Morality of Predicting Death?

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

Poyi, if you mean me as your poor example, it is OK to go ahead and say so. I stand by everything I wrote, as well as my knowledge that led to my specific arguments.

You raise a good point about the value of defining morality. I have usually used the term ethics. I would only point out that an ethical society doesn't accept an individual morality template in cases where vulnerable people are likely to get hurt.

Speaking of the Bible, Jesus preached a radical ethics about care for the poor, widows, and orphans, as the vulnerable people of his day. He told people not to worry about the future, but to put their faith in God. He taught people to love one another, and to "turn the other cheek." What parts of the Bible do you think I haven't read or understood, insofar as it concerns death prediction?

We can trace the history of morality. In ancient Greece, slavery was perfectly legal, and men purchasing child slaves for sexual purposes was perfectly legal. But would you say this is OK today? If morality is a matter of personal conscience?

JA pointed out ongoing problems today in human trafficking. Just because some people justify profiting from this practice, that doesn't mean that you would condone the traffickers' sense of morality.

So probably you can accept that Australia needs to have moral codes not just for individuals, but for the society as a whole.

I think your post fits within the definition of cultural relativism. Yes, we do want to respect different cultures. But this doesn't mean we have to condone dictators' moral principles leading to human rights abuses.

Aren't you mistaking disagreement for disrespect? I can disagree with you without disrespecting you. I do respect you. I also disagree with some of your opinions.

If you disagree with me, does this mean that you do not respect me?

I suggest thinking through this issue.

So let me ask you a question. You've read through the entire thread. Brava. Given all of the potential risk to a querant asking for a death prediction on this forum, how would you personally justify it? Should a complete novice on a power-trip be able to predict death for a depressed teenager?

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

Marinka, thanks for your reply, but I believe I have addressed each of your points before. I can see how you have elaborated on your own perspective, but I don't see where you have engaged with my specific responses to your position.

Let me ask you the same question I asked Poyi, "Should a complete novice on a power-trip be able to predict death for a depressed teenager?"

This doesn't sound like your practice, but now that you've taken a strong stand in favour of death prediction, this is what you have just tacitly encouraged.

I note that you don't practice much horary astrology. But surely you are aware that this is where a lot of death-clock requests would be posed. So it wouldn't be the kind of astrology that you personally see as good practice for instances where the querent might be extra-vulnerable, or the astrology amateur particularly well qualified. Yet this is what you've tacitly encouraged.

You wrote, "My stance is not going to affect people - they will do what they want to do with or without my encouragement. " You don't know this. You have just tacitly encouraged death prediction with your posts-- by highly unqualified people. Can you see why this might be amoral?

JUPITERASC · Oct 9, 2013

YOU ASKED

waybread said:
...Why is doing death prediction on living people so important to you?

I REPLIED

JUPITERASC said:
Death prediction is applicable ONLY to living people

Only living people can request astrological physical death clock prediction

Similarly only living people request astrological relationship death clock prediction

YOU SAID

waybread said:
Which is a good reason not to do it. We sometimes use the word "post-diction." The techniques may be the same, but we use a past example.

I now remind you IRREFUTABLY that PREDICTING the death of a person ALREADY DEAD is not possible

You now advocate "post-diction"

which simply means that

AFTER the death of a person,
an astrologer THEN finds possible reasons for that person BEING ALREADY DEAD

AND

Since the reason for "post-diction" is obviously to IMPROVE/HONE PREDICTION TECHNIQUES

- then clearly you are arguing in support of PREDICTION

Astrology, as Marinka has reminded us, is PREDICTIVE

Marinka said:
....You did mention something which I thought was very important and had not been mentioned previously and that is "death isn't like other areas in which horary/predictive astrologers give their opinions".

I pondered this statement for awhile and realized that a death thread should be just like other threads. People should be able to come in and offer opinions even if the opinion is simply "Why do you want to know that, has something happened that you need clarity on?". I would like to see this done in a comforting way and done in a manner to diffuse the situation. New astrologers should be exposed to handling questions like this. I compare it to an experienced surgeon teaching new surgeons - the new surgeons get to operate with the experienced surgeon standing there watching every move - otherwise, how does the new surgeon learn. If the new surgeon gets in trouble, the experienced surgeon is there to take over.

My whole argument rests on the premise that if there is a transaction between two people and no one else gets hurt, why do others feel the need to regulate it or in this case, ban it.

Marinka · Oct 9, 2013

waybread said:
Marinka, thanks for your reply, but I believe I have addressed each of your points before. I can see how you have elaborated on your own perspective, but I don't see where you have engaged with my specific responses to your position.

Let me ask you the same question I asked Poyi, "Should a complete novice on a power-trip be able to predict death for a depressed teenager?"

This doesn't sound like your practice, but now that you've taken a strong stand in favour of death prediction, this is what you have just tacitly encouraged.

I note that you don't practice much horary astrology. But surely you are aware that this is where a lot of death-clock requests would be posed. So it wouldn't be the kind of astrology that you personally see as good practice for instances where the querent might be extra-vulnerable, or the astrology amateur particularly well qualified. Yet this is what you've tacitly encouraged.

You wrote, "My stance is not going to affect people - they will do what they want to do with or without my encouragement. " You don't know this. You have just tacitly encouraged death prediction with your posts-- by highly unqualified people. Can you see why this might be amoral?

I usually don't respond to each and every point as that means that the discussion eventually gets mired in the muck ... as in looking at the dirt rather than the forest. I find that it is better to look at the entire context and determine the main point (IMO) and respond to that. I also try and keep my responses short and to the point for the same reason.

As to my strong stand - it is to allow free speech if it does not hurt anyone outside the transaction (think of the 1st amendment for the US). And in this case, death prediction would fall into that category.

As to questions like "Should a complete novice on a power-trip be able to predict death for a depressed teenager?" ...

Can you please define how you know that
- person is depressed
- person is novice
- person is on power trip

Questions like this is what I mean by getting mired in the muck. No purpose in answering - hypothetical situation....

Mandy · Oct 9, 2013

poyi said:
I found it amusing and as I suspected while I was cooking my scotch fillet as dinner after night shift and while I was eating my steak, I browsed through 17 pages of replies, No One actually care to define what Morality is?

Many just used their own personal life experience to define rather it is moral to predict death. In reality, we all live in a world of many colors, never Black and White except if you have bi-color vision. I had mentioned before and each time sank into the sea of arguments. No one care to consider and Respect that everyone is different and morality really only is a subjective views of each individual in the given time and life experiences they received over time and accumulation of their education, cultural and religious background they coming from. However, often most claim to KNOW IT ALL with their single life experiences or experiences from their family member or friends or hearing from so and so, or the half read and half understood Bible, many personally selected references from books and online sources to support their own arguments as the only Authority.

I spent about 2 hrs skip reading all the replies. Then spent 0.13 second to google What is Morality?

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/morality-definition/

http://ethicalrealism.wordpress.com/2011/05/20/what-is-morality/

The answer to me, is that everyone is different, every case is different, one with the skills on predicting death should judge as per individual case, to choose the lighter shade to accept or reject to predict out of many shades of grey. There is no definite truth, at least not from the Catholic as an example. It is impossible for me to ever trust those who preach their religion yet molested boys and girls for F**K know how many decades and thousand of years, in secret and protected by their own leaders. Not a second that I thought they are the representation of moral standards. Haven't even mention how they used to treat psychiatric patients with cruel treatments and how senior nuns used to abuse their young. It is impossible for me to also 100% accept legal laws is the absolute truth to all matters.

The only Truth and truly the only, we live in a world of many shades of grey, not the 50 shades book, but as a very fact that there is no absolute standard. Western standard on death prediction will be very different to the Eastern culture, can we say the East such as Vedic and Chinese astrologers are immoral? not necessary, that would be racist to talk like that cause you have no understanding of their value system and had never been living in their society as Indian or Chinese. So how are we to judge that is immoral when we simple have no absolute knowledge about basically anything? And including morality itself, actually we really don't know what morality truly means. Each culture is different, each person have different thoughts, the way they grow up etc. So many variations, what makes one's value and comments higher than the other and be the absolute authority over the other person?

I had said many times, why people not just learn to respect everyone is different and every case is different. But again, my comments were ignored by most. Cause apparently the focus of the thread is not about morality itself, not about predictive astrology either, Oh no way close to be about about exploring knowledge in astrology, but more about Who WON the argument and be the authoritative figure. Apparently, it is all about how many charts he or she read and how many clients he or she had, and whatever references book he or she could quote to justify own arguments to WIN the argument to CLAIM to be the super Highly Moral person.

I am very amused to see many different shades of human psychology. But am very sad for a good forum being at war for so long.

Poyi, do you know how morality is researched? Most suitably it is done through vignettes.

Poyi, vignettes have been put forward on the basis of the possibility that vulnerable people sit behind the computer screen and the further possibility that amateurs do the reading. Both possibilities are separate and are a thought experiment of what is possible. You have the right to choose your personal standard of moral behaviour, nobody has once claimed otherwise.

Since you have identified yourself as a pro-death-prediction campee within the debate, members have made the effort to reply directly to your statements and ask you what you propose to do about these realistic possibilities. You have ignored these questions (and have pressed on with your own agenda). The world may be colourful but the argument is black and white: vulnerable people are a realistic consideration. Amateurs are a realistic consideration. Of course, you not replying nor exploring these shades of possibility objectively is fine, absolutely, but I am suprised that you feel qualified to judge others who do.

It is also not racist to explore the value system of other cultures. Why would it be? Race and values are independent concepts.

poyi · Oct 9, 2013

I really don't feel any need to explain myself or prove anything. People with wisdom can see and assess themselves. This is my last post.

Mandy · Oct 9, 2013

Dear Marinka, thank you for your reply. I understand where you are coming from but I feel still the need to expand on a few points, which I will do now. You say

Marinka said:
It appears (IMHO) that much of your concern being stated here is that when transactions are done on the internet, there is no knowledge of the other person or they of you. That is true initially but, as conversation continues, there can be some generalizations made about the people involved by their communications. If the person has posted their natal chart, an astrologer can determine whether they are in a crisis (transits) or whether they are dealing with long-ago issues buried in their chart (natal chart) or simply looking to see when love will enter their life again.

I understand that this is the common (I do not mean that as a derogatory term) perception. However, if I may continue to utilise the example of Sue-Ellen/Maisy, could I ask you to consider that if someone is already posing as the chart owner who they intimately know, but are not the chart owner themselves, they would have no difficulty in feigning authenticity and explaining the chart owner's current circumstances since they know them very well. If the reading is about love life, indeed, the consequences of a third person hearing the news are not dire. But if the reading is about life/death, the consequences may be not what you would have intended (Not to mention the possibility of amateur readings; free for one, free for all).

Marinka said:
As to people not being what they say they are, sometimes they shine through whatever deception they put out there.

No offence intended, but I am surprised somewhat that you are satisfied with "sometimes" when speaking about something this precarious (potentially). Surely you would not be satisfied if the bank told you that only "sometimes" a non account holder has access to your account or the hospital saying that only "sometimes" they contaminate one's blood. "Sometimes" here refers to how good of an actor they are. It just takes one bad event.

You know when you are really pressed for time and really want to ask for help, but you know that the helper stands a reasonable chance of contaminating your data (say a chart reading, for instance), you just do it yourself because you cannot risk the data contamination? Yes. This is like that. When you cannot know, really, on a forum but the reading is very intimate and potentially damaging, do you take the risk? If you would not take "sometimes" risks in enterprise which is very important to you, I reason it is fair to not take "sometimes" risks in enterprise that is very important to another.

Marinka said:
I always try and check the charts to see how old someone is (>18 years) or whether they have challenging transits and where the transits are hitting.

There is always the real possibility that the death-prediction request is not from the chart holder.

Marinka said:
Personally, I don't do horary for clients or second person interpretations. All of these are valid concerns but, I don't think that it merits banning any predictions (death or otherwise).

But is it not true that on a forum you can never truly know whether you are consulting with a first or second person (see above). If it is your rule to not do second person interpretations, then I would imagine you would apply this reasoning to forum conduct also.

Marinka said:
As to your mention of suicide ... discussions are not even allowed here, my impression is that the mere mention of suicide in a thread will result in a shutdown and lock (as should be the case). Suicide is different in that the person is in danger at that instant, it may be a call for help .. or maybe not. This forum is not the place to handle that and that's why it's an immediate shutdown.

Marinka said:
But, this forum is about prediction ... because that is what astrology is.

Perhaps I was not clear earlier, the suicide threads have been about astrological requests such as "what in my chart is causing this; why is my life so bad; will things get better?" These questions are not any different to love life questions. The only thing that makes them different is that the OP has chosen to bring up one avenue of death. They could have framed it differently. They could have said "I have been quite unwell lately, in and out of hospital, not sure what is wrong. Anyhow, can you see is death in my near future?"

Marinka said:
Maybe any advice/data dispensed should come with disclaimers or maybe with something similar like the literature that comes with your medicine.

Marinka said:
The answer is not to ban topics, it's about educating, teaching, and being mentors to the next generations of astrologers

Marinka said:
.[/QUOTE]

Now we seem to have moved on from prediction specifically and into the domain of education. My views on educating death prediction are that it requires oversight and appropriate mentoring, otherwise students -immatures- are left to doing the work of a professional. Alice recognises this when she stated that those who make mistakes do not gain clients. We know this happens.

A forum is a place to learn, sure, but again we have the issue of not knowing who is who and that members are not really committed to teaching or to staying or to answering questions, several of them even trolling. In an astrology forum we have no objective marking and amateurs are free to go around learning selectively from their mistakes (provided they actually get that rare feedback), including being ignorant also to their mistakes. Professionals on forum are not committed by any means to correct the work of amateurs. I have seen many occasions where this does not happen. It is not like surgery (an analogy you made above) because a surgery student is tightly controlled (their teacher has ethical accountability), comes to the operating table with a robust and rigorous qualification, and if they make mistakes, even on first examination, they actually fail.

In any event, who accounts for the death prediction mistakes made by amateurs on a forum? Well, it’s a forum so I guess it would be only the recipients. That is the reality. I can understand that it is cool to have a free-for-all space to learn death prediction without personal accountability, but let’s not ignore the consequences this philosophy could have on vulnerable people, whether recipients or spectators.

You say:

Marinka said:

My whole argument rests on the premise that if there is a transaction between two people and no one else gets hurt, why do others feel the need to regulate it or in this case, ban it.

Click to expand...

What does your premise that "no one else gets hurt" rest on? This is not a supported claim. Have you spoken to everyone else? You have spoken to me and I genuinely feel deeply dislodged by the insensitivity surrounding this death talk and the insensitivity inherent in the forum-approach to this type of prediction. The answer is not to tell me to get out of the conversation. I am a forum member and I have a voice. Waybread is another. Other members who made the same conclusion earlier in the thread are more. The concerns we have about morality are logically substantiated, internally, and together we give feedback about forum experience.

Now, you say that your "whole argument rests on the premise that if there is a transaction between two people and no one else gets hurt..." Now that we have established that your premise is not substantiated, for lack of evidence and evidence to the contrary, do you still insist on that argument?
Also, as mentioned to Poyi, one way to objectively analyse morality is by use of vignettes. You have just noted:

Marinka said:

Questions like this is what I mean by getting mired in the muck. No purpose in answering - hypothetical situation....

Click to expand...

We do not need to get mired in muck. That is what research is for.

may28gemini · Oct 9, 2013

Not all astrologers, professional or otherwise, have the ability/talent/skill to accurately predict death. That being noted, I don't think it's immoral to predict a client's death if they wish to know the answer. If a client is paying a fee for a service and that service happens to be said in the form of, "accurately predict when I will die," then what is the harm? What they do with that information, that's up to them and not under anyone's control.

To me, death is quite mundane, ho hum, and as common as the air we all breathe. I don't quite grasp the ceremonial histrionics as if death is sacred, nor can I make any sense out of all the lavish displays of attention and adornment that is tied to death (funeral possessions and whatnot). I roll my eyes with this. Life is far more interesting and should be considered special and worthy of attention and lavish adornment so it can be enjoyed. Decoration of a dead person does nothing for them but suits the living and is done out of guilt.

Death is physical termination- material flesh and body no longer sustainable. That has happened and will happen to every single life form on this planet. I don't see what's so special about withholding information pertaining to anyone's death. It's not like anyone can actually escape it :andy:

Marinka · Oct 9, 2013

Mandy said:
Now, you say that your "whole argument rests on the premise that if there is a transaction between two people and no one else gets hurt..." Now that we have established that your premise is not substantiated, for lack of evidence and evidence to the contrary, do you still insist on that argument?

Your argument rest on the premise that individuals have a possibility of being hurt in this type of transaction. I respectfully ask, where is your evidence that this has happened?

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

Marinka said:
I usually don't respond to each and every point as that means that the discussion eventually gets mired in the muck ... as in looking at the dirt rather than the forest. I find that it is better to look at the entire context and determine the main point (IMO) and respond to that. I also try and keep my responses short and to the point for the same reason.

As to my strong stand - it is to allow free speech if it does not hurt anyone outside the transaction (think of the 1st amendment for the US). And in this case, death prediction would fall into that category.

As to questions like "Should a complete novice on a power-trip be able to predict death for a depressed teenager?" ...

Can you please define how you know that
- person is depressed
- person is novice
- person is on power trip

Questions like this is what I mean by getting mired in the muck. No purpose in answering - hypothetical situation....

Marinka, I respect your "freedom of expression" position. I do take exception at being lumped together with book-burners and Puritanical censors.

Surely you are also for limiting some freedom of expression in certain circumstances. The false yelling of " 'Fire!!!' in a crowded theatre" example would be one. Child pornography in which actual little kids are sexually abused would be another. You might also favour excluding sexually explicit novels from the shelves of your neighbourhood elementary school, or for your own 4th-grader. In Canada where I live, extreme hate speech is illegal, specifically on the job or by service-providers.

We don't make one-off exceptions. These rules apply to everyone.

So the question isn't about some sort of unfettered freedom of expression, but where we draw the line. Incidentally, I once put my job and professional reputation on the line as a matter of conscience over a freedom of expression issue. Has anyone here ever done so?

Re: your final question. I don't think you can always tell. Whereby we can't assume that the poster is a mentally robust adult. You or I might catch hints like, "I feel worthless and like my life is never going to work out," as a signifier for a mental health disorder like depression. But how many inexperienced younger astrologers would? And you probably wouldn't see something like that at all on a cryptic horary question.

My position is based upon having read hundreds of charts for people. At over 5000 posts, and counting, W.

Mandy · Oct 9, 2013

Marinka said:
Your argument rest on the premise that individuals have a possibility of being hurt in this type of transaction. I respectfully ask, where is your evidence that this has happened?

Respectfully, my argument does not rest on that premise alone. This is made clear within the argument. If still unclear, my argument rests on many principles:

1. If you do not take "sometimes" risks on your own life, why take "sometimes" risks on anothers'?

2. The forum prohibits astrological discussions about suicide, yet not astrological predictions about death. Therefore, suicidal people may get death predictions simply without mentioning their suicidal thoughts.

3. What the astrologer thinks about death matters because they tend to project this insensitivity on to the anonymous request who may be on their last nerve and submitting the chart of their mother (as mentioned).

4. You want proof of all this? Suicidal people come on to the forum. Depressed people come on to the forum. Anonymous people come on to the forum. Underage people come on to the forum. This is why sexually explicit discussions are banned. And how many get freaked out over a 12th house sun? You have no way of knowing who is who, who is authentic and who is not. So what is the answer?

a) "If I know someone got hurt then I will stop. Since it is not commonplace to get this feedback, but we know vulnerable people attend the forum, lets just ignore it until a problem surfaces (by which time there may have been several upset underage children)."

Or,

b) "We have identified that we share space with mentally vulnerable people, trigger happy beginners, trolls, and anonymous posters. In order to prevent untoward consequences of death prediction on these vulnerable people as a forum facilitates, we will limit them to personal interaction only."

It makes sense to me that if one does not do "head in the sand" astrology, they should also consider not to do "head in the sand" death consultations.

Marinka, hope you can empathise with these points. If not, so be it.

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

JUPITERASC said:
YOU ASKED

I REPLIED

YOU SAID

I now remind you IRREFUTABLY that PREDICTING the death of a person ALREADY DEAD is not possible

You now advocate "post-diction"

which simply means that

AFTER the death of a person,
an astrologer THEN finds possible reasons for that person BEING ALREADY DEAD

AND

Since the reason for "post-diction" is obviously to IMPROVE/HONE PREDICTION TECHNIQUES

- then clearly you are arguing in support of PREDICTION

Astrology, as Marinka has reminded us, is PREDICTIVE

And your point is..... ? I am on record as opposing astrological death prediction. Is your post about semantics?

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

poyi said:
I really don't feel any need to explain myself or prove anything. People with wisdom can see and assess themselves. This is my last post.

Are you saying that I have not done so? I believe I have. Evidence provided upon request.

Marinka · Oct 9, 2013

waybread said:
I do take exception at being lumped together with book-burners and Puritanical censors.

Surely you are also for limiting some freedom of expression in certain circumstances. The false yelling of "yelling 'Fire!!!' in a crowded theatre" example would be one. Child pornography in which actual little kids are sexually abused would be another. You might also favour excluding sexually explicit novels from the shelves of your neighbourhood elementary school, or for your own 4th-grader. In Canada where I live, extreme hate speech is illegal, specifically on the job or by service-providers.

I don't think that you are a book burner or a puritanical censor, at least not yet. :smile:

But, your religious background and as a result of that, your possible issues with prediction does come through (and that's OK as it's just an observance on my part).

- As to yelling FIRE in a movie - that is a case where severe physical damage can result to the theatre goers. This is what happens when 200 hundred people run for 3 fire exits - people get trampled. Good example is the Coconut Grove Fire in Boston. Most of the dead were not burnt - they were piled up by the exits.

- Child pornography - As I have stated, people under 18 are not able to give consent and a such, their parents must consent. In this case, the child did not agree to this and they are being hurt.

- Sexually explicit book in the school - my children are not going to that school so, I don't have an opinion - I will leave it to the parents that are responsible for the well-being of their children to decide amoung themselves how to handle it.

- Hate Speech, this is relatively new issue (or an old issue reviving with a different face) as racial slurs might also fall under this. I think this is covered by Hate crimes and thus, if your "hate" leads to you hurting another person, it is punished more severely by the law. Corporations have standards that they adhere to as how professionals must address each other and if those standards are not kept, someone will be fired.

I fail to see how any of these are appropriate analogies for death predictions on a web site. The first example has physical damage to people. the next two are people under 18, and the last is regulated either by corporations or the law depending on the extent of the damage that is done by the "hate".

Where is the proven damage that has been done by death predictions?

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

may28gemini said:
Not all astrologers, professional or otherwise, have the ability/talent/skill to accurately predict death. That being noted, I don't think it's immoral to predict a client's death if they wish to know the answer. If a client is paying a fee for a service and that service happens to be said in the form of, "accurately predict when I will die," then what is the harm? What they do with that information, that's up to them and not under anyone's control.

To me, death is quite mundane, ho hum, and as common as the air we all breathe. I don't quite grasp the ceremonial histrionics as if death is sacred, nor can I make any sense out of all the lavish displays of attention and adornment that is tied to death (funeral possessions and whatnot). I roll my eyes with this. Life is far more interesting and should be considered special and worthy of attention and lavish adornment so it can be enjoyed. Decoration of a dead person does nothing for them but suits the living and is done out of guilt.

Death is physical termination- material flesh and body no longer sustainable. That has happened and will happen to every single life form on this planet. I don't see what's so special about withholding information pertaining to anyone's death. It's not like anyone can actually escape it

May28, all of your points have been addressed-- frequently-- by Mandy, me, and a few other posters at the beginning of this thread. Although I do not think death prediction is moral, it is particularly troublesome on an Internet forum like this one where oftentimes you do not know the querent's age, mental and physical health status, veracity, or motives. Third party queries raise a whole other level of ethical concerns.

This thread isn't about whether you or another forum member fears death. I have a comfortable metaphysical view about death myself, but we've all known people who don't have this. You have no idea whether an anonymous poster on an internet forum might be deathly (!) afraid of death, and what an insensitive prediction might do to her-- regardless of whether it is correct or incorrect.

You do not write as though you have had personal contact with death and dying. Until you have some experience with your own sense of extreme grief and loss, witnessed at close-hand the physical deterioration attendant on a lingering death, seen the physical pain involved in a severe injury, and experienced the financial issues that often ensue, I take your comments as coming from abstraction.

Marinka · Oct 9, 2013

Mandy said:
Respectfully, my argument does not rest on that premise alone. This is made clear within the argument. If still unclear, my argument rests on many principles:

1. If you do not take "sometimes" risks on your own life, why take "sometimes" risks on anothers'?

2. The forum prohibits astrological discussions about suicide, yet not astrological predictions about death. Therefore, suicidal people may get death predictions simply without mentioning their suicidal thoughts.

3. What the astrologer thinks about death matters because they tend to project this insensitivity on to the anonymous request who may be on their last nerve and submitting the chart of their mother (as mentioned).

4. You want proof of all this? Suicidal people come on to the forum. Depressed people come on to the forum. Anonymous people come on to the forum. Underage people come on to the forum. This is why sexually explicit discussions are banned. And how many get freaked out over a 12th house sun? You have no way of knowing who is who, who is authentic and who is not. So what is the answer?

a) "If I know someone got hurt then I will stop. Since it is not commonplace to get this feedback, but we know vulnerable people attend the forum, lets just ignore it until a problem surfaces (by which time there may have been several upset underage children)."

Or,

b) "We have identified that we share space with mentally vulnerable people, trigger happy beginners, trolls, and anonymous posters. In order to prevent untoward consequences of death prediction on these vulnerable people as a forum facilitates, we will limit them to personal interaction only."

It makes sense to me that if one does not do "head in the sand" astrology, they should also consider not to do "head in the sand" death consultations.

Marinka, hope you can empathise with these points. If not, so be it.

Mandy, I have read your points and they are well-thought out but, it seems they are "what ifs", "maybes", and "possibles".

Where is the proof that people are being hurt by astrologers doing predictions, specifically death predictions?

In the US, innocence is a given, proof is needed to be guilty ...

waybread · Oct 9, 2013

Marinka said:
Your argument rest on the premise that individuals have a possibility of being hurt in this type of transaction. I respectfully ask, where is your evidence that this has happened?

Oh, please. Why do you think professional astrologers voluntarily sign up for ethics codes in most of the English-language professional astrology associations? It is because they got sick and tired of the wannabe astrologers and outright fraudsters out there harming clients and thereby seeing their own credibility undermined.

I posted the links back-when. While only one association outright prohibited death prediction (by certified professionals) they pretty much all stated, "First do no harm," which included not frightening the socks of clients. They also included the astrologer recognizing the limits of his own expertise.

This is utterly different than your "learn as you go on the terminally ill" philosophy.

Some people may ask for a death prediction out of idle curiosity (like going to the psychic fair fortune-teller) but people who are at actual risk for an imminent death have a far higher probability of being emotionally distraught.

We see minors, people with mental health disorders, and deeply distressed people on this forum all the time. Sometimes we don't know that this is the case until after several exchanges. If you disagree, we must be reading very different types of threads.

On the really predictive threads, like the horary ones, you do not routinely see people asking such uptake questions. See for example fastlane69's thread.

So are you OK with taking a chance? Is the risk really worth it to you in terms of your own conscience that you might be wrong? It's not OK with mine.

We all limit our freedom of expression and inquiry all the time, voluntarily. Sometimes this is out of prudence and a sense of appropriateness.

Marinka · Oct 9, 2013

waybread said:
Oh, please. Why do you think professional astrologers voluntarily sign up for ethics codes in most of the English-language professional astrology associations? It is because they got sick and tired of the wannabe astrologers and outright fraudsters out there harming clients and thereby seeing their own credibility undermined.

I posted the links back-when. While only one association outright prohibited death prediction (by certified professionals) they pretty much all stated, "First do no harm," which included not frightening the socks of clients. They also included the astrologer recognizing the limits of his own expertise.

This is utterly different than your "learn as you go on the terminally ill" philosophy.

Some people may ask for a death prediction out of idle curiosity (like going to the psychic fair fortune-teller) but people who are at actual risk for an imminent death have a far higher probability of being emotionally distraught.

We see minors, people with mental health disorders, and deeply distressed people on this forum all the time. Sometimes we don't know that this is the case until after several exchanges. If you disagree, we must be reading very different types of threads.

On the really predictive threads, like the horary ones, you do not routinely see people asking such uptake questions. See for example fastlane69's thread.

So are you OK with taking a chance? Is the risk really worth it to you in terms of your own conscience that you might be wrong? It's not OK with mine.

We all limit our freedom of expression and inquiry all the time, voluntarily. Sometimes this is out of prudence and a sense of appropriateness.

As I noted in a previous post

---

"I respectfully ask, where is your evidence that this has happened?"

----
Is there any evidence?

I can see your stand and I respect it but, it seems to me that conclusions are being made on "whatifs, maybes, and possibilities".

JUPITERASC · Oct 9, 2013

waybread said:
Oh, please. Why do you think professional astrologers voluntarily sign up for ethics codes in most of the English-language professional astrology associations? It is because they got sick and tired of the wannabe astrologers and outright fraudsters out there harming clients and thereby seeing their own credibility undermined.

I posted the links back-when. While only one association outright prohibited death prediction (by certified professionals) they pretty much all stated, "First do no harm," which included not frightening the socks of clients. They also included the astrologer recognizing the limits of his own expertise.

This is utterly different than your "learn as you go on the terminally ill" philosophy.

Some people may ask for a death prediction out of idle curiosity (like going to the psychic fair fortune-teller) but people who are at actual risk for an imminent death have a far higher probability of being emotionally distraught.

We see minors, people with mental health disorders, and deeply distressed people on this forum all the time. Sometimes we don't know that this is the case until after several exchanges. If you disagree, we must be reading very different types of threads.

On the really predictive threads, like the horary ones, you do not routinely see people asking such uptake questions. See for example fastlane69's thread.

So are you OK with taking a chance? Is the risk really worth it to you in terms of your own conscience that you might be wrong? It's not OK with mine.

We all limit our freedom of expression and inquiry all the time, voluntarily. Sometimes this is out of prudence and a sense of appropriateness.

Let's study fastlane's comments then :smile:

fastlane69 said:
I mean....is this not a forum? I asked a question....a question that was relative to ME!

No one held a gun to anyone's head and made them type into their keyboards!

Quite frankly, I didn't even expect a response....at best I was hoping that someone more versed in horary astrology could point me in a direction.....Culpeper did just that. I wasn't wanting the answer to the universe! And if you don't understand why I asked that question, then fine....

but don't insult me by saying that it was improper just because it doesn't suit your idea of a horary question.

fastlane69 said:
Last year I was diagnosed with Coronary Artery Disease.....I always thought of myself as invincible....until last year....my natal chart that I posted will explain my train of thought. Which leads to my question.....My father lived to an age of 87....my mother is still alive at 87 now....the genetics are not a question.....and yes, maybe I already did know the answer....

I was looking for confirmation....I trust astrology completely...it has never let me down before....

my question was not one of the neophyte....I understand the implications of such a question.....maybe I am not an adept in the practice of astrology....but I understand the truth of it all...I was merely asking for help....a hard thing for me to do, but I must....so....

fastlane69 said:
I can take it....I'm ready for the answer....please help me understand....thank you....If one of you sees something....say it.

Mandy · Oct 9, 2013

Marinka said:
Mandy, I have read your points and they are well-thought out but, it seems they are "what ifs", "maybes", and "possibles".

Where is the proof that people are being hurt by astrologers doing predictions, specifically death predictions?

In the US, innocence is a given, proof is needed to be guilty ...

Marinka, this is not about who is guilty. It is about raising awareness of vulnerability and making an informed decision (i.e., that you are sitting amongst vulnerable people). How a third-party reading member is going to react is not subject to your predictions.

It is my career to work with vulnerable people. Death and death angst (lots of literature about it) is statistically extremely common. Asking for proof in this context sounds almost sadistic and, in any event, unethical. Can anyone imagine submitting a research proposal to an ethics board that reads: "This study aims to assess whether astrological death predictions of one's sick parents is going to affect the level of depression amongst a suicidal teenage population. Of particular importance is the interaction between suicidal teenager and death prediction which is false and death prediction which is true. Ultimately, this study would be considered convincing if at least one suicidal teenager is harmed as a result of participation." No, Marinka. If you cant empathise with the possibility for harm, irrespective of what I say, if it plesases you more to take the risk, or to see evidence of harm, I will not pretend to understand and so be it.

Morality of Predicting Death?

waybread

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

JUPITERASC

Well-known member

Marinka

Well-known member

Mandy

Well-known member

poyi

Mandy

Well-known member

may28gemini

Marinka

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

Mandy

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

Marinka

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

Marinka

Well-known member

waybread

Well-known member

Marinka

Well-known member

JUPITERASC

Well-known member

Mandy

Well-known member