Astrologers' Community  

Go Back   Astrologers' Community > General Astrology > Natal Astrology

Natal Astrology A place to discuss yours and others' birth charts (after you post your own birth chart interpretation). Includes psychological and relocation astrology, houses, aspects, and planetary dignity and debility.


Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 02-06-2020, 03:45 PM
aquarianbd aquarianbd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh
Posts: 114
Credibility of astrology

I am a firm believer in astrology and I am frequently attacked, lolz.



I can well understand astrology can never conform to science. The thing I dont understand is the miserable failure of astrologers in carlson's/ Dean and Kelly's experiments. These are the most commonly used weapons as they are listed in wikipedia



Are there any studies/research that validate astrology at least to a certain degree?

__________________
Take care.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 02-06-2020, 06:51 PM
AJ Astrology AJ Astrology is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 294
Re: Credibility of astrology

Quote:
Originally Posted by aquarianbd View Post
I am a firm believer in astrology and I am frequently attacked, lolz.



I can well understand astrology can never conform to science. The thing I dont understand is the miserable failure of astrologers in carlson's/ Dean and Kelly's experiments. These are the most commonly used weapons as they are listed in wikipedia



Are there any studies/research that validate astrology at least to a certain degree?
Hi aquarianbd,

Yes, a Finnish statistician and mathematician has validated many facets of astrology, and also invalidated many methods. His peer-reviewed research is published in main-stream journals.

Some conclusions he drew from his studies, which generally employed about more than 20,000 charts:

1) use of the tropical zodiac with western astrology is valid; use of the sidereal zodiac is invalid

2) use of the sidereal zodiac with Vedic astrology is valid; use of the tropical zodiac with Vedic astrology is invalid.

3) the Davidson and composite chart methods for synastry are totally invalid. The traditional astrology method of synastry is valid.

4) a method developed by a British modern astrologer for delineating career/profession is incredibly accurate. Other methods are not as accurate, but accurate nonetheless.

5) if a house system is used, the Placidus system is most accurate. Whole sign and equal sign when used with traditional astrology is accurate, but not when used with modern astrology.

6) techniques and methods should rarely be mixed. Mixing Vedic with Western is a massive fail. Modern can use traditional methods, but traditional methods do not work with modern.

The methodology used in "studies" to refute astrology is disingenuous at best.

They rely on confirmation bias and the charts are nearly always incorrectly read. For example, traditional astrology never examines a single body, and never examines a single body merely in the context of a house or sign, yet that's exactly what those "studies" do.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to AJ Astrology For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (02-06-2020), katydid (02-07-2020)
  #3  
Unread 02-06-2020, 07:00 PM
aquarianbd aquarianbd is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh
Posts: 114
Re: Credibility of astrology

Quote:
Originally Posted by AJ Astrology View Post
Hi aquarianbd,

Yes, a Finnish statistician and mathematician has validated many facets of astrology, and also invalidated many methods. His peer-reviewed research is published in main-stream journals.

Some conclusions he drew from his studies, which generally employed about more than 20,000 charts:

1) use of the tropical zodiac with western astrology is valid; use of the sidereal zodiac is invalid

2) use of the sidereal zodiac with Vedic astrology is valid; use of the tropical zodiac with Vedic astrology is invalid.

3) the Davidson and composite chart methods for synastry are totally invalid. The traditional astrology method of synastry is valid.

4) a method developed by a British modern astrologer for delineating career/profession is incredibly accurate. Other methods are not as accurate, but accurate nonetheless.

5) if a house system is used, the Placidus system is most accurate. Whole sign and equal sign when used with traditional astrology is accurate, but not when used with modern astrology.

6) techniques and methods should rarely be mixed. Mixing Vedic with Western is a massive fail. Modern can use traditional methods, but traditional methods do not work with modern.

The methodology used in "studies" to refute astrology is disingenuous at best.

They rely on confirmation bias and the charts are nearly always incorrectly read. For example, traditional astrology never examines a single body, and never examines a single body merely in the context of a house or sign, yet that's exactly what those "studies" do.

Thanks a million, AJ Astrology. I am really indebted. What's this study called? Can you share a link?
__________________
Take care.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 02-07-2020, 12:54 PM
Ekonomist13 Ekonomist13 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Croatia
Posts: 83
Re: Credibility of astrology

Quote:
Originally Posted by aquarianbd View Post
I am a firm believer in astrology and I am frequently attacked, lolz.



I can well understand astrology can never conform to science. The thing I dont understand is the miserable failure of astrologers in carlson's/ Dean and Kelly's experiments. These are the most commonly used weapons as they are listed in wikipedia



Are there any studies/research that validate astrology at least to a certain degree?
Hello!

Just yesterday I've read about those experiments here: http://astrology.co.uk/tests/basisof...tm#scievidence

Not only are there multiple successful astrological researches, but there's also a scientific (in)validation of previous sceptical researches.

For example, dr. Drean's EPI analysis was invalid due to misattribution of keywords to test on specific elements (fire, water, earth, air) and was later improved and retested by Robert Currey.

You've also mentioned Carlson's research, and Robert Currey has debunked even that research - it seems that the results were significant with p = 0,0037.

I'm sure I've also read about Kelly's experiments there, and much more, so be sure to check the other pages on that website.

Let me know what you think - I'm conducting my own research(es) as we speak, and will hopefully join forces with that website, however, I'm still afraid of looking like an amateur due to the my analysis relying mostly on Sun sign + ascendant + elements table and nothing more, as if planet's energy doesn't directly influence us, but depends on some kind of a field theory (electromagnetic?).

For elements, I "blame" Moon, Mercury and Venus interplay, and I do not think or find in real life any examples of other planets's effect on one's personality (which is the focus of my research). Granted, generational planets like Uranus, Neptune and Pluto could affect the whole generation's attitude, but then again, what we're dealing in most of the researches is applying the rules to individual cases to make astrology compatible with recognized sciences.

However, I'm aware of the Mars effect, and I'm aware that what I'm researching is purely psychological and contains only a little bit of astrology as a whole - I just hope others will understand where I'm coming from.

P.S. I wouldn't rely on wikipedia on any fringe topics and sciences. They apparently have an outside group of editors-sceptics who actively mock and criticize any such research conducted, and if neccessary, they're also known to "spin" the results in their favour. That I've also learned on the above quoted site.
__________________
ॐ असतो मा सद्गमय ।
तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय ।
मृत्योर्मा अमृतं गमय ।
ॐ शान्तिः शान्तिः शान्तिः ॥

Om Asato Maa Sad-Gamaya |
Tamaso Maa Jyotir-Gamaya |
Mrtyor-Maa Amrtam Gamaya |
Om Shaantih Shaantih Shaantih ||

Last edited by Ekonomist13; 02-07-2020 at 12:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ekonomist13 For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (02-07-2020)
  #5  
Unread 02-19-2020, 09:12 PM
OuterPlanets89 OuterPlanets89 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 56
Re: Credibility of astrology

I think the European empirical epistemological method (say that 3 times fast!) that was birthed in an unstable time where the church was quite dogmatic and oppressive, which led to the absolute dissolution of anything intuitive in education/academia in the West. Naturally after colonialism/globalism, this approach also overrode more intuitive methods from other cultures (in global thought), and has become the barometer for academic credibility in the world.

Now the empirical method is incredibly effective for what it is, but I do think this hardline epistemological approach (that all of modern Western thought is built on) will always keep astrology from being a respected academic field, and perhaps even being considered "acceptable" to believe in (particularly among those with advanced degrees). As far as micro/macro knowledge goes, the empirical method is a bottom-up approach, while astrology requires some top-down presuppositions ("why do the planets represent the energies they do?" etc), prior to studying in a bottom-up manner (correlation between transits and events etc).

Perhaps this mirrors the 3rd/9th House duality, as the pain in the modern world from the 9th House (from religious institutions), has led to modern thought being overly focused on a 3rd H approach, keeping many of us from finding meaning and seeing things from a greater perspective (even if information is so readily available and shared).
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to OuterPlanets89 For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (03-12-2020), sworm09 (03-09-2020)
  #6  
Unread 02-20-2020, 03:00 PM
AJ Astrology AJ Astrology is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 294
Re: Credibility of astrology

Quote:
Originally Posted by aquarianbd View Post
Thanks a million, AJ Astrology. I am really indebted. What's this study called? Can you share a link?
Hi aquarianbd,

Sure, I can post a link:

http://astrologynewsservice.com/arti...irm-astrology/
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to AJ Astrology For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (03-12-2020)
  #7  
Unread 02-20-2020, 10:05 PM
petosiris petosiris is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 3,759
Re: Credibility of astrology

I don't see any of the 6 points discussed in the article.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Unread 02-21-2020, 02:35 AM
waybread's Avatar
waybread waybread is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: A class M planet near you
Posts: 14,729
Re: Credibility of astrology

It looks like a lot of Kyosti Tarvainen's articles were published in the astrological journal Correlations. You might have to be a subscriber to access them. http://www.correlationjournal.com/ However, when I clicked on "current issue," it was from 2018. Anyone know if Correlations is still active?

Basically, IMO, astrology is a complex system. Extremely so. I don't think it lends itself to simple analyses. I agree that today's more powerful computers can handle a lot more complexity, and we need to look at how thousands of variables interact. We can't just isolate one or two factors and hope to get meaningful results.

Also, some people believe that astrology is a system of divination. That takes the discussion out of the realm of statistics and into the mind of the astrologer.
__________________
My friends, love is better than anger. Hope is better than fear. Optimism is better than despair. So let us be loving, hopeful and optimistic. And we’ll change the world. Jack Layton, "Letter to Canadians"

I thought we went along paths--but it seems there are no paths. The going itself is the path.
C.S. Lewis, Perelandra.

Life is not about finding yourself. Life is about creating yourself. Message on a refrigerator magnet.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to waybread For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (03-12-2020)
  #9  
Unread 03-09-2020, 11:34 AM
sworm09's Avatar
sworm09 sworm09 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 384
Re: Credibility of astrology

Quote:
Originally Posted by waybread View Post
It looks like a lot of Kyosti Tarvainen's articles were published in the astrological journal Correlations. You might have to be a subscriber to access them. http://www.correlationjournal.com/ However, when I clicked on "current issue," it was from 2018. Anyone know if Correlations is still active?

Basically, IMO, astrology is a complex system. Extremely so. I don't think it lends itself to simple analyses. I agree that today's more powerful computers can handle a lot more complexity, and we need to look at how thousands of variables interact. We can't just isolate one or two factors and hope to get meaningful results.

Also, some people believe that astrology is a system of divination. That takes the discussion out of the realm of statistics and into the mind of the astrologer.
Reviving an old thread here, but the more I think about and practice astrology, the more I come to think that astrology is a form of divination.

Astrology being an objective quality of the world is highly doubtful imo. Astrology spits in the face of what we know about physics and even if there were evidence of forces emitted by the planets that influence humans, the claims to knowledge that astrologers make are dubious.

Let's say that there was evidence that planets emitted a force that had a measurable impact on human behavior. Could we from that say that we could therefore predict a person's behavior, finances, career etc based only on the time and place they were born? If we could, shouldn't it be easy for astrologers to show in a concise, clear manner that these things can be predicted?

We don't have evidence of any such force and on top of that, astrologers are generally pretty bad at presenting concise evidence that the techniques even work. A lot of the "evidence" are just astrologers reading what they want to see into a chart in an inconsistent manner. That's not science, that's divination. Astrology relies on the ability to see patterns in abstract symbolism and apply those patterns to the answering of a question concerning a person, a specific situation, or even a nation. That's divination.

Ok, but what about the correlations found that are suspiciously only published in astrological journals? That's all well and good, but without any mechanism, those correlations are very dubious. What's more is that when meta-analyses are done, those statistically significant effects vanish. If there were astrological effects, this wouldn't happen. But let's say that the astrological effects were to remain in the most demanding of meta-analyses, that still raises the question of how something like astrology could work in the first place or how such a powerful influence could somehow go undetected.

Leaving the science to the wayside for a moment, just observe the way astrology is done. It is 90% ad-hoc in nature. Astrologers are very inconsistent in the manner of making predictions and will often ignore the misses and hold the hits in their memories. Astrologers tend to look for what sticks out to them in a chart when asked a question. That's not science, that's divination. If one were to apply the techniques of astrology in a mechanical fashion one would quickly see that the techniques themselves don't work. Human pattern seeking ability and our capacity for induction are the engine that get the car of astrology running.

That said, I love astrology and I practice it. It's incredible when it appears to work, and the hits are very addictive. But I can't in good conscience claim that it's anything but a complicated form of divination. Heck, even the historical evidence backs that up. Up until Ptolemy, astrology was rarely seen as a natural science, but more as a form of omen watching.

There's something fascinating going on with astrology, but I don't think it has anything to do with the natural sciences. I think the cause of the apparent astrological effects are to be found within the realm of psychology and anthropology. That doesn't in any way diminish astrology imo.

Last edited by sworm09; 03-09-2020 at 10:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to sworm09 For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (03-12-2020)
  #10  
Unread 03-09-2020, 02:11 PM
JUPITERASC's Avatar
JUPITERASC JUPITERASC is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 54,757
Re: Credibility of astrology

Quote:
Originally Posted by sworm09 View Post
Reviving an old thread here, but the more I think about and practice astrology, the more I come to think that astrology is a form of divination.

Astrology being an objective quality of the world is highly doubtful imo. Astrology spits in the face of what we know about physics and even if there were evidence of forces emitted by the planets the influence humans, the claims of knowledge that astrologers make are dubious.

Let's say that there was evidence that planets emitted a force that had a measurable impact on human behavior. Could we from that say that we could therefore predict a person's behavior, finances, career etc? If we could, shouldn't it be easy for astrologers to show in a concise manner that these things can be predicted?

We don't have evidence of any such force and on top of that, astrologers are generally pretty bad at presenting concise evidence that the techniques even work. A lot of the "evidence" are just astrologers reading what they want to see into a chart in an inconsistent manner. That's not science, that's divination.

Ok, but what about the correlations found that are suspiciously only published in astrological journals? That's all well and good, but without any mechanism, those correlations are very dubious. What's more is that when meta-analyses are done, those statistically significant effects vanish. If there were astrological effects, this wouldn't happen.

Leaving the science to the wayside for a moment, just observe the way astrology is done. It is 90% ad-hoc in nature. Astrologers are very inconsistent in the manner of making predictions and will often ignore the misses and hold the hits in their memories. That's not science, that's divination.

That said, I love astrology and I practice it. It's incredible when it appears to work, and the hits are very addictive. But I can't in good conscience claim that it's anything but a complicated form of divination. Heck, even the historical evidence backs that up.

There's something fascinating going on with astrology, but I don't think it has anything to do with the natural sciences. I think the cause of the apparent astrological effects are to be found within the realm of psychology and anthropology. That doesn't in any way diminish astrology imo.
Robert Powell
discussing several of his books
including
History of the Zodiac
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dsb...ature=youtu.be

This revolutionary history of the zodiac
includes chapters on the Egyptian decans
and the Hindu nakshatrasshowing how these sidereal divisions
which originated in Egypt and India
are related to the original Babylonian zodiac.
History of the Zodiac
Robert Powell
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82p-D...eature=related Hippocrates Let food be your medicine: let medicine be your food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvz9uSK3zXo Rosencrantz & Guildenstern are Dead Tom Stoppard http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KchhSIVwMdY Every exit is an entrance to somewhere else. VETTIUS VALENS FREE http://www.csus.edu/indiv/r/rileymt/...s%20entire.pdf
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JUPITERASC For This Useful Post:
aquarianbd (03-12-2020)
  #11  
Unread 03-09-2020, 05:47 PM
Hkk Hkk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 2,285
Re: Credibility of astrology

Hindu Vedic astrologers can prove it and so can their followed worshippers.

Proof is in the pudding
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
astrology, credibility

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 07:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2005-2018, AstrologyWeekly.com. Boards' structure and all posts are property of AstrologyWeekly.com and their respective creators. No part of the messages sent on these boards may be copied without their owners' explicit consent.