Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Young people are flocking to astrology

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

861–870 of 972 posts

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#861

Post by za3faran »

copperx wrote: post #235
za3faran wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Muslim, I've seen Dawkins make very basic and laughably incorrect claims about Islam. It clearly shows he has extremely shallow knowledge about what he claims to criticize. Niel DeGrasse Tyson is also guilty of the same. Here's a short clip of Dr. Sami Ameri, a published author and expert, discussing but one of Dawkin's fallacies in his book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TsNpvZN76zU

The so-called expert and Dawkings have a fundamental disagreement over the definition of truth. For Dawkings, truth is something that can be empirically proven. Truth for Dr. Ameri seems to be a logically sound argument. Meaningful discourse can't happen if there is no agreement over the words being used.

We know that truth extends beyond what can be empirically proven. Meaning that just because something cannot be proven empirically, does not mean that it is not true. Furthermore, truth is not limited to what can only be empirically proven. This is what the neo-atheists/scientism followers seem to always fall for, and something that even philisophers know not to be true. I believe Godel's incompleteness theorem has something to say about the matter as well. And Dr. Ameri is an expert, you can read up about his credentials. Unlike say Dawkins who was referred to as a journalist by an academic in his field.

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#862

Post by bitsage »

xvedejas wrote: post #476
ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of any religions that make any clear predictions, so they're not even wrong (as opposed to astrology which is clearly wrong). So-called punishments are typically enacted in some other realm (e.g. after-life, rebirth into a lower form etc) which leads to some experimental problems in verifying the claims. I disagree about your interpretation of burning of religious books - surely that's more to do with p…

In college a Christian friend readily gave "evidence" of predictions in the bible as reason why he believes that religion. I think a lot of religious people do think there are clear predictions. I wish I remembered his examples (which I found uninteresting at the time) — I think one was a prediction of an invasion of Tyre?

It could have also been about Jesus and his death

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#863

Post by sibeliuss »

wilg wrote: post #807
sibeliuss wrote: post #801

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without fully grasping how archetypes work, it is impossible to begin. It's a prerequisite, and without that one will always miss just how remarkably accurate (in field-like terms) astrological prediction can be.

I hope you find your way out of this mess.

And I hope you find your way in! Shit is weird, dude. Train your eye.

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#864

Post by za3faran »

mediascreen wrote: post #223
mediascreen wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I just suffered through the 13 minutes of nonsens from this "expert". One problem is that he doesn't understand what he is arguing against. Dawkins doesn't argue that, because people tend to have similar beliefs as those around them, he has disproved those beliefs. He just uses it to illustrate the close minded way some people take the supremacy of their particular religion for granted. The question "What if you…

And the counter argument that Dawkins himself he is an atheist because he was born in the UK in the 20th century just proves Dawkins point. I think Dawkins himself would agree that the likelihood of him being atheist would have been far lower if he would have been born in Pakistan or in 17th century England.

The point he's making is that the fallacious argument can apply both ways, so it is not something that can be used to argue for either side.

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#865

Post by ostenning »

machina_ex_deus wrote: post #377
varjag wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no qualitative difference between belief in astrology and any of the world's religions. Not saying you're not entitled in disregarding astrology believers but the cut-off point is completely arbitrary and dare I say irrational.

To me there is an a huge difference. I can accept religions, which are adding axioms that aren't falsifiable, and that are usually taught to a person when he is a child. And religions had their roles in shaping society for good. I can accept conspiracy theories and disbelieving the known consensus. I just can't accept a person who, in the age where we know exactly how planets move and what they are, decided to believ…

> ...to believe in falsifiable things that we fully understand and have no causual relationship.

Not to give astrology or any particular belief system any credit, but how can one ever truly say that we "fully" understand anything in this reality?

This is a highly fallible trait that allows "science" to become a belief system in and of itself.

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#866

Post by bitsage »

gambiting wrote: post #582
machina_ex_deus wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Magicians can do what looks like turning water into wine easily. Is that seriously your biggest issue with religion? If there's anything to be really skeptical about its that a person resurrected from the dead, rest of the miracles are pretty mundane in modern standards. And the way I understand their epistemology, they know it happened because people saw him both dying and living afterwards, so it boils down to whet…

>> they know it happened because people saw him both dying and living afterwards, so it boils down to whether you believe their accounts. I come from a religious background, born and raised catholic, and even in our indoctrinating upbringing it was made clear that the new testament isn't eyewitness testimony. It's a written story of something someone said. Given the age of the material this is the best we're going to…

Wikipedia is incredibly biased when it comes to certain topics, especially anything pertaining to Jesus. The irony is, the section you have quoted doesn’t even have a source attached! More reading: https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#867

Post by sn9 »

mise_en_place wrote: post #81
figital wrote: post #63

There are epigenetic markers which can identify the season or perhaps even month you were born. If you might think there is a link between personality and birth order and that perhaps metaphor is useful in storytelling or group dynamics … then one could loosely link these concepts together and consider it more than something like a party trick.

Indians often do this with marriages, by checking the astrological compatibility. All of it honestly seemed like bs to me, if anything it’s job security for so-called soothsayers and astrologers, who have been grifting generations of families

My mother payed two different astrologers to predict my future.

She reported two mutually exclusive predictions.

She did not see what that implied.

She has a graduate degree in statistics.

Woo is a mindkiller.

Astrologers are grifting charlatans.

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#868

Post by rayiner »

gochi wrote: post #818
rayiner wrote: post #794

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most secular researchers agree that Jesus, Mohammad, the Buddha, etc., were real historical figures, so that’s a qualitative difference. Moreover, there are entire civilizations built on those belief systems—including the one you live in. Comparing those civilizations is an empirical basis for comparing the underlying belief systems.

Those civilizations were built in spite of not based off those beliefs. We wouldn't have created anything more than mud huts if we were to rely on adhering to belief systems. You cannot control people while also pushing the limits of humanity, they are mutually exclusive. To ignore this is to ignore religious systems were always about control and order, not progress.

"Control and order" create civilization. Your ignorant view could be forgiven if we didn't have so many 20th century examples showing that principle in operation within a single generation: Japan, Korea, Singapore, China, and Taiwan. Going back further: Puritans, Mormons, Lutherans, etc. The Mormons escaped persecution and settled land nobody wanted and built thriving cities there.

I'm not aware of a single civilization where free-thinking turned a poor society into a prosperous one. It's always the other way around: free-thinking individualism is a luxury enjoyed by the descendants of religious, orderly, and well-controlled people.

Indeed, ironically, free-thinking individualism is directly rooted in Protestant Christianity, which emphasizes the personal (rather than communal) relationship with God, and having lag people read and interpret the Bible. Do you think it’s a coincidence that the most individualistic societies on earth just happen to be Protestant?

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#869

Post by rcme »

vacuity wrote: post #636
rcme wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is believing in religion rational?

I'll subvert this and say that any religion and atheism aren't rational. Ignoring the case of supernatural compulsion, a given person has ingrained beliefs/values, as well as a personality, that drive what they accept and don't accept. Strictly trying to achieve rationality embodies the scientific method, but science can't prove or disprove anything, ultimately. Beliefs that fill the void there are beyond rationality…

> but science can't prove or disprove anything, ultimately.

What? From where do we derive our knowledge of the natural world and universe? How do we know, for instance, that the Earth revolves around the sun and not vice versa? Are you implying that we don’t know that, or are you implying our knowledge of this fact is a divine gift?

Re: Young people are flocking to astrology

#870

Post by dzonga »

mavhc wrote: post #240
anon-3988 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I think that it is perhaps beneficial to not completely remove religion, but replace it with something that is more aligned to the 21st century. Let's be honest, humans are very flawed and prone to succumb to religious thinking; regardless of how smart/dumb you are. Superstitious thinking can arise from simple day to day observation. So it is much better to fill in the void with something dull like "do go…

Organised Religion is good for people, because it keeps them from believing even crazier ideas, and still tells you to see a doctor when you're sick Most of the people who go to Organised Religion don't really believe in God, they're just in it for the tea and biscuits, ie it's a social club. If you really believed in God and Heaven you'd become a monk or nun, logically you'd spend your finite life maximising your ch…

the social part - as I get older I realize why people go to church even if they're astrophyscists
Post reply on HN