Article about natal astrology being false

Rawiri

Rawiri

Well-known member
It is interesting to compare the entries of the participants with each other. Because they all had received the same information, one would expect many similar responses. Actually, the lack of agreement was striking. Each of the seven charts could be paired with seven questionnaires. Of these 49 possible combinations, none was selected more than twelve times. It was as if each astrologer had used a random generator to determine the correct matches. There were only two astrologers who had independently arrived at the same solution (p = 0.18). Two other entries were also identical, but in this case the participants had joined forces.
Click to expand...
The problem is really right there.

There is no universal consensus in astrology about how to systematically analyze a (blind) chart. The astrologers did not even agree with each others conclusions.
 
S

Solar Flare

Banned
I got 3 out of 7 right lol... Not as bad as I expected considering the fact that I'm not a professional astrologer and that I didn't have the results of the questionnaire on my hands. It's funny that I gave first 3 charts the most thought and got them right but was less serious about the others and got them wrong. I'm kinda mad at myself now, I could've easily guessed the occupations of the 5th and 6th persons if I was more serious about it. Charts 4 and 7 are less conclusive to me so I could get them wrong anyway.

Would be interesting to see what score other people can get (no cheating, please!). It's pretty fun. Maybe we should try something similar on this site.

As for the test itself, I think it was performed well and the author doesn't seem very biased from the way he describes the process of it. The fact that he allowed the astrologers to ask the participants questions beforehand and was interested in their opinion of why they had such unsatisfying results shows that he was a good researcher and was willing to have the testing done correctly. The only conclusion I have is that most probably the majority of those people who claimed to be astrologers were either charlatans or totally sucked at their occupation. It truly boggles my mind that only one (!) astrologer out of 50 managed to get 3 correct matches and no one showed a better result than that. The possibility of getting 3 or more correct answers at random was about 6.5% and only 2% of participants managed to get into this zone, which means that they could obtain better results if they had nothing to do with astrology!
 
Last edited:
wilsontc

wilsontc

Staff member
difference between science and astrology, to mineral

mineral,

The article contained the clue to the problem but then suggested the wrong solution:
According to Geoffrey Dean and Arthur Mather (1994) scientists and astrologers are in conflict over whether astrology works because they tend to look at different things: scientists are concerned with accuracy whereas astrologers look for client satisfaction.
Click to expand...

Yes, scientists and astrologers do look at different things. But it's not about accuracy vs. giving the customer the answers they want. Scientists look at predictability and consistency, while astrologers (at least modern ones) look at potentials and life improvement opportunities. It is entirely possible that some or most of the people on the test are in the WRONG job for them. They have abilities and skills they have no idea they have so they have never used them. A modern astrologer can guide this person to an awareness of these new skills and how to best use them in the right job for them. A scientist simply wants to know what job a person is in while a modern astrologer wants to fit the person with the best job for them.

About the difference between science and astrology,

Tim
 
Top