Matt_LRR said:
Whoah, back up the bus. I'm going to avoid digging into to many of this posts points, but I will say this: Astrology is not a science. It is barely even a pseudo-science. It has no basis in fact, and has been demonstrated repeatedly by actual science to have no predictive value whatsoever.
Our knowledge and understanding of the universe has grown dramatically over the last hundred years, including the discovery of new planets, stars, and celestial bodies that were heretofore unknown, and therefore could not have been accounted for in older astrological predictions. Simple reasoning leads us to the conclusion that if astrology "works" today, then it couldn't have worked in the past. simply because they were predicting based on an incomplete reading of the skies.
That said, such a thought process grants astrology more credit than it's worth.
They make that shit up. They make it up based on centuries of tradition and and pseudo-science, but they still make it up.
Astrology is no more relevant to your life than as an amusement. Something to perhaps dabble in for fun, but it is NOT science.
-m
Wow... you're clearly very angry about astrology. Did an astrologist run over your dog when you were little?
Okay, seriously. A careful read through of my post will reveal words like "for fun, have a birthchart done", "if you are curious", and "self-examination." Also "believe what you want."
Just FYI though:
sci·ence
NOUN:
1. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.
2. Methodological activity, discipline, or study: I've got packing a suitcase down to a science.
3. An activity that appears to require study and method: the science of purchasing.
4. Knowledge, especially that gained through experience.
Astrology - as practiced by astrologers instead of newspapers - is a very complex and exacting science. Actually, it is basically the science of observational astronomy. Predicitive value is not required for a science, though it is required for a 'theory' or 'law' of science. For example, economics and pscyhology have very little predictive value.
In point of fact, I think there is a certain psychological value to astrology, despite the fact that I don't ascribe it any predictive ability or mystical power. And just because something do what it was intended to do doesn't mean it isn't useful, entertaining, or interesting. And it certainly has a place in the history of science. Considering that the very basis of the scientific method is to build on what has come before, dismissing it out of hand as worthless is kind of a smack at science.