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.
But rememeber, you can fix a lot of things but you cant fix stupid
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Beggars can't be choosers....
Where are we going, and why am I in this handbasket?
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.
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.
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.
Not at the office it isn't. Spirituality is not compatible with the scientific method.
Outside of work, no problem.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Think of the children... No, seriously, think of the children.
I would give Astrology some merit if it weren't for the countless scientific studies that consistently found it to be without merit. Astrology, like Psychics, employs simple psychological tricks in order to get the believer to believe that the horoscope applies to them, when in fact what it says could really be applied to anyone.
Astrology isn't "spiritualism". We're not talking about religion or believing in a higher power. We're talking about parlor tricks. Even if the alignment of the stars and the planets did have an effect on the world (and it would be ignorant not to investigate the possibility, I'm certainly not saying that science has proven otherwise), astrology certainly has not demonstrated any such phenomenon.
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
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.
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.
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
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
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.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
It's called stereotyping. And if the characteristics being stereotyped are relevant to the judgement, say like a belief in astrology indicates some degree of ignorance, gullibility, or even stupidity, then it's not bigotry. Another example, I wouldn't let an ex-felon (especially one convicted for embezzlement or fraud) near large amounts of money in a business. It's just common sense.
"Kinky sex involves the use of duck feathers. Perverted sex involves the whole duck." - Lewis Grizzard
Interesting - you believe in salvation through a holy zombie despite a total lack of explanation as to how the reanimation of dead bodies relates to human events ?
OK, let's at least get this clear: the resurrection of Jesus (you know, the fictional one) did not involve zombies. Jesus did not hunger for the flesh of the living. Instead, he actually came back to life.
We're talking Goa'uld Sarcophagus or Ancient Healing Device here, not a zombie virus.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
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)....
No, but it's not inherently incompatible either; they deal with nonintersecting domains. Science is concerned with that which can be empirically tested. Spirituality is handy for things that can't.
When people try to apply "belief" to things which can be empirically tested, however, that's not spirituality, it's stupid.
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.
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 "
I'm going to call you on this one. "Very firm Christian beliefs" is a meaningless motherhood statement. That little detail aside, haven't you ever found it convenient that the "right" religion is usually the one we're indoctrinated with since childhood, or the church just down the street? I suspect precious few people in somewhere like Omaha Nebraska have ever woken up one morning and realized that the Shinto study of Hatsumiyamairi is the true path to enlightenment. Nope, people get sucked into the tried and true. ;)
No, I don't think you're a bigot. I think you're someone who has turned science in to a belief system because of your passion for the idea that humanity is "advancing". Humanity, and all organic systems, is changing. We don't get better, we get different. You're out to find the path to true enlightenment, that's cool, everyone is, through spirituality or science, it's all the same passion for finding real happiness. It's all just driven by curiosity and an ingrained inherent motivation to be "better" than what we are. Something that, realistically, just doesn't happen. Better is relative and counts humanity as significantly more important than the natural world around us. That is, of course, a very close-minded, human, non-scientific point of view. The concept of something being better -rather than different- is unfortunately nihilistic but at the same time, serves the concept of evolution much more accurately than does some passion-fueled rant that seems to scream, "If we're ever going to get anywhere, we have to drop organized religion." I assure you, friend, we ARE getting somewhere. Mankind, all life, doesn't sit around. It may be frustrating that you won't see it in your 85 year lifespan, but rest assured, humanity is indeed changing all the time. It may not be changing in a manner that's positive for YOU, but evolution will always give some biological group a chance in the limelight, so maybe you'll get lucky.
I also have problems reconciling science and faith. It does seem to me that a profound life-defining belief in something which cannot be proved to exist is incompatible with the scientific method of a rigorous and logical evaluation of evidence to arrive at a conclusion. However, i have many friends who do seem able to reconcile this, and despite their beliefs are (by any metric) excellent scientists. Apparently the logic goes something like - god created the earth/universe etc, and made it conform to a bunch of laws. We are discovering and understanding those laws to the best of our abilities, using the curiosity that god gave us. The use of scientific method provides us with the means to do it, and its ok because god doesn't intend us to live through eternity in the mud saying to each other "oh, god did that, we don't need to know about it".
So based on your post, Isaac Newton was not a scientist.
Abaddon: An Xbox 360 Indie game
There are elements to astrology that might have scientific explanations, even if the causal model provided by astrology is wrong. For example, according to astrology Leos often act as if they have something to prove. Well, in the West, Leos are usually the youngest in their school class, and at the age at which they start school that's a big difference; they're a *long* way behind their "peers" so it's hardly surprising if they learn behaviours that make them look "big". Nothing to fo with where the stars were when they were born, but (possibly) a significant observation nonetheless. Just because astrology teaches it doesn't necessarily mean it's wrong.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
I've heard the whole "tidal effect" thing so many times and it really does annoy the hell out of me.
I'll let you do the maths - but just to get you started, compare the force of gravity exerted on you by Mount Everest to the amount exerted on you by Saturn. Then compare either of those to the amount exerted on you by the moon, and then by the sun. After that, tell me if you really think the distant planets could have ANY meaningful effect.
Or, if you want to think about things other than just gravity, take a look at the different kinds of things that actually reach you from the planets. In general, far MORE of these same things come from the much further distant stars, yet those are never accounted for.
That's the short version, but in essence, I think it's completely fair to say that astrology is complete and utter bunk.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
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.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
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.