AstroLogie, are there any fundaments?

[IrishEyes]

Tormod!!!

[IrishEyes]

You

[IrishEyes]

are

[IrishEyes]

such

[IrishEyes]

a post-count

[IrishEyes]

PADDER!!

 

(oh, and this is 950 for MEEEEEEE)

[Aquagem]

My contention is that it is conincidental. It's pattern recognition and that some people are better at patern recognition. That a pattern was detected in how people behaved by the same people that detected a pattern to the stars. They then made the false causal connection between two noncausal set of patterns.

New leaf -- I'll try to keep this really short...

 

I studied a bit about the history of astrology in a three-part history of science course and did a paper on it. The Babylonians actually developed a network of outlying stations for collecting information on local happenings, weather, politics, etc., and sent them to the priests in Babylon. The priests developed the mathematics of plotting stars and planets, and came up with their astrological system based on correlations they (thought they) saw between the two data sets. Astrology has often been credited with being the first major empirical science, and by has been called the father of all sciences. The empirical procedures they developed for observations were hardly improved on until the Renaissance.

 

What they were trying to prove was a deeply held conviction that the whole world was tied together - the old macrocosm/microcosm thing. According to my prof, the Tigris and Euphrates rivers flooded erratically, rather than regularly (like the Nile) and their development of the calendar was necessary to regulate agriculture effectively. But the more religion got into the picture, the farther off their theoretical underpinnings got from reality. Sound familar?

[Aquagem]

My contention is that it is conincidental. It's pattern recognition and that some people are better at patern recognition. That a pattern was detected in how people behaved by the same people that detected a pattern to the stars. They then made the false causal connection between two noncausal set of patterns.

Now I see how the game is played to boost that post count - quickies.

 

One more quick thought. I agree that pattern recognition probably stimulated the development of astrology, just as it did agriculture and a wide variety of other human activities. Once the Babylonians thought they saw a pattern, they went on to test the hypothesis, from which was born the first major empirical "science", or proto-science. Tycho Brahe in the 17th century was convinced that if only he could measure planetary positions and predict them accurately years ahead, he would get really rich through predicting elections, floods, and the price of eggs in China. That was why he hired Kepler to figure out how the planets moved. Kepler's laws were the serendipitous result of an astrological motivation (or maybe it was just greed...).

 

We regularly test theories by resorting to better measurements, but, unlike Tycho, we modify the theory when the results don't match (ideally, that's what we do).

[Freethinker]

Of course, *I* could care less about my post count.

As made clear in the various threads created to try and beat me to 2000 posts! :-)

[Freethinker]

New leaf -- I'll try to keep this really short...

Don't feel bad. All of us great posters start oout and occasionally do long posts. As such naturally I got comments about my posts being too verbose. :-)

 

Yes short snippets are best. A singular thought stream per.

 

Or if you need to keep up with Tormod, a post per word!

The Babylonians actually developed a network of outlying stations for collecting information on local happenings, weather, politics, etc., and sent them to the priests in Babylon. The priests developed the mathematics of plotting stars and planets, and came up with their astrological system based on correlations they (thought they) saw between the two data sets.

I understand that in the interim, the star's positions have moved one entire lunar cycle. That compared to the original locations/ calendar month, we are one month off.

But the more religion got into the picture, the farther off their theoretical underpinnings got from reality. Sound familar?

Power. The ability to correctly predict gives the predictor a favored position and thus power. Religion is about power. Especially the development of religious authorities. An ability to share power with the physically superior ruler. A predictor, even if imaginary, can provide positive motivation for the physical ruler. Promoting when it is most advantageous to enter into battle. Predicting a positive outcome giving a PMA. It is given additional legitimacy of they can make it even more ritualistic and claim their power comes from an even greater power, they are channeling. Such as the Pope, or Pat Robertson today.

[Freethinker]

Now I see how the game is played to boost that post count - quickies.

Sounds more like how to increase notches on the headboard.

[Freethinker]

We regularly test theories by resorting to better measurements, but, unlike Tycho, we modify the theory when the results don't match (ideally, that's what we do).

And perhaps religious authority (such as Christian or Islamic) not being as able to just outright kill those that dare promote modifications, might be a factor? Perhaps the difference in admitted results between Kepler, Copericus and Galileo?

[Aquagem]

And perhaps religious authority (such as Christian or Islamic) not being as able to just outright kill those that dare promote modifications, might be a factor? Perhaps the difference in admitted results between Kepler, Copericus and Galileo?

Yes, I do think knocking off scientists because they tell you something you don't want to hear is productive only in the short run. Unfortunately, I think we are headed back that way, and I don't see a counter-movement in the works. Today, "junk science" is the epithet of choice, but "heretic" can't be far behind. I predict the rack will be back within twenty years...

 

Long live Bruno!

 

Maybe that's the movement -- The Bruno Society -- to counterbalance the Faithbased Institute of Balanced Science (FIBS), soon to be announced in DC.

[Aquagem]

Sounds more like how to increase notches on the headboard.

Probably more effective than a SHORT SHAFT :)

[Aquagem]

I understand that in the interim, the star's positions have moved one entire lunar cycle. That compared to the original locations/ calendar month, we are one month off.

The original Babylonian "signs" were imprinted on the star field, and now are different by more than one thirty degree sector due to the precession of Earth's pole. Polaris wasn't the pole star then. I've used this as an example of how our collective scientific mind has freed itself of former absolute frames of reference. The Babs devised the calendar to track the agricultural cycle, but of course had no inkling that stars were not fixed, and, more to the point, that the equinox, the point in Earth's orbit where the sun is directly perpendicular to the Equator, moved slowly backward through the star signs over a 26,000 year period. The precession had been accounted for by the time of Ptolemy of Alexandria in the 2nd Century AD, and astrology in the West had already shifted itself to a connection to the seasons ("tropical", as in Tropic of Cancer). The East did not make the switch, and their signs are different from ours by one.

[Freethinker]

Long live Bruno!

 

Maybe that's the movement -- The Bruno Society -- to counterbalance the Faithbased Institute of Balanced Science (FIBS), soon to be announced in DC.

Love it!

 

The Bruno Society. Better than the Hypatia Society! She was more what we would call New Age today. Bruno was a true Free Thinker and an actual martyr to the cause.

[Freethinker]

Probably more effective than a SHORT SHAFT :)

Probably more info then you intended to tell us?