david starling
Well-known member
Now that's a mixed metaphor...
Subjective objectivity means being objective from your own viewpoint. It won't be one-size-fits-all.
Now that's a mixed metaphor...
Regarding astrology, it was much easier to be more subjectively subjective prior to the introduction of Heliocentrism into the mix.
Now it is easier to be objectively objective?
No, just subjectively objective. It's both within us and without us, so pure objectivity is impossible.
ptolemy, are you on a quest to develop a purely objective explanation for how astrology works?
Why do you care?
No matter how much you sugarcoat it, you are clever enough to know what I mean.
Skeptics don't pursue astrology because they think its waste of time, waybread you pursue astrology despite agreeing that its waste of time (by which I mean that it is an objective phenomenon). I however pursue it (like most others, practitioners or not) because I do think it is an objective phenomenon, so there lie our differences (of ''allegiance'').
I wouldn't be bothered if astrology could be proved to be bogus. Obviously, you would be mightily bothered.
Imagine trying to come up with fancy methods to get more queries correct with shotgunning. I don't see why astrology should not degenerate into that if there is no objectivity in it.
There is something sinister in the way Cornelius sells full subjectivity under the guise of something magical/literature/divination. This leads to so much confusion because most people think he simply means replacement by another mechanism of synchronicity (see his podcast with Chris Brennan).
I will have it in mind that you understand him correct the next time you give me some advice though. I am keen on building a scientific system rather than a mentalist one.
Petosiris, I am sorry that you find me so threatening.
It is a contentious subject, so it is bound to have polarizing opinions. Either the planets are able influence your life (or able to perfectly synchronize with 7 billion people) or they don't.
No, no, and no.
Are you merely trying to be annoying, or do you have actual rational arguments to make? I suspect the former.