If one knows enough of about sign systems it is totally possibly to discern a variety of generalized traits and behaviors. The correct study of complex meaning making is semiotics not astrology however semiotic analysis could be performed on astrology to dig deeper into its structure.
Does Astrology Work?
141–150 of 188 posts
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#142I’d be interested in the views of professional as well as hobby astrologers who are on HN.
(I've been studying astrology for many years.)
I remember when this researcher was trying to recruit participants for this study off of social media, which was widely met with skepticism in the serious astrological community.
It is nearly impossible to find truly skilled astrologers who would agree to participate in a study like this off of Twitter, those who have studied the decade(s) or more required to be proficient. Real Astrology requires an uncommon mix of character; one must be both scholarly and intuitive, while also recognizing the symbolic nature of things. These qualities, in the proper balance to succeed at the craft, are rare.
Further, only astrologers who study traditional techniques can yield accurate results, and these "accurate results" are archetypal in nature [1]. Modern astrology is a free-for-all with a very high woo quotient, and mostly caters to the young.
(My personal take is that Astrology is a divinatory, participatory "science", and can't be statistically analyzed [2], though the Gauquelins did just this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_effect)
[1]: By archetypal I mean: astrologer sees Jupiter transiting the 5th house and predicts a child born in the coming year; no human child is born, but given the general signification of the 5th ("children"), the native did publish a book, which they labored over, and loved. Statistically it was a miss, though archetypally it was a hit; this must be understood by all in order for it to be meaningfully true. [2] This is where the impossibility of accurate statistical analysis lives.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most people don't believe tarot cards are really some magical thing I think a lot of people have trouble with the idea that despite astrology not being accurate or grounded in science, it can still be useful for some of the people some of the time.
> despite astrology not being accurate or grounded in science, it can still be useful for some of the people some of the time. That's what an art form does. The problem with astrology is that it's framed as a science giving answers to questions, not as an artistic performance giving insight into life patterns. It as painful as seeing people watch wrestling believing it is a real competitive sport.
Astrologers can definitely cross the line from being performers to being fraudsters. I wouldn't compare it with wrestling though.
Nobody above the age of 12 really believes wrestling is an unscripted sport. It's just kayfabe.
Did The Undertaker really bury people alive? He absolutely did. Did Mark Calaway (the wrestler's actual name) bury people alive? Of course not. Nobody called 911 to report a murder after watching The Undertaker perform.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#144Obviously astrology does no better than random guessing, that's no surprise. But the fact that astrology had such low levels of agreement is a little interesting to me -- I guess I assumed there was some kind of underlying system to astrology, but I guess not! > Much to my surprise, astrologers had very low agreement with each other on the chart for each person. If astrologers picked charts at random, they would agre…
> Obviously astrology does no better than random guessing Not necessarily. It is entirely plausible that babies born during the Summer months share something in common, and babies born during Winter months share something else. Since astrological signs are 100% correlated with the seasons, one could "guess" with a higher probability than random chance these traits. The causality would obviously not be from stars to b…
To give a concrete example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect
But whether astrology actually settled on these features would depend on the feedback systems in place, and the granularity of those systems/how predictions were made in reference to a specific person.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Would you ask a snake oil salesman his views on the benefits of snake oil? :)
Sure, that's the scientific method / debate; person A says snake oil does not work, person B says it does, let's have it out.
That's not how the scientific method works, at all.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity. > Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, or celebrities, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. Videos of pratfalls or disasters, or cute animal pictures.…
Thanks for that. I will suggest that we modify it to: "anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity even though most of us think it's bunk." That will avoid a lot of problems!
That seems like an ironically anti-scientific stance to take, not to mention a slippery slope to start moderating what people find interesting would introduce some serious bias.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#147Obviously astrology does no better than random guessing, that's no surprise. But the fact that astrology had such low levels of agreement is a little interesting to me -- I guess I assumed there was some kind of underlying system to astrology, but I guess not! > Much to my surprise, astrologers had very low agreement with each other on the chart for each person. If astrologers picked charts at random, they would agre…
There are several different astrology systems in use that draw on various world spiritual/astrological traditions, make different astronomical assumptions and adjustments, etc.
There are also lots of different things that could factor into a birth chart reading, so different astrologers might put more emphasis on different aspects.
Fun stuff, and not entirely valueless as an exercise in self-reflection.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#148Obviously astrology does no better than random guessing, that's no surprise. But the fact that astrology had such low levels of agreement is a little interesting to me -- I guess I assumed there was some kind of underlying system to astrology, but I guess not! > Much to my surprise, astrologers had very low agreement with each other on the chart for each person. If astrologers picked charts at random, they would agre…
Traditional astrology has an extremely sophisticated system underneath. Modern astrology, not so much.
It depends on which "modern" astrology you have in mind. For example the "Shamanic Astrology" system by Daniel Giamario is the product of a lot of thought, effort, and research.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Obviously astrology does no better than random guessing Not necessarily. It is entirely plausible that babies born during the Summer months share something in common, and babies born during Winter months share something else. Since astrological signs are 100% correlated with the seasons, one could "guess" with a higher probability than random chance these traits. The causality would obviously not be from stars to b…
This study was a followup to one that just used signs [1], which yielded performance no better than chance. If the summer/winter correlation held, then that study would have shown positive results, which it did not. There's nothing to say that these star charts or seasons of birth cannot correlate with personality traits or life outcomes. But Astrology, as a practice, is not useful for unwinding those correlations. I…
Also, summer in one half of the world is winter in the other, so the signs do not correlate 100% with seasons, and you'd have to study across geographies.
Re: Does Astrology Work?
#150Nothing new or surprising was learned, the skeptics say 'see!' the 'believers' will disregard. And it's fine. Most people don't believe tarot cards are really some magical thing, it's just an interactive and creative way to get some random inspirational qoutes or text. It's either fitting and viewed a true, or not fitting and simply disregarded. I know it's all bs, but that doesn't mean it cannot be entertaining.
> Most people don't believe tarot cards are really some magical thing, it's just an interactive and creative way to get some random inspirational qoutes or text
I think most people believe tarot cards are not a magical thing and they also don't think it's an interactive and creative way to get some random inspirational quotes or text.
The number of people who practice tarot for entertainment of any kind is vanishingly small; and of that population, I'm not convinced that there are fewer true believers than for-fun-only folks.