus be proven wrong (and as far as I'm concerned already have been). If my wife still believed it in when confronted with the evidence, I would consider it downright stupid and I would have a hard time respecting her, something which would seriously hurt our relationship.
When it comes to 'spirituality' it becomes more difficult to say. When I met my wife, she was a catholic from birth and I was an atheist. I had no problems with her beliefs because her religion, as a general rule, did not put out testable predictions that could be disproved. Thus I saw no conflict between her beliefs and my scientific nature. I didn't consider her beliefs 'irrational' or 'stupid' and so had no problems respecting her beliefs. From her point of view, she was also a scientist and had no problems respecting my atheism.
If any of us didn't respect the other one, we would not have lasted long. An example would be if she had been a "young earth Christian" and believed the world is less than 10000 years old. There is a mountain of evidence to the contrary and while I can't disprove that God made it look like the world is billions of years old to 'test us', I have no time for this idea. Also, I have little respect for people that try to mix religion and science. I.e. try to pass of religious ideas as scientific (think creationism or 'intelligent design').
These days we are both Christians although I really don't want to be associated with the 'born again' loons.
Astrology is sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world.
So's religion, or any conventional dogma. Many of them can be inordinately useful in understanding people and their motivations. Or motivating people and their understanding, for that matter.
illegitimii non ingravare
My girlfriend of 3 years believes heavily in astrology. Checking her astrology websites is the first thing she does in the morning. It can be trying, especially when she tries to tell me how I am supposed to be. It has also led to a few horrible situations where she was wrongly convinced I was cheating on her (the stars told her so).
I deal with it, though. I love her, and it's one of those things you have to live with.
But, one thing I never understood... if Pluto is "an important planet for my sign", and astrology is thousands of years old, how the hell does that work when Pluto was discovered less than a hundred years ago.
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
While I don't believe the daily paper predicts the outcome of my day, I certainly believe the climate and various environmental forces at work during my conception and prenatal development could effect my overall personality in significant ways. If the moon can move billions of tons of water around all day long, why can't it effect me too? Science has proven alligators' sex are determined by the egg's average temperature during incubation so it seems similar phenomena are at least possible with the rest of the species. Maybe being born in winter, or "cooked" over the hot SC summer helps determine my disposition later in life. There is usually a thread of truth in everything (except Scientology)
"It's a wise man who rules the stars, and a fool who's ruled by them."
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
I think more research is needed to determine if :
a) Astrologer girls are 'freaky' in the sack compared to scientist girls.
b) Astrologer girls are cuter than scientist girls
c) Astrologer girls are more willing to invite their other cute astrologer girl friends over one night.
In order to determine this, I will need a sample study of 100 scientist girls and 100 astrologer girls to participate in a double blind test on these questions.
[Scorpios need not apply]
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
if she's "hot"?
/. so you'd better settle for "still warm"..
this is
I mean, for fuck's sake! We're not mystical creatures! What possible value does this article have? My job as a scientist has nothing to do with my love-life. That I am a human does.
Over-complicated fuckers.
"Spirituality is not compatible with the scientific method."
Sorry I'm calling bullshit.
You did'nt define "Spirituality" and there are many definitions of it that are perfectly compatible with scientific method.
Your ignorance and bias are showing.
Honestly. It is okay to judge people by the behaviors that they choose, which you can observe. It is okay to have opinions about other people, and decide who you want and do not want to associate with based upon what you know about them.
We will only ever have a limited set of information about any other person - even persons with whom we are very familiar and intimate with. We do not and can not know all pieces of information about a person, and so the judgments we make about anyone are by definition based in some part on speculation. Even if we did know every piece of information about a person, our judgments would be based on interpretation.
It is furthermore human nature to be more comfortable with people who seem to be most similar to us, and less comfortable with people who seem to be most different from us.
My judgment of people who choose to put faith in astrology is that they are foolish. I do not choose (if I have the choice) to be closely associated with foolish people.
This very question, "Should scientists date people who believe in astrology?" is asking the reader to make a judgment about scientists, based on a limited set of data. This, by itself, is okay, but the problem stems from the fact that the subtext of the question is that "perhaps we shouldn't be judging people on a limited set of data."
The question contradicts itself, and is therefore completely pointless and stupid. In my judgment.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
this horoscope appeared in a newspaper last year. Horoscope mistake
Blazing Spiders
Not only should scientists date people who believe in astrology (or the mystical notion of choice), we should produce and rear children with them. We're the only hope these kids have of growing up with a voice of reason and logic in their ear.
I'm pisces, and I am pleased to say it has been proved that pisces people don't believe in astrology. Jerry
I believe pharmacists should be allowed to choose what services to provide to the public on the basis of their belief system.
For example, if a pharmacist believes that increased evolutionary pressure on the population is a good thing, then he/she should be allowed to not dispense antibiotics to people who believe the earth is 6000 years old.
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
I am an atheist, proud and true. I do not believe in *anything* that can't be proved. Unfortunately, I have to accept a lot of things as "probably true" barring evidence to the contrary. My wife is a catholic who reads the horoscope, go figure.
It is a good marriage. Every now and then, however, when we talk about those who have passed away or deeper meanings of life or what have you, it forces a reconciliation between philosophies. Sometimes a fight, sometimes a a discussion, either way, it can work.
So, should scientists date "believers of things?" Sure, but you have to be ready to "accept" the person "as-is." If you can't do that then it won't work.
Guys, if any women are actually reading this, we are collectively sooooo not ever getting laid.
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
inundated: 1. to cover with a flood: overflow 2. overwhelm
Women may be inundated by something from fashion magazines but given the single page devoted to horoscopes in most issues, astrological nonsense isn't it. And next time, think before you AskSlashdot; by your logic it would be 'normative' for men to believe that women exist solely for them to gaze at their various physical attributes, depending on what magazines they partake of.
If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention.
Now for some good news: by following the above steps, you will develop a mathematically sound personality that society actually needs, and, more to the point, every one of the linked personalities gets laid and so will you. Study your personality, make the set of behaviors etc. your own, and date only people who have an astrological sign that complements the one you've chosen using the above steps! When faced with a choice, read the astrology section of a trusted newspaper, and just do whatever is prescibed for your chosen personality. The only caveat (and really it is the only one) is not to mention your true birthday, only one that fits in with your chosen sign, if anyone asks. This is just to keep from having to explain the science behind your choice every time you mention it. If the relationship gets to be very serious, just invent a story about a botched birth certificate, for why your identification doesn't show your "true" birthday... As with nicknames, people will understand that you have a different "official" birthday.
FAQ.
Why is this better than a traditional horoscope?
The traditional way of determining astrological signs for selecting a personality is flawed because there is an unequal distribution of births by month. (It's not the only thing true about birth months, incidentally! Check out these studies linking lifespan and month of birth!) Also, your physical birth month will be a function of, how can I put this delicately, your parents' mating habits, so it's less than scientific...
But won't twins have the same checksum?
Duh. It's an astrological sign. You know, normally based on birthdate...
But won't people cheat and just keep picking different checksum schemes until they get the "
First of all, it assumes that the hot women who believe in astrology would date scientists. Ergo the entire premise is fatally flawed.
(the same would apply were the gender roles reversed)
Now, to answer a wee bit more seriously... I think it happens, but it's probably pretty rare - those tend to be personality types that are way too opposed to work together most of the time. A person with a "real" science-based worldview is going to have a lot of trouble dealing with someone who believes in nonsense like astrology. I think the astrology believer would be more open to dating a scientist than the other way around, long-term.
What I have seen over the years is that a lot of people who claim to not believe in astrology (and don't read horoscopes) will, however, go out and talk about a person's sign and say generalisms like "Joe's a Scorpio, so that's why he does that". Astrology is unadulterated crap. But there might be a sliver of reason to the idea that some personality trends may be formed at least partially by the season in which they were born. That wouldn't shock me at all.
-- Josh Turiel
"2. Do not eat iPod Shuffle."
How can this be something of any interest to us - this is not Hello Magazine. It's not our business, telling others who they want to see.
Apart from that - scientists may not have much confidence in the validity of astrology, but however little reason there may be, scientifically, to believe in it, it is not something we are able to definitely prove false. Just like that other far fetched superstition, Christianity.
I don't think most astrologers believe that the planets somehow directly and physically influence what happens here on Earth; they do, however, believe that it is something that can be observed, even if they can't explain why it works, and to tell the truth, there hasn't yet been much serious, rigorous, scientific work on the subject. I can understand that; there are so many other subjects that are much more likely to produce valuable results - but believing in religion doesn't in itself make a person stupid. One has to keep an open mind - there is a story about Niels Bohr: Once, Heisenberg came to visit Bohr in his office in Copenhagen, he noticed that there was a horseshoe hanging over the door, and he asked him: "Surely you don't believe in that sort of nonsense?" - And Bohr answered: "Of course not; but I am told it works even if you don't believe".
How many people really take this seriously? I may be demonstrating the no true Scotsman fallacy, here, but how many people who read astrology actually believe it any more than they believe in four-leaf clovers or knocking on wood? I suspect that, for most people who believe in astrology, their daily horoscope or astrological sign is in no way relevant to them. They read the horoscope, laugh about it if it comes true, and in no other way let it affect their lives.
The principal point should be whether the stars says that you two are made for each other, of course.
It's hard enough to get a date as it is without pre-rejecting everybody who believes something beyond that which can be proven. Besides, show me a scientist who believes nothing beyond that which can be proven and I'll show you a liar.
Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
I've always felt this way about hemeopathy and alternative medecine. I was married to a woman that believed and used hemeopathic mixtures and alternative medical techniques like colonics. In my mind, endorsing these products and ideas is as silly as believing that the earth is flat. In any case, we discussed how homeopathy works -- serial dilution to increase the potency of natural products that induce various ailments -- as well as the dangers of alternative medicine, and she stopped using these methods. I think it becomes problematic when your partner deliberately continues to subscribe to a way of thinking that he/she knows is blatantly contradictory to modern science.
I dated a lot of girls that were either religious or astrology-nuts, or where otherwise mentally misguided, but i keep on trying to get them to enter a serious discussion about this stuff they believe in, and get them to admit when they are being inconsistant in their beliefs. If they find a way to combine their irrational beliefs with the grand scheme of science (e.g. religion: god set down the basic rules, but doesn't influence us anymore, astrology: nice old tradition that gives guidance like a magic-8-ball gives guidance) i usually let them be. If they don't accept that their concepts are illogical, this usually indicates a very closed-minded and stubborn character to me, and these fundamental differences usually end up destroying the relationship in other indirect ways.
I know that i am not sounding too tolerant of religion and voodoo stuff, and might be calles closed-minded because of that, but i have logic on my side, so i insist that i am at the least right-er than people that have inconsistent world-views (and usually deny it)
your starsigns are compatible
We know for a fact the weight of celestial objects effects things here on earth with the moon effecting the tide. A womans period is oddly the same timeframe it takes the moon to go through its phases. Maybe in a million years science will be able to track and prove that miniscule gravitional forces throughout the universe does have a small effect on our perception of reality and therefor our disposition to life.
... of course not ...
As to it predicting that all people born in late February or early March finding true love today
*DrugCheese rants*
While I believe astrology is bogus, I had a PI who always said that the phase of the moon could affect results.
A merchant is someone who buys and sells things, sice when do you have to be literate to do that - especially when transactions are face to face and in cash?
I saw an article in this series and one of the traders featured gets prices by SMS but has to get someone to read them to her.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
With the consensus that astrology is complete nonsense.
While it is general in nature, and yes, there is truly crappy astrology out there, I have found that it can be an invaluable tool for general guidance.
Also - if you study general traits for people of a particular sign, you'll find that, more often than not, they do match up. With exceptions, for sure, but again - I said GENERAL guidance.
I found it purely by happenstance, but those of you who are open minded about it - go to tarot.com, or else use the google gadget in igoogle, and just for a week or so, check out your horoscope on a daily basis. I found them to be so completely relevant to what was happening in my life that I check them daily now.
It's hard enough for a geek to land one of the hotties. Are we supposed to disqualify them just because they are stupid? If you want intellectual conversation talk to your friends. If you don't have any intellectual or intelligent friends then go find some. I can't believe anyone could even ask this question. My dog can't do calculus, but she still makes a great companion. If you are that picky maybe you don't deserve to get any action. Actually girls who believe in astrology/spirits/ghosts etc tend to be highly suggestible. They are great because you can persuade them to actually stay with you if you like them. You can persuade them to do pretty much anything. In the end that matters a lot more than swapping syllogisms with another brain in a jar.
Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves that we are virgins.
About a year ago, I wound up sitting briefly (we were both having coffee at the same cafe and worked for the same university) with a prominent research geneticist and wound up having a discussion about religion and it's role in science. For someone who'd put science in such focus in his life, he was remarkably open-minded about religion (paraphrasing, but along the lines of "to be as adamant about the non-existance of god as a lot of atheists are seems kind of closed-minded, especially if you're a scientist and supposed to be figuring things out, not just assuming they are the way you want"). But anyway, he also went into a tangent about astrology -- as an example, i think, i forget how we got into it as a subject -- and how maybe it isn't planets or what-have-you, but rather the general temperature patterns during gestation that affect personalities, IE, gemini's are bastards, cancers are sensitive etc etc because during gestation they had colder or hotter womb temp averages, and he had seen in his own work how minute temperature changes in utero or in vitro could affect outcomes drastically and dramatically. Makes more sense to me than "oh, saturn was rising when you were born so you're fucked forever!"
FreeBSD for the impatient.
"Just because she believes in astrology and forest spirits doesn't mean that she rejects science and logic"
Funny, I thought that's exactly what it meant.
Oh, it is...
Just to point out, there are plenty of men who believe in Astrology too. I also think many of the comments have equated scientists with men. Not to be a huge liberal hippie douche, but don't assume everyone reading the comments is a dude. Women do read Slashdot, and making broad generalizations like, "Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines," seems a bit like a stereotype. So let's not make this thread into a Dude's Club, but more of a Dude and Dudettes club.
isn't the premise of science that it is supposed to be effective regardless of belief? i find it strange that so many self-defined scientists ended up arguing over what is appropriate to believe in, instead of whether belief is appropriate at all. in the process, they also seem to forget that belief is mutable. this fact goes against the belief of many believers, and one can't help but be suspicious that those who fail to consider it may be believers themselves. "everybody believes in something" is a defense that believers commonly call upon, but this only indicates that they haven't met (or don't believe in) any actual scientists.
...on how good she is in bed.
There's no failure quite as dissatisfying as a complete and total solution to the wrong problem.
Most men can put up with an astounding amount of BS for a little bit of pussy.
To quote the devil (as George Spiggott):
"If you can put up with whatever drivel spews from their mouths until half past three in the morning - you're in!"
Asking whether scientists should date astrologers is nothing like asking if a catholic should date a muslim.
It's much more like asking if scientists should date catholics.
Catholic + Muslim is an issue of whether people of one religion should interact with people of another religion. Scientist + astrologer and Scientist + Catholic are an issue of whether you can take someone serious as a scientist if they also associate with someone who has beliefs that can not be scientifically validated.
But since we seem to be pretty accepting of scientists that go to church, I don't see how we can be too worried about scientists who date people who go to church. Whether the person is catholic, Muslim, or an astrologer.
Especially if they have a nice rack.
Back to serious - the whole question is based on the biased assumption that somehow astrology is 'less' of a religion than Christianity/Islam. Everyone would be up in arms if it was suggested that scientists don't date Christians. So what does astrology matter? If we're going to accept omnipotent beings that create/control the universe, what's the big deal about destiny controlled by movement of the stars and planets? This whole topic is just a 'Monotheistic religions are better!' attack.
paintball
You'll realise it's not worth the hassle.
First let me say, not all us ladies read those pieces of crap magazines.
;-)
Second let me say, not all scientists are lonely men. (My sister is a chemist, happily married. Yes, there are other, single women in her lab. No, you can't have the number.)
Third, let me say that the horoscopes in said mags, or newspapers, are meant as entertainment, and of course are vague and could apply to anyone.
Astrology is not just another tool of divination, like tarot or I Ching or picking petals off a daisy. It is a system of looking at the flow of energy in the universe and how it affects you. You can use it superficially (like the horoscopes in the paper) or you can study the vast amounts of information available and discover that no, it's not meant to predict anything, it simply points out things that you are or are not prone to and YOU, as the master of your own destiny, can choose to use that knowledge to help yourself - or not.
Quantum theories about how all matter and energy is connected and interacts only help to prove to me that astrology is not so easily dismissed. If the moon can affect when I have my period, why can't Jupiter affect when I'll be in a good mood to throw a party?
Now last, let me say that there is more to a woman than titties. Well, most of us, anyway.
Sheesh. Where are all the other geek girls in here when you need 'em?
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
Astrology is not such a bullshit as some might believe. Putting aside the connections to stars and all, it is really mostly a method of stereotyping, based on statistical analysis of data. People born in a particular period of the year tend to have similar mood patterns. This is not such an outlandish claim if you accept that the initial and boundary conditions may affect somewhat the further evolution of people's characters. Yes, I am a scientist, but I have my own reasons not to reject totally Astrology. Some time ago I met a woman who was Gemini. Well, read the description for that sign folks: http://www.astrology-online.com/gemini.htm It is all true, unfortunately. I cried like a baby :(
This is just another potential area for compromise.
If two people click and want to spend their lives together, why not let them work it out for themselves instead of trying to come up with some sort of "best practice" which isn't going to cover all cases anyway...?
Mainframe/UNIX Bit Twiddler and long time Windows/Linux Hobbyist.
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
You should know by now no amount of factual evidence can overcome "Modern science can't yet explain...". Anything you post will be met by some rewording of that nonsensical claptrap.
He is right about one thing though, when he says
"We don't convince others of the things we know in our mind by shutting them out completely."
He's correct. I for one don't even bother trying to convince them. With 6 billion people on the earth, missing out on someone who thinks "Modern science can't yet explain..." is a valid argument isn't going to make me lose sleep.
Unless it's a hot chick, then all bets are off.
I've been slowly undoing the magical beliefs of my wife and it's only taken me 10 years to convince her of the lack of any real basis for her beliefs. She has, however, really caused me to take a hard look at this system of astrology. I have found that it would appear that there may actually be some kind of correlation between birth month and some personality traits, at least regionally.
All the social and cultural pressures aside (which probably account for the most of it) I have wondered if there actually could be a physiological mechanism at work here.
It has, after all, been shown that the bodies chemistry and metabolism do change throughout the year in time with the seasons. I wonder if gestation at differing times of the year could have no effect on the child.
Read my Very Short "Stories"
"Date?" In that case the real criterion is: "are they hot?"
Now if the question had been "marry"... OK, I don't think anyone can answer that one for anyone else. But if the couple is too far apart the relationship is unlikely to last. But who cares for a few dates / whatevers?
Sorry, just kidding. There is no such person.
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
So, yes, if you take the type of person who is likely to be attracted to a life of contemplation & meditation, and allow them to do so, they're often going to reach the same result. But which is the simpler theory - they are all being affected by various external supernatural agencies, or the structure of the human mind tends to the same result from different starting conditions?
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
it is not just women but all people. Kids are not taught ( public and privet schools ) how to think in a critical or skeptical manor . They are inundated with " BAD " science and pseudoscience from birth to grave by the schools and media ( mostly the media) . One tool ,that i like, is never taught it is a "baloney detection kit" see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Demon-Haunted_World .
"I don't pitch OpenSUSE Linux to my friends, i let Microsoft do it for me
I am a soft atheist (really need a better word), so I do consider most forms of religion to be silly at the least.
That said, I also find most forms of makeup to be silly -- either she's pretty enough already, or the makeup is only going to make it worse. So something being "silly" is not enough reason for me to not become involved with someone.
Now, if she was, say, a racist, that would be different, because I actually see that as wrong and hurtful. Same if she was constantly trying to convert me -- or if she insisted that our children be raised Christian, rather than at least being exposed to what their father believes.
So, about astrology: I would certainly want to talk about it, and I would find it silly, and say so. But most likely, it would be alright, if she was otherwise an intelligent and interesting person. What would not be alright is if she insisted on, say, planning weddings and vacations around astronomical things -- or if she refused to associate with a friend of mine because that friend happened to be born at the wrong time.
And I would argue that the alternative -- seeking out someone who sees the world exactly the way you do -- is going to get very boring, very fast.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Whats the harm in believing in psychics, tarot card, etc. My wife of eleven years has long believed in psychics, ghosts, etc. One day she saw a psychic and the psychic told here I was cheating on her and had been for our entire marriage. We had recently gone through a major move overseas and she had been disheartened about not being able to find a job so she was in a fragil mental state when this guy got her ear. All it takes is a seed of doubt to be planted to change your life.
hypothetically, if they could get a date!
Just like the Mathematician Dating Formula
A group of Mathematicians got together on a Saturday night and worked out that if they could actually get a date they would go for a girl who is:
'Age of perfect girl' = 'Own Age'/2 + 7
There is no God but Lucas, and Yoda his prophet is.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
What is this doing on the front page? The story is biased, offensive, and inflammatory.
An attempt at debating a subject that cannot be quantified is a FOOL'S ERRAND.
Even the VATICAN has stated that one thing is faith and one thing is science.
This kind of discussion is ridiculous . . .
What if I told everyone that I know a programmer, a white, educated, and very logical geek who - at the same time - practices HAITIAN VODOU as his religion?
If I did that, people would totally start flaming and humilliating, and it is NOT COOL - WTF?
The topic is similar to sexuality. It requires tolerance and respect. It does not lend itself to logical debate, as the individual's experience cannot be QUANTIFIED.
Bah. I am going to Hacker News now.
SARAVA!
When I first joined Mensa, I think I had assumed that a group of people with high I.Q.'s would be rational enough that there wouldn't be any astrologers among them. But there are, and even more surprising, the astrologers in my local group were all people who had much higher I.Q.'s than my own. Some of them even had advanced degrees. I've tried to get verification for their beliefs, wondering of course if it was possible that my rejection of astrology was premature. But their explanations always got so convoluted that I couldn't follow them. Maybe they were trying to baffle me with bullshit, sort of a Mensa snipe hunt. No, all that I was able to verify was that they really do believe in it. I still don't.
I realised that commercial astrology was just a money making machine when Jonathon Cainer was interviewed by Jools Holland at the new year hotteny-wotsit, and said something like "it will be interesting to see how much influence the newly discovered sedna has on our lives". What, you mean, now you know it's there? Surely it would always have had an affect?
Back in college I had this Astronomy professor. The first day of class he would always state, "It's Astronomy, not Astrology, and it's Cosmology, not Cosmetology. If you thought differently, you are in the wrong class." Someone would invariably leave.
Anonymous Cowards suck.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
My astrological profile (Aquarius) flatters me by telling me I'm rational and open-minded, the traits that caused me to become an agnostic leaning towards the ultimate heresy of atheism and to become a scientist. Depending on who you talk to, they also say the age of Aquarius is nearly upon us and is ushering in another intellectual renaissance, the likes of which will perhaps see religions, superstition, astrology, and other magical thinking marginalized and replaced by understanding. I would like to believe that as well. It's almost like the practitioners of astrology signed their own death warrant in a futile attempt to win me over by telling me what I want to hear, damn them!
Nothing drives me crazier than mystical prognosticators who predict their own downfall and then say, "I told you so, see, I'm right! And now I'm out the door so you can't continue to debunk me!"
A compelete discussion thread dedicated to people arguing about whether to reject people for dating based on their belief in astrology,reveals why /.ers don't have girlfriends.
Scientists not only should not date them, but we should burn Astrologists for being witches.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
I will have luck in the romance department tonight it said.
... which until today remains to be shown!
I have a really elegant proof for Fermat's last theorem. If this sig was only a bit longer...
Make cheese not war 8:)
Though the concept underpinning the question is interesting--that being social interaction in a pluralistic culture--there are better ways to breach the subject. It's pretty ludicrous to pose the original question as a generic yes or no proposition. Don't even get me started on how offensive it is to...well women for example.
Ok that being said, now I can be totally hypocritical and give my two cents. Every individual can choose with whom to associate, in regard to personal relationships, however the please. If one wishes to impose stringent criteria on association (e.g. no white people, no cab drivers, no Christians, no gamers, no lefties, only people born on Tuesday, only democrats, etc.) then that is his or her right, however ignorant or laudable others may find that choice. There are no hard and fast rules governing personal relationships, and I don't think I'd like to live in a society that imposed them, either legally or morally. Keep in mind I am talking about purely personal relationships. Personally I see no reason to foreclose on a relationship without actually knowing the person. I've actually learned a thing or two by interacting with people who think differently than I.
PS: There are probably biological and systemic social ossifications that shape our choices of association, but those kinds of things are a lot harder to 'get at.'
If you wanna, I can dig up article on how some exorcism killed a boy/girl ? Or how some parents refused cancer treatment on their kids but wanted homeopathy / naturopathy ? If belief did not kill or influence negatively the live of those which are not protected against it (aka:kids), then I would not care shit. But as it is now people should fight against those belief when kids are involved. And parents which favorize non-evidence based quackery instead of real medicine should have their parental right removed. No appeal.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
I think some people are way too casual about having incompatible worldviews with a significant other, but then again, I'm a person with very firm atheistic beliefs. Maybe if you are agnostic, for example, you can tolerate someone who believes something which, by your view, could potentially be correct.
But if your mate believes something which you see as patently foolish - like the idea that everyone needs to be "saved" by believing a Jewish prophet rose from the dead to wipe away the sin of a woman eating a piece of fruit because a snake told her to do so, despite all evidence to the contrary, and despite a total lack of explanation as to how the cherry-picked oral histories of disparate societies written 2000 to 4000 years ago relates to human events - I think this deep disagreement about how life works will lead to bitterness and problems. It's hard to conceal contempt.
And yes, I'm braced for the blind Christian hypocrisy of Slashdot's low-modded fundamentalist users.
We want some answers and all that we get
Some kind of shit about a terrorist threat
- Ministry
Which method - radiocarbon or by slicing thenm and counting the rings?
Slicing to count the rings is no longer approved of; drilling is the preferred method.
(There's probably a "rings" marriage joke here, too, but I'm too lazy to find it.)
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
Because I'm a man who believes in astrology and I'm dating a woman who's a scientist.
:P
Eat my paradigm breaking existence.
TRHOnline - Staggering Towards Brilliance
No, stay with me. I don't believe in hocus pocus.
I once did a teaching course, as I was teaching basic IT skills in an evening class. One of my fellow students was teaching astrology (I was rather glad to hear that it wasn't subsidised in the same way as the IT classes were). So I got to learn a little bit about it.
He was completely dismissive of magazine horoscopes, and said that a proper horoscope involved far more detailed plotting based on the exact date, and a dialogue between the astrologer and the client. It soon became apparent to me that the star stuff was pretty much just a starting off point for some self-examination, coached by the consultant. You can make the same argument for tarot -- the cards you get are arbitrary, and their meanings are deliberately ambiguous, meaning you can use them to kick off some rather productive brainstorming.
because if she was to start like 'praying' for stuff she'd have totally passed over into a different place.. I mean blasphemy and all that. I'd be tying her to a stake down the garden within seconds.
I see this as a basic problem of economics and supply/demand.
... and really like sex.
See, I'm a scientist (male). I would prefer it if women, including those who believe in astrology, preferred to date male scientists, especially in my age range, and that male scientists didn't want to date women.
That way demand for me is high and supply of me is low, making it fairly easy for me to date cute women.
Oh, and they should be rich too
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
While I agree that there's a need for tolerance in civilization, that doesn't apply inside my home. I don't tolerate many things at my home, being religious / spiritual is one of them, but outside my castle, my domain, you can do whatever suits you & makes you happy ;)
They're plenty intelligent girls out there that doesn't "believe" in anything, there's no need to get involved with the ones that are "practitioners", in a relationship way.
Carlos Niebla
I'm failing to see why considering spiritual beliefs in choosing a girlfriend is a problem. You're already discriminating based on gender, attractiveness, personality, interests, maturity, etc. I don't hear many people suggesting that "she's totally selfish and immature, but that's no reason to rule her out." If you think her spiritual beliefs are idiotic, maybe there are better women to be spending your time with.
This thread has been farked.
We should link back, thus crossing the streams and see what happens.
fark
Astrology is a technique, or maybe a set of loosely linked techniques. A technique is a process or method used to accomplish a given task or to achieve some desired result. There is no point in saying a technique is "right" or "wrong" ; the only relevant criterion is whether it works or doesn't work. If it manages to produce the desired effect, then it "works". Otherwise, it "doesn't work".
I did give a try to astrology, and my conclusion is that it doesn't work. But i don't see any point in being dogmatic about that. Most paradigm shifts in human knowledge were initiated by challenging ideas that were considered "obvious" in their local cultures. Just make up your own mind.
(Yes, we do exist on /.!)
If you're making dating decisions based on strictly rational/demonstrative criteria, you're likely to have a long and lonely life. You should date someone because you're INTERESTED in them. If you keep it up long enough, you may end up falling in love with someone who likely disagrees with you on certain issues. Astrology may be one, or religion, education, politics, or porn. Guess what? PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT! You have to learn to get along, and decide AS YOU GO whether the differences add to your relationship, are tolerable, or irreconcilable.
Shopping for a date with a checklist seems to be a symptom of a society that is increasingly unable to actually interact in person. Do people talk to strangers on the bus anymore? Generally not unless they're insane dust-lickers, and that's a pity. Human interaction is good for us all.
My advice to finding a healthy relationship: Quit looking for dates that meet certain criteria. Then quit looking for dates. Start talking to people. Make friends. Cook supper for some people. Maybe you'll find someone in that process, and maybe you'll end up with them for the rest of your life. Maybe not, but you'll at least have had a richer life than the person shopping for a perfect match on the internet.
(Although various forms of "modern" dating--internet dating, speed dating, and so forth--can certainly work for some people.)
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Astrology is not merely "sort of a flawed mental shortcut for understanding the world." Astrology is trying to optimize your life by trying to extract extra information out of the Universe. It is not spirituality in the sense of Christianity, Islam, which is the worship of a being who by his nature deserves worship. Nor is it spirituality in the Buddhist sense of realizing that pain is caused by desire, so to eliminate pain you must eliminate desire. Astrology is more akin to folk religion, where you attempt to bribe the gods (with worship, money, etc.) to give you what you want.
Astrology is using amplified noise a guide to life. Since the information they want, namely information about the future, is non-existant, attempts to extract it from patterns of stars and planets must fail. Astrology is sort of like drawing a constellation from random dots. It sure looks meaningful after you draw the lines, but you've not decreased the randomness at all.
On the other hand... I'd probably just use the extra time surfing pron... so maybe I'm better off not knowing.
Wanted: witty unique signature. Must be willing to relocate.
Scratch out the simple part and you're golden.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
One of my ex girlfriends was all into making my "chart" to see what was rising in what sign, and all sorts of other BS. So I lied - told her I was born on Feb 30 (there is no Feb 30 - ever). Got a "reading" of all sorts of things that she thought I was like - "See it fits you"
Then told there is no Feb 30, was born on March 2 (another lie) - got a similar reading (cause my stars were still closely aligned).
Finally told her my real birthday was in August. She got mad and didn't want to do any more horroscope crap around me again, AND we still went out for over a year, before broke up w/ her. She wanted to plop out some kids, and I wanted grad school - so I said later.
Mesg is - just put up with it. It's a harmless thing they do, as long as they aren't making serious life decisions because of it. If they won't buy a house, cause the stars are wrong, or want to buy 10,000 shares of a stock 'cause of the stars, then dump them.
..........FULL STOP.
I am an atheist and she is a catholic.
We have not had too many problems so far. After a few years of caving in on going to christmas mass I put my foot down and refused.
But we will have to see what happens when we have kids and I will want to keep them from being brainwashed, and she will want to have them subjected to CCD.
Overall, she is a great person, and I couldn't be luckier. If I had discounted our relationship because of her believe in magic, I would have missed out on the greatest thing in my life.
Should scientist date people who believe astrology, only to make them change their minds?
What certain people should try is choosing their partners on different reasons and stop finding stupid pretexts to reject beautiful relationships.
Astrology is not a spiritual belief. Astrology is stupidity. If you stay with this girl, you are setting yourself up for heartache down the road when her illogical (or should I say non-existent) thought processes bring some inane belief to an issue of consequence.
The Internetâ(TM)s #1 Wholesale Janitorial Supply Company. Everyone is Our Customer! See our online janitorial supp
Only in alternative universes where geeks are considered hot. Did you see that cutie in the article? Are y'all trying to tell me that you are rejecting that? Oh let's be honest how many geeks are rejecting ANY woman?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eucharist
Nobody really believes in Astrology. If they did, they probably shouldn't be dating you because you are an opposite sign or something, but they are. So they don't really believe, it's more a inspirational thing. The dictums are so wide in scope as to allow for any interpretation. Think of it as the I-Ching of occident.
It's the same thing with religion. Most people don't really _believe_ in religion, you know, it's more a folklore-political kind of think. To test it, try randomly slapping people at a christian meeting and tally how many offer you the other cheek.
So don't worry, people are _rational_, even if they say they aren't. Just don't believe what they say. Of course if you find somebody that won't get out of bed and lose a job, due to a bad horoscope, then of course you should revise the relationship.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
Horoscopes are wrong because the Earth's slow precession (changing orientation of the axial tilt) has shifted the zodiac constellations over a month from their "original" positions when horoscopes were created circa 3,000 years ago. Need version 2.0
Weather prediction is a model. It works quite well unless to try extrapolate too far into the future. The model's validity is limited to a few days and trying to use if beyond that produces unreliable results.
Newtonian physics is also a model. It also works until it is taken too far, then breaks down. It's fine for building bridges, driving, flying etc, but breaks down when you start getting to a significant fraction of the speed of light.
All models have their limits and become invalid when you exceed them.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
I point out that you're using the word 'precise' where you should be using the word 'accurate'?
Avoid Avoid. I am a Physicist and this is certainatly not true for me. This is a silly subject to debate, whether we should date someone or not because they believe. I do not believe for a second that astrology works but I would date someone who does. The thing about the predictions are that they are vague so can fit most situations that will arise in a persons life so can seem true. Sometimes they can fit more closely and people start to think it can't be a coincidence. Also they tend to be uplifting, positive and make people feel good about themselves (money would never be made if people didnt like them :p). Put all this together and you find that people want to believe in something, want something to look forward to and if it makes them happy its not such a bad thing. What is bad is the money the writers make from it. The phone scams that make fortunes. Its all about taking money, greed.
I'm probably coming to the discussion too late for anyone to actually read this, but:
Has anyone stopped to consider that just maybe there might be a shred of truth to astrology? If nothing else, people who believe in it may subconsciously shape their actions and interactions with others to make astrological predictions self-fulfilling.
I am a rational, scientifically-minded person that demands proof before belief. I have personally witnessed enough anecdotal evidence in support of there being *something* behind astrology that I feel it warrants further investigation. It could just be an exercise in self-fulfilling group psychology, or there could be a deeper connection. Also, the patterns in the sky and the patterns in human behavior may simply both be expressions of a deeper pattern. (Correlation does not necessarily equal causation).
I am saddened that any real discussion on the topic is halted by knee-jerk reactions. Far too many of us regard "Science" as a religion, devoutly upholding beliefs in that which has been published before, and discounting the possibility of alternate explanations, in a blatant violation of what science is supposed to be about.
If the math says that the universe is really wadded up on itself through higher-dimensional folding, is the thought of everything being connected in a way we can't see through our limited three-dimensional perception filter really that bizarre?
Knowledge != Intelligence
... of 2000 years of scientific development....
It is not that astrology is important, it is that he did not know any better!
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I dropped several possible relationships for that reason.
Look guys, if one is not religious you don't want a religious nut trying to impose his or her point of view on you.
This is one of those things in which you really have to think long and hard about the situation.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Is the OT joking?
Rule for Nerds Seeking A Female:
If female is alive and doesn't run screaming within first 10 seconds
then she is fair game for a l4m34553d attempt
Alive is optional.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Really... why discriminate against star gazers?
...... poor, celibate, sod.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I am firm believer in science and generally disregard religion as anything but a comfort zone and crutch for others not up to the task to view a bigger picture than a human-centric point of view on Life, the Universe and Everything. Astrology falls right in line with this, simply using older religious references to ascribe meaning to the movements and alignments of planets, attempting to easily write off how things work. Scientific methodoloy give us a direct analysis of "how" things work in the world. All that being said... no line of reasoning or faith give us "why" things work. Intelligent design is another phrase for "too lazy to read", but we are one hell of a beautiful accident. And for all of the amazing leaps in analysis of the Universe and its origins, peering through distance and time to see the early formative years of our large home, no one can fully explain or understand a Big Bang. I'm not suggesting it is God, but the Big Bang Theory is just as much a matter of faith as, "Let there be light..." It simplifies our understanding to a degree and gives us a jumping off point to follow up on the how again. Is science merely an analytical religion?
For Slashdot, that's quite an accomplishment.
Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
It's easy to answer, once you phrase it like this: Should you continue to date someone you can't respect?
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
Its not that interesting dating someone who believes the same things you do, it gets old fast.
Astrology is not what you read in the paper either. What you read about in the papers and magazines is limited, for the most part, to sun-sign astrology (I like to think of it as bubblegum astrology). There are eight more planets plus other interesting astronomical features that help to differentiate every single person (yes even identical twins) from everyone else. There is a lot of math behind the scenes. I programmed my TI-85 calculator to determine Placidus house cusps over 12 years ago based on where and when a person was born. It involved calculus and factored in the distortion of the sky due to differences in the shape of the atmosphere at different places on Earth.
I have enjoyed astrology in my life as a hobby, and never "believed" in it as a science or a religion. Just like knowing a bit about someone's past can help you gain perspective on who they have become today, I feel astrology can serve as a useful barometer on personality. Since so many factors contribute to each person's astrological makeup, there's no way, I believe, you can pigeonhole people based on this information; or for that matter predict their actions. People who do are no different than those who say all techies are pale-skinned geeks with pot-bellies and receding hairlines.
Written by an airhead (Gemini Rising, Sun-sign Libra, Moon in Aquarius - or more simply a Libra for those who like bubblegum astrology).
Had to catch my breath before I could explain to the crew and patrons what was so funny.
You can't take the sky from me...
Actually Astrology is based on ancient chinese astronomy and dates back many thousands of years. It is all about tracking planetary positions and mapping them into a symbolic langauge of positions. It was used to determine crop planting and harvesting and as a way to measure time and location. So in fact it has very scientific roots. Over the ages, wise elders studied the stars and their positions and found correlation to other living systems which are cyclical and began to identify trends and aspects of things that appeared to be correlated in people. What emerged was a type of psychological langauge framework that describes how certain planetary positions influence living systems including people and animals, possibly through DNA influences at the quantum level. One precept of astrology is that there is free will and ones DNA and astrological influences do not determine your fate. The other is that time twins (people who share the same location and time of birth to within a few minutes), will have the same predispositions in many areas as compared to other people with very different charts.
Astrology is a language describing planetary time and position in relation to star clusters first and foremost.
What I find most interesting personally, being a computer scientist and computer language designer (a person who designs symbolic information representation systems), is how quickly people who have not done even the slightest bit of research into "real" astrology are willing to cast their "flawed" opinions about a most worthy area of study from my perspective.
A wonderful web site that you might want to use as a point of beginning inquiry is:
http://www.nightlightnews.com/
I have had only one reading done in my life which was very interesting and informative. I had it done by the famous author and friend of Tim Leary and Robert Anton Wilson, Mr. Antero Alli (who is also an excellent independent film director).
If you want to judge a subject, better spend at least a few hours reading about it from well respected and expert practitioners before denigrating it in ignorance.
Shame on all you lazy and prejudiced slashdotters, ready to form an inquisition. Ignoramouses....
SimBuddha
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
You're dating a person, not an ideology. Who cares what (s)he believes, what matters is how you relate to him/her as a person. If you're going to let something as silly as astrology is going to get in the way of your relationships, you're in for a very lonely life.
-JS
Vanity of vanities, all is vanity...
Should scientists date people who believe in astrology? Shouldn't that be up to each individual scientist? I'm a scientist. I'll date whoever the hell I want to date, and the fine members of Slashdot aren't going to influence that. If you're a scientist, you should be able to ask yourself that question and come up with a reasonable response fairly quickly. If you really feel that you can not be with someone who has an illogical belief, then I'm afraid you're cutting yourself off from most of the dating pool (but that's your prerogative).
I see no problem with people who believe in astrology, just as I see no problem with people who believe in yetis.
A person's beliefs are NOT a good indicator of the person's ability to think rationally and clearly.
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
Only women believe in astrology. I've known about an equal number of men and women who believe in astrology, personally.
Stupid assumption number 2: Women believe what they read in fashion magazines, if they read them at all. I haven't read one in a decade, but even at the age of 13 I thought they were mostly bullshit. I just thought the clothes were pretty. Most women I know take any fashion magazine with a large grain of salt.
Stupid assumption number 3: That any women would want to date 99.9999999999999% of the people responding to this post after reading the comments. Sheesh, people.
Stupid assumption number 4: What, women aren't scientists?
I, for one, don't really understand the point of this entire article.
Who cares, and just how hard is it to "tolerate" ?
This comes off a bit condescending, methinks. "Science versus the unwashed, uneducated masses" kinda thing. Okay, I used to be like this too, and constantly chided my wife over it. However, over several years, I have to say, experience has made me rethink my position, to a degree.
First off, while Astrology is indeed flawed from the aspect of Polar Progression, I have found most people to be uncannily similar to their "sign" designations, nonetheless. Is this merely "Life imitating Art"? It could be - especially if the persons knew what their sign was supposed to be like, and believed in Astrology. But many people I know don't follow any of it, and yet, they are as predictable in their behavior as their sign would indicate. Maybe it's just the season you're born in, and therefore has more to do with the Earth than the heavens. Maybe not.
I don't think many people take Horoscopes seriously, which are mostly entertainment and general good, if not vague, advice. Even hardcore astrologers acknowledge that you cannot lump everyone together so simplistically.
For some reason though, people throughout millenia have believed that the nature of the heavens has some influence on us. Logically, it seems such beliefs would be the result of observed behaviors, for which then an explanation is sought, rather than the other way around. Something had to influence people to believe there was a connection of some sort. It seems an awfully strange thing to just make up..
Most people opposed to astrology cite the fact that the gravity of distant planets could not possibly have an effect on people from such vast differences, and I agree - there's just one problem with the whole argument - who ever claimed the "effects" were due to gravity? For all we know, there is still some unknown force of nature undiscovered, unnamed. It's far fetched, but anyone who thinks we've discovered it all now is sadly mistaken.
Science is indeed the way to truth, but it also requires that one keeps an open mind (without letting the brain flop out), and is subject to revision at any time new data or evidence is brought to light.
Just sayin'!
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
and I am fine.
I just have this penchant for my turtleneck and tweed blazer with cords..
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
Should scientists date people who read fashion magazines?
(Would anyone want to?)
Should Bayesians date non-Bayesians?
I've always thought that Douglas Adams' take on astrology was suprisingly insightful, from "Mostly Harmless":
The rules just kind of got there. They don't make any kind of sense except in terms of themselves. But when you start to exercise those rules, all sorts of processes start to happen and you start to find out all sorts of stuff about people. In astrology the rules happen to be about stars and planets, but they could be about ducks and drakes for all the difference it would make. It's just a way of thinking about a problem which lets the shape of that problem begin to emerge. The more rules, the tinier the rules, the more arbitrary they are, the better. It's like throwing a handful of fine graphite dust on a piece of paper to see where the hidden indentations are. It lets you see the words that were written on the piece of paper above it that's now been taken away and hidden. The graphite's not important. It's just the means of revealing their indentations. So you see, astrology's nothing to do with astronomy. It's just to do with people thinking about people.I've always found that reading my horoscope, and comparing it with myself in person, is both amusing and insightful -- amusing because of how wrong it is, and insightful because I have to be introspective just to work out how wrong it is.
Thanks for the civil tone of your question. :)
Of course I can't give an exhaustive explanation of why I believe in Christ here, and to be honest, my belief did not start with a philosophical examination - though I did come to that later on. However, I would say that since the most important claim of Christianity is the existence of a God who is infinitely intelligent and has His own goals, it is at least consistent with that belief that He will not submit himself to scientific tests unless He wants to. I believe that God is a Person, so you can't put him in a beaker and test Him unless He consents to that.
Astrology, on the other hand, purports to be a very predictable system of drawing correlation between two sets of observable events; human and astronomical. It's trivially easy to show that these predictions are false as often as true, or general enough to be meaningless.
Furthermore, and more importantly to me, astrology makes no conceptual sense. If human events are correlated with the stars (or more accurately, with earth's movement), then there must either be a physical mechanism for that which isn't apparent (cosmic mood-inducing rays or something), or there must be an intelligence behind it, pulling the strings - which, as far as I know, is not claimed.
I guess I would say that the concept of astrology seems to be too simple to stand up to critical thought. Reformed Christianity poses some difficult questions, but I think that it's internally consistent.
Why would anyone date a scientist. Their story is always changing. Everything is theory rather than fact. You could never trust anything they said. And apparently they think they are superior, too. Scientists kinda sound like assholes.
I think anyone trained to be objectively observant would tend to see in humans a strong wish to make sense of the randomness of life. It may even be an extension of how we're wired. We tend to see patterns in everything - an abstraction that can be related to things we already know.
Einstein, as a result of the Holocaust, probably had a tough time believing in the traditional Jewish portrayal of God. However, there are so many ridiculous coincidences in fundamental constants of the universe that had to occur for life to be viable. When you add intelligence that it's hard to not see some hand behind that.
Whether that means we're all running in a simulation space or that vastly more powerful intellects engineer universes. Neither is falsifiable experimentally (yet) so the details are up to individual preference. I tend to think that's what he meant. It would have been nice to ask him though.
Apparently, the argument is quite complex.
Bullshit.
People date whomever they choose to date and the rest of us are jackasses in questioning whether-or-not they have any business doing so. Who the hell are we to even ask if they have a justification to explore their personalities together? Just because someone has a belief that the other does not doesn't make them less interesting. I feel slightly dumber for having ever run across such crap.
Horse Pucky.
I am Jack's smirking revenge.
Ok, you so sceptical people ..... answer me this (or better still, answer yourselves this): how do you know you're not asleep?
Can't quite do that? (well, you do have to commit to taking the question seriously, for starters.)
So what makes you an expert on astrology, then?
Sheesh.
Should Scientists Date People? :-)
[] Leonardo Kenji Shikida
As an atheist, I've dated Christians, spiritualists, as well as other atheists. In the end, while I enjoyed the company of people who believe in the supernatural, I knew I could only spend the rest of my life with another atheist. But I wouldn't have known that unless I got to know other people too. The whole point of dating is to get to know other people. Date as many different kinds of people who will date you. Learn about other people and what you dislike, like etc. However, I suggest being very selective about who you marry based on the data you collect while dating.
i\hbar\dot{\psi}=\hat{H}\psi
How dare you refer to Jesus Christ as a holy zombie! He was, so far as I know, quite intelligent. And had magic powers.
So... I'm thinking lich is a more likely creature type.
I'm an economist. My wife is a physicist. She's been known to say, "Economics is a social science... like Astrology."
Ouch
Women are inundated with astrological nonsense from fashion magazines, so it is normative for them to believe it
Uh... that's kinda sexist.
Terrorists can attack freedom, but only Congress can destroy it.
I know lots of male scientists and engineers who voted for George Bush, twice. At least Astrology is sometimes right.
I'll sum up here what I said there. - Astrology is not a "spiritual belief". It's an ordinary belief. (Specifically, a misguided superstition). - Hiring on the basis of grades and test scores is not a "ridiculous heuristic". These reflect on students' motivation and inherent aptitude; in the absence of more meaningful data, they're the most useful metrics available. - Obsessive compulsives may harbor strange beliefs, but those beliefs stem from an anxiety disorder. Last time I checked, astrology wasn't mentioned in the DSM-IV. (Perhaps it should be.) To sum up, the article is stupid. Deciding whether to date someone who believes in astrology is a personal decision; there is no "right" or "wrong" choice.
I think it would be a terrible idea to say that people in one category should or should not date people from another category. Let people decide what they want for themselves.
Newsflash - Dateline 2253 - New New New York
/phoentic HmAlkjAAd)&mc reported today that he and his multidimensional colleagues have finally proven the reality of Astrology.
Astrology falls to logic!
Professor Alan 21234808 of the university at
"Yes, it does exist and can be used in many ways to explain and even control future events" PA2x23 said in a quantizied news conference from the rim of the galactic plane.
"However, I must stress that these 'Astrological Influences' are only felt in the multi universes which are bifurcated during the observation of the event."
"I truly feel the angst of those earlier scientists whose knowledge was hobbled by a basic lack of understanding of the many ways in which the Cosmos functions. But they perceived reality based upon the rules which they thought they understood. Now we that we better understand the underlying quantum chaos which we wet brains perceive as reality, it all becomes crystal clear."
As predicted in our previous issue; every one born under the sign of Gemini was hit by a big truck and died...
You never catch me alive
The fact that atheists don't believe in some things and do believe in others does indeed make them nothing much different from a Christian and the rest of them. However, the fact that atheists don't believe in a god makes them different from Christians and Muslims and Hindus and so on who do believe in at least one god. Trying to blur the meaning of god doesn't really change the distinction, it just makes it more difficult to say.
Well said!
http://outcampaign.org/
possibly through DNA influences at the quantum level [...] . Ignoramouses....
One, it's "ignoramus". Next time try "idiot"; it's shorter. Two, you should take your own advice, and read some actual science books. Ones with math. And problem sets. "Possibly through DNA influences at the quantum level" indeed.
I have had only one reading done in my life which was very interesting and informative.
And you know why that is? It has zero to do with planets, and everything to do with the complexity of the human mind. Which you are, alas, just blowing on by.
The astrologers I've talked to often have a deep intuitive understanding of human psychology, and so can say some pretty insightful things. But all the planet mumbo jumbo? That's the functional equivalent of ink blot tests. With a little structure and a little random noise, you can unlock the subconscious skills that were there all along.
Many are also skilled cold readers, which can give the impression of wisdom and knowledge without actually knowing anything. They need not be doing this intentionally. FBI profilers also don't know jack, but are apparently sincere.
And of course, astrology subjects are unwittingly complicit in this. Confirmation bias plays a big role, as do other cognitive biases. Derren Brown, a UK magician, did an astrological reading for three different groups of 5 people. After getting birthdates and one personal object each, he gave them a 4-page written document about their personality, history, and ambitions. 80% gave very high marks for accuracy, and were shocked at how detailed and personal the reading was. One person thought he had somehow gained access to her private journal. At the end, he revealed he had given everybody the exact same reading.
So I'd say that you should take your own advice, and learn something about the topic before running your mouth. If people think a fake reading is real 80% of the thime, then a personal anecdote about a supposed good reading tells us bupkis. And that's true even when somebody sprinkles some sciency mumbo-jumbo on top.
oh, right rule out dumb girls, when exactly was the last time you hooked up with someone?
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
Mind giving a link/reference to that reading by Derren Brown? I think I'd enjoy reading more about it.
If noone rtfa, then what's the slashdot effect?
It's pretty easy to trash astrology when all you know is what you've seen in newspapers and magazines but it's got a lot of good things that most young scientists should investigate before they dismiss it out of hand.
:P
I studied astrology after meeting a beautiful girl who was very involved with spirituality. After we broke up I continued because I found it helped me enjoy other unastrological subjects that I was interested in like psychology, astronomy, calculus and physics long before I became involved in science.
Here are a few interesting byproducts that a budding scientist can receive from studying astrology...
1) Obviously the history of science is full of alchemical and astrological references so by studying the pseudoscience you end up knowing where you came from as a scientist without the dryness of a formal history course.
2) Although calculus wouldn't be the first thing you think about when you're speaking about astrology, I had to learn the math before I could fully understand the more esoteric calculations and theories I was working on during my studies. Long story short, my theories turned out to be silly in retrospect but without it calculus would have been too intimidating to even contemplate learning.
3) Drawing a cool looking horoscope with all the planets and aspects is beautiful and mathematical at the same time.
4) How can you beat Astronomy, Psychology and girls all together in one subject.
Unlike Sunday newspaper astrology where it's mostly predictive and in the end suspect, real astrology should be more about personal growth and understanding yourself through intense analysis of ones personal relationship with the world and other people. The key being that you do it to find out about yourself.
Actually, there was a February 30th in 1712 in Sweden.
--- At my sig, unleash hell.
Yes, considering the average demographic reading /., I don't think it's wise to preemptively rule any girl out. That is, unless you're in the minority around here that has already gotten rich off your great idea.
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
Mind giving a link/reference to that reading by Derren Brown? I think I'd enjoy reading more about it.
I haven't seen anything on line, but see his book Tricks of the Mind, "Cold Reading", page 320 and forward. It contains the full text of the reading. Fabulous book, BTW; I paid to have it shipped from England, and it was totally worth it.
it's not like I'm going to ask here anyway.
Really, it doesn't require advanced scientific knowledge for her to bake me a pie, does it?
Yes. 100 years after the widespread use of electricity, and we don't have a grand unified theory. What a bunch of hooey! A few years ago, we didn't even know if fission was possible. Hooey! Science is all hooey for not solving ALL the questions RIGHT NOW. A few years ago we didn't have a hubble telescope, and now that we do, the scientists can't use it to explain the origins of the universe by my next birthday! Bah, I'll just lump science together with astrology and scientology. It's all the same.
And btw, this article wasn't about dating people with different beliefs; it was about dating people who believe in astrology, a very specific and very well debunked idea.
-b
No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
Could you make the same choice?
On the other hand, I think that lying to her about his birthday would be enough reason to dump him right there. Not because it's dishonest or because it's secretive... but because he's being a contemptuous prick.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
One does not have to have a science-based job to be labelled a scientist, in my opinion. If you use your intellect and observation, and perhaps experiment a little and accept other peoples' experiments (as long as they are rigourously carried out), you can be a scientist - even if your actual job is an english teacher, a nanny, or the president. By this definition, we really have no idea as to what the gender proportion is. As a female scientist (yes, with a science degree), I find that the summary did, in fact, have poorly chosen words (I don't think the writer was intentionally sexist).
Why is it that 'skeptical' thinkers reasons for disbelief usually always have something to do with the other person being evil? They seem to assume that all astrologers are 'fakers' to get peoples money.
It took me a while to realize that all those things lurking in the shadows went away when i actually opened my eyes.
The instant people decide to learn for themselves the truth of an issue, they have at their fingertips every resource they could ever need to make their search both fast and rewarding, so ignorance in this case is very much a choice.
Astrology in particular is very powerful, because it's very hard to ignore or discount the experiential evidence once you find a decent source or two. I think in a large part, the reason there is so much resistance is that once one accepts astrology as something more than a fiction, one is required to question every other aspect of one's life which was once regarded as safe and secure. That's scary and life-changing, and hobbits are easily unsettled by the prospect of adventures.
-FL
Terminal lurker can't stay quiet this time, I present Exhibit A: Roger Culver, tenured professor of astronomy at Colorado State University, has been married for quite some time to an astrologer. Here's the kicker: they met on the Oprah Winfrey Show. Opposites attract in the most severe case, yet there are quite a few similarities. I realize this article is more relevant to "should they or shouldn't they," but these two did and have been happy for quite some time. They are two of the nicest (and nuttiest...) people I have ever met, I was a student of his for some time in the late 90's. In a completely bizarre twist of fate (nay, twas in the heavens...), the Rocky Mountain Collegian has a complete article TODAY (3/10/08) on their marriage and life together:
http://media.www.collegian.com/media/storage/paper864/news/2004/04/08/VervetheDishLive/Astrology.A.Question.In.The.Stars-1704021.shtml
Nice people, but I am a complete skeptic. I obviously doesn't deter them, though.
Astrology like a lot of esoterical and religuos things, is based in statistical facts. Its statisticaly correct, but the explanation is wrong. There are several scientific explanation based in thing like the age you have when you beging kindergarden that explain a lot. I personally prefer to think that whe are in a Matrix and the program who give each person a personality, use the position of the stars as a seed.
How else are scientists' genes to be preserved in the population? If scientists didn't fuck ditzes, then in two generations we'd all be hair stylists, systems analysts and astrologers. So just turn off your conscience and do it!
Of course it would be best if _both_ halves of any offspring's genes were from scientists but female scientists are so rare anyway and most are ugly enough to make the stiffest woodie wilt (consider TRG = "Typical Rice Girl").
So one-night stands are OK but don't get in a long-term relationship. Best to carry fake ID and drugs (including Viagra) for above-mentioned problems.
I can't help noticing that you haven't made any assertion to the contrary. Were you?
Notice the article opens with the line "While searching for my soulmate...". lol! As to believing things which are dubious, start with phenomenology and the whole conundrum of consciousness, and ... who am I talking to again ...?
most scientists would choose astrology and breasts over a bunch of /. nerds and their opinions.
The simple fact that so many here consider astrology to be a form of religion is evidence of just how little informed people are on the subject.
Don't look at newspaper horoscopes. They really are nonsense.
If you want to know whether there is anything to it or not, there are a number of excellent sources worth examining, but it takes a little effort. Most will never, ever bother to look, because they believe, right down to the core of their beings, that they already know the truth of the matter. --And they 'know' this without ever having properly tested their beliefs. I didn't want to be yet another of the countless hypocritical sceptics out there, and so I gave it some effort. I discovered that I'd been blind and ignorant for many years. This site" runs a very detailed, free astrology page. --That's worth exploring and taking the ten or fifteen minutes to track for a few months. Anybody who says they don't have time for that is just making excuses.
Another is a book by Theodora Lau. It's called, "The Handbook of Chinese Astrology". I've seen more than one hard-core sceptic stop to seriously re-think things with that one. It's VERY specific. Dig around for that at your local book store or do the Amazon thing.
-FL
So horrible, it's linear!!!! I thought it should at least looks like some kinda log curve!
Please die.
By E.Jit
Posted 2/26/09
THURSDAY, Feb. 26 (BadHealth News) -- Whether it's a frisky kitten or a tubby tabby, a cat at home could increase your heart attack risk by almost a third, a new study suggests.
A similar study conducted in 2008 indicated a positive correlation between cat ownership and reduced heart disease. This prompted millions of proactive sufferers of cardiovascular diseases to rush out and become proud new cat owners. With the resultant shift in profile of the typical cat owner, we can now report a positive correlation between cat ownership and increased heart disease.
Astrology is the science of manipulating people.
Wanna fight ? Bend over, stick your head up your ass, and fight for air.
I normally say my star sign is Ophiuchus ....
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
Ruling out dumb girls is fine -- I did that, and am SO to a woman who's fine with me living the startup lifestyle (spending weekends at the office, rarely going out to dinner, deferring children pending financial security... you know). Availability of intelligent women is not so restricted as one might expect.
The thing is, one needs to be willing to compromise on other aspects -- so ruling out both dumb and ugly girls would have restricted the candidate set to the point where I don't think I necessarily could have found someone willing to make those adjustments with so little time investment in courtship as I was willing and able to make at the time when we met.
(Posted as AC for obvious reasons).
So that would make you 1 years old officially. Happy belated birthday.
It does appear there was a Feb 30th this year and I missed it, at least according to this post about some guy who used to be in Kiss playing in Buffalo that day.
http://www.hardrockin80s.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=14097
Jeruvy
For the record, no, I am not an athiest attempting to claim that all religion is crap. I'm a former follower of one religion, and now follower of another, who doesn't see that the differences between all of these paths are merely trivial.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
Nothing in the FAQ...
"It's a harmless thing they do,.."
It's not harmless. It's more people that can't think reasonably, and that is NEVER harmless.
It preys on there mind and set them up to accept logical fallacy from others.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
"...belive there is a god than it is to belive there isn't, neither stance can be disproven."
You prove things exist, you don't prove they don't exist. It's stupid and poor understanding of science to say otherwise.
Some people claim God exists: I say what are the tests?
You don't say "Flying monkeys live on the moon" and then call people who don't believe, believer in them not being there.
It's phenomenally stupid.
To claim something you must have proof, the bigger the claim, the more proof.
Atheist have a lack of belief in God or Gods. It has the phrase "Lack of belief" right in the definition.
*cough believe not belive cough*
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
unless she is hot, then have sex and dump her.
However, I doubt his story is true..or at least I doubt it didn't happen the way he's trying to make it sound it happened.
I mean, he may have tossed out feb 30th, and she blew it off because he wasn't being real about it.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Quite so! I don't know about ever breaking up with a woman over her belief in astrology, but I've definitely skipped over a few potential dates for this reason.
As someone else stated in an earlier post, the topic's main question really boils down to a matter of "How much can you, as an individual, tolerate in a relationship?"
Relationships themselves aren't strictly about "logic". (Honestly, if they were, I think people would only get married only when it made sense from a cost/benefits analysis they ran, working all the financial details. I suppose you'd have to assign numerical values to your level of concern over issues like "growing old alone" too?)
There's the whole "emotional" thing involved with dating. A good friend of mine, for example, is currently seeing a woman who is physically attractive and has a "friendly personality", yet seem the polar opposite of him when it comes to logic and reason. I don't know if she's into astrology, but she makes it quite clear that she prefers a "simple" lifestyle with as little "technology" to deal with as possible. She works in catering, and makes great food dishes, but seems to have almost zero curiosity about the world around her. Politics? No thanks, makes my head hurt! Ever wonder how come X happens when you observe Y and Z? No! Someone else smarter can worry about that stuff! Now, if it were ME, I simply couldn't carry on a meaningful relationship with a woman like that. (Yeah, the sex might be good - but I'd run out of things to say to her REAL fast. I don't like that uncomfortable feeling of having someone hanging around your place when you're out of things to talk to them about.) But obviously, they manage to get along. Perhaps he likes being left alone to do his own thing, and doesn't CARE what she does with her time? Perhaps he doesn't feel the same "need" I feel to bounce intelligent conversation off of a partner and get some in return? Whatever. Everyone has different "wants" and "needs" from a relationship.
The subject is petty, huh? Oh well, different strokes for different folks. And no, I'm not going out with you, Joe.
Seriously, I think mysticism implies irresponsibility. The stars predestined your actions, huh? No wonder you cheated on me, Aphrodite.
Dude, you act like I said you should reject a girl for not having big enough tits. But we were talking about fucking astrology, ok? I've been with ladies who were into that crap, and the laughing and enjoying our short time on Earth, was short indeed! Find someone with some sense and ethics, and you'll laugh harder, and enjoy your short time in much more intimate and satisfying way. I love my girlfriend deeply, and if I hadn't vetted out this type of bullshit, I wouldn't have been able to trust her enough for that love to be possible. Never again will I risk heartbreak on a religious nut.
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
There are a great many 'science believers' that lack proper understanding, overapply logic without understanding its limitations, do likewise with statistics and a great many other fallacies, and such people may be looked at (and desire to be looked at) as serious scientists. Such people are a far greater problem, as is the irrational belief that modern science is the one true way of thinking (I'd advocate it myself as a good way of thinking, but would stop short of calling it the only way to the truth: that's religious dogmatism in disguise.)
In any case, physicists still can't get all their laws to work together properly and mathematicians know that they can't have consistent and complete foundations to their discipline, and there are a great many examples of deep and insightful though in other areas of human endeavour that science has yet to delve into, yet comprehend, so again it is too soon to call any other kind of though unreasonable.
That said, I myself believe that astrology should be taken with a rather large truckload of salt... I mean, the idea that one 12th of the population of the earth, half a billion people, have the same future prospects is nonsense (so out go the star-sign based methods.) The idea that one 365th of the population has the same future is again nonsense (so out goes the date of birth approach.)
John_Chalisque
...never "dated" her. I never had a girlfriend because my friends always run away scared for some reason after I ask them out. But this one remained a close friend, which is unusual. She was incredibly influenced by astrology. She would blame bad rainy days on "her ruler being the sun." It was sad and terrible how she was influenced by this "science." However, they say it is wise to not talk about politics and religion, well, astrology is basically a religion and you don't want to talk about it with people.
> Mind giving a link/reference to that reading by Derren Brown?
Youtube link. See about 2 mins into video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btP_vy5cQq4
Isn't that for her to decide? I mean once you've built a rapport with a person there's a tempo and rhythm to be maintained that may include little intellectual traps like this.
Under the influence of Post-Cyberpunk Gonzo Journalism
That's just sad because I think you just implied that your SO is ugly.
"but so is disregarding someone because of their spiritual beliefs"
I disagree. If someone holds imbecile beliefs, disregarding that someone is not a shortcut, it's a defense and selection mechanism that works against imbecility.
You should afford imbecile people all of their duly endowed rights -- but it's perfectly reasonable to discriminate against the opposite sex based on the level of imbecility of their beliefs, just as it's perfectly reasonable to discriminate against the opposite sex based on how hot her/his ass is. Just as your prospective employer is entitled to discriminate you based on the imbecility of your answers at the job interview.
Imbecility is contagious.
Rudd-O - http://rudd-o.com/
You can FUCK dumb girls -- not that I'm advocating that, but hey, people tend to go that way and you know what? It's because it WORKS -- but under no circumstance should you go steady with one. Self-respect and self-cultivation go hand in hand, and if a person is content with remaining dumb, then that person is probably not going to make a smart guy happy (unless the smart guy is in for the "massive cheating on her" and not for the "loving her").
Rudd-O - http://rudd-o.com/
That's exactly the point of GP. If there is a "scientist" that lacks proper understanding, you can safely put him in the "sack" of "can't think reasonably" with astrologists.
GP is absolutely dead-on in that the world has a dire need for more rational, humanist thinking. Your objections haven't even begun to touch any of the underpinnings for that argument, so I will take your post as a commentary instead of as a rebuttal.
And yes, the scientific process may NOT be the way to truth all the time, but it has self-fucking-evidently worked much better than the obsolete figments it replaced. Any other answer depends on a dishonestly false definition of the word "truth".
Rudd-O - http://rudd-o.com/
You have, of course, taken long-term contraceptive steps, to avoid "accidents" when the retard that you're genitally wrestling with "forgets" their short term contraceptive. After all, you don't want to be wasting your breeding years bringing up another generation of retards, do you? And you're not going to waste brain cell-seconds explaining to a retard why you're selective about breeding partners (viz - not retards).
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
Astrology is a crutch to get you going - like Software Developement Methods. A few good friends of mine are Astrologers (one of them being an engineer at Siemens) and while their whole approach to it is *nothing* like what you read in magazines (Professional Astrologers know a *lot* about Astronomy for instance) I do percieve it as sort of a Semi-Science such as Software Developement Methods. They have something to them, but their relevance is rather shady. It boils down to what those involved make of it. Very much like religious lithurgy, art, psychoanalysis or search engine optimisation (to hint what I think of webdevs who offer that as a key feature).
... lets call it 'Shaman', as opposed to - lets say - an illusionist.
Real Astrologers use the Ephemerides (in fact, it's Astrologer who invented them), the best, most percise Astronomy Tables Tool is developed by an Astrologist (http://www.astrolog.org/astrolog.htm), etc. etc. And while the discussion amoungst High-Profile Astrologists like 'wether the Ajanamsa Correction is the correct way of interpreting a Horoscope or not' might seem wacky to people who consider themselves 'scientific', the same goes for, let's say, discussions over wether Perl or Java is the best tool to programm in. Just ask an accountant listening to discussions like that of what he thinks about the relevance.
Some of the most resonably people I know of endorse or used to endorse Astrology (the real thing, with stacks of books and all) or other esotherics, and allthough I don't hold as much on Astrology as they do, they are the first I go to ask for advice when I'm stuck with a personal problem.
I used to use even more irrational ways of analysing people - by throwing runes. And of course I know how the runes fall has next to no meaning in itself - it's all about the way I learn to ignore that fact on command and open my mind when interpreting them in relation to the question I 'asked the runes'. That's what makes a good
Astrology, as much as anything else involving understanding the complex nature of humans and what makes them human, is a support. The actuall 'miracles' are performed by the people using it in the right manner. Which may, of course, vary from Astrologer to Astrologer.
My 2 Eurocents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
*sigh* I get so sad reading this sort of debate.
Does the sun rise in the morning?
Does the moon rise at night?
Do they have any effects on our world?
Can we agree that these are immediate effects that are readily perceived by everyone in a grand way based on time? Okay. Let's talk about time.
Time is at the center of our consciousness. I saw a video, can't remember who it was, but the lecturer started explaining how calendars shape consciousness. I didn't agree with some of the later arguments, but felt he made a very accurate opening observation. Calendars determine when people pay bills, rent, mortgages, and sub-prime loans. They also determine what is old and what is young. They determine how often people are paid, they determine when the banks come collecting. Within the family, dates are important for birthdays, deaths, marriages, divorces and when the relatives come visiting. As well, don't forget a woman is a lot more aware of time than a guy. Time always passes with events in space.
Anyone can observe shifts in consciousness on seven year increments. As with everyone, they will vary, based on immediate environmental and familial factors. Folk wisdom even indicates that the body rebuilds itself once every seven years.
0-7 is the definition of self.
8-14 is the family definition.
15-21 is the social definition.
21-30 is the world definition. (Mid-life crisis anyone?)
Obviously when we're thirty looking back on seven, we begin to feel how perceptions of time differ with age. It becomes evident how major events in our younger lives colored our perceptions. Unless the changes were major within space, like moving from country to country, or changes to family, perceptions will stay relatively similar throughout life. Consciousness sees the immediate effects immediately, but the slower effects take time to be seen. We can see the sun rise and the moon set, but the rotation of the stars is much more subtle. Light pollution doesn't help this matter.
So, now that we can agree that time affects consciousness, lets get back to those planets. It's based on degrees. There's a high degree of solar influence because we're so much closer to the sun. The celestial spheres are a lot farther away so their influence is going to be of a much lower degree. Of course, the environment doesn't necessarily have anything to do with one's free will. What happens if free will is aligned with the stars? Well, the North and South American indigenous peoples applied a lot of import to the heavens. At the time, the Western World was going through enlightenment. Look at the results and prevalence of the attitude that grew out the dominant culture. Where are we today? What have we learned?
It's easy to let our scientific orthodoxy try to recontextualize history. But isn't it a mistake to allow our current lens cloud the full picture of history? Is this perhaps why we say history repeats itself? Perhaps the thing to learn is that every culture has it's own collective lens of perception.
Our scientific methodology has resulted in wonderful technology. It's so attractive that things like ipods and computers dominate our lives, sometimes making life easier and sometimes making it harder. The lens of perception with technology is only limited to your googling abilities and willingness to learn, since it's all there on the net. Without the scientific method, we wouldn't have the internet and be able to learn about things like ice core samples from the wiki.
Ice core samples indicate that in times past, the earth can change rather quickly. They also indicate we have higher concentrations of carbon dioxide than ever before. We've introduced a new variable into our atmosphere.
At the very least, processes that have been occurring with a regular frequency are overdue. Any human consciousness that is not aware of time on a larger geographic and cultural scale will inevitably try to reduce observations to an understanding that is framed
Neutiquam erro
A close friend of Tim Leary you say? Is THAT supposed to me trust him?
It's a wholistic system of looking at a human, but your all into the classical scientific notion of being bits and pieces of 'clocks' or 'machines'. Its also 6,000 years old so it must be doing something right. But its the wholistic aspect that grabs white male scientists by the short and curlies. Check out Acupuncture, Ayurvedic, Homeopathy, Chinese and Native American herbal medicines. Yup! all wholistic therefore not yet part of the western scientific paradigm yet. Expand your minds.
I see no reason why somebody who experiments with astrology couldn't be destined for a scientist.
All 19 hijackers were known terrorists 09-10-2001. Lack of FBI intelligence does not justify warrantless wiretaps..
It's no wonder I never read the comments on slashdot any more.
- Wogbo
Indeed, he did. But as he laid out, you have a much easier time finding someone willing to compromise in your favor if they have the impression that they are getting someone more attractive / more financially secure / otherwise on a higher rung of society than they are. "Marrying up" as they say.
One of my ex girlfriends was all into making my "chart" to see what was rising in what sign, and all sorts of other BS. So I lied - told her I was born on Feb 30 (there is no Feb 30 - ever). Got a "reading" of all sorts of things that she thought I was like - "See it fits you"
You told a girl that your birthday was Feb. 30 and she didn't stop and say "Be serious"?
No offence, buddy, but I don't think you were dating the sharpest tool in the box back then.
The dirty little secret behind the polygraph is that the "test" depends on trickery, not science. The person being "tested" is not supposed to know that while the polygraph operator declares that all questions must be answered truthfully, warning that the slightest hint of deception will be detected, he secretly assumes that denials in response to certain questions -- called "control" questions -- will be less than truthful. An example of a commonly used control question is, "Did you ever lie to get out of trouble?" The polygrapher steers the examinee into a denial by warning, for example, that anyone who would do so is the same kind of person who would commit the kind of behavior that is under investigation and then lie about it. But secretly, it is assumed that everyone has lied to get out of trouble.
The polygraph pens don't do a special dance when a person lies. The polygrapher scores the test by comparing physiological responses (breathing, blood pressure, heart, and perspiration rates) to these probable-lie control questions with reactions to relevant questions such as, "Did you ever commit an act of espionage against the United States?" (commonly asked in security screening). If the former reactions are greater, the examinee passes; if the latter are greater, he fails. If responses to both "control" and relevant questions are about the same, the result is deemed inconclusive.
The test also includes irrelevant questions such as, "Are the lights on in this room?" The polygrapher falsely explains that such questions provide a "baseline for truth," because the true answer is obvious. But in reality, they are not scored at all! They merely serve as buffers between pairs of relevant and "control" questions.
The simplistic methodology used in polygraph testing has no grounding in the scientific method: it is no more scientific than astrology or tarot cards. Government agencies value it because people who don't realize it's a fraud sometimes make damaging admissions. But as a result of reliance on this voodoo science, the truthful are often falsely branded as liars while the deceptive pass through.
Perversely, the "test" is inherently biased against the truthful, because the more honestly one answers the "control" questions, and as a consequence feels less stress when answering them, the more likely one is to fail. Conversely, liars can beat the test by covertly augmenting their physiological reactions to the "control" questions. This can be done, for example, by doing mental arithmetic, thinking exciting thoughts, altering one's breathing pattern, or simply biting the side of the tongue. Truthful persons can also use these techniques to protect themselves against the risk of a false positive outcome. Although polygraphers frequently claim they can detect such countermeasures, no polygrapher has ever demonstrated any ability to do so, and peer-reviewed research suggests that they can't.
[source]Somewhere, a sociologist just died when you tried to claim that because I don't know what a Higgs boson looks like, he doesn't know why a person acts the way they do.
Social scientists are scientists too. They're pretty good at "why".
The rest of your rambling sounds like a lot of justification for being an idiot. It's perfectly fine to not believe scientific ideas that can't be proven. I know physicists who don't think black holes or Higgs exist for good reasons. That doesn't mean you get to write off everything that can be proven. Just because we don't understand something does not mean it has not happened, or does not exist.
Thanks! I had read about this, but not seen the video. That's delightful!