Live data from Hacker News

Does Astrology Work?

clearerthinking.org

151–160 of 188 posts

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Traditional astrology has an extremely sophisticated system underneath. Modern astrology, not so much.

It is my understanding that ancient astrology was basically proto-astronomy, similar to how alchemy was the forerunner of chemistry/advanced metallurgy. A lot of woo, but the ‘art’ still had enough systematized concepts and early discoveries that it offered some limited scientific scaffolding.

This is true.

The sophisticated system I'm speaking of however is not the astronomical science (though indeed they were responsible for this development, and it was of course sophisticated) but rather a methodical, extensive, rules-based study of fate, as related to platonic (archetypal) forms.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#152
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Astrology works Citation needed. Even agreement between the astrologers was low, which is a strong argument that it doesn't work even if you believe in it. That is, the patterns "predicted" by astrology simply do not exist; individuals cannot reliably reinforce their behavior based on expected behavior because there is no agreement on what the expected behavior is. > most doctors don't perform much better than thes…

Dr. Barry Marshall intentionally drank a culture of bacteria to give himself a peptic ulcer and then cured himself, as part of his study. And had to do this because he was ostracized by academic orthodoxy and funding machinations. They wouldn't publish his papers and tried to RIF him...Everybody that's at risk for developing an ulcer (or had one) owes their quality of life to the wild risks he took. Doctors aren't su…

Yes, this is just like astrology, where controversial trailblazing astrologers upset the status quo by dramatic demonstrations in violation of the status quo!

In a different thread we could have a nuanced discussion of both the theory and practice of medicine. But the very worst view of modern medicine is so far ahead of astrology that it isn't even a meaningful comparison.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is all the "scientific" fields that are nearly as high on the bullshit quotient as astrology that we stubbornly continue to defend.

Which fields do you have in mind, other than... doctors, apparently?

Sociology, psychology, biology, political science, economics oh man does the list go on... If you spend time supporting scientists in doing statistics and research methodology for any amount of time you will see the emperor has absolutely no clothes.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#155
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is all the "scientific" fields that are nearly as high on the bullshit quotient as astrology that we stubbornly continue to defend.

Can we pinpoint a specific decade this happened or is it a slow process? Because if we count CS as a science, I’m seeing it become just like the worst of the sciences in this regard. AI has really gotten me pessimistic. There’s so much borrowing from other subjects since there are now models for every subject and every grade level, which ultimately will become products for large corporations. Like maybe we should hir…

I've only had an inside view of academia since the mid aughts, but it was already a well established issue then with departments trying to institute p-hacking controls and citation rings being a known thing. I think a big part of why it's exploding so hard is the scarcity of academic jobs combined with the big push to increase STEM PhD production leaving people to a cutthroat competition, where you have to either cheat or be absolutely brilliant to have a real shot at a tenured position.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#156

Earlier 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!

Moderators would gave an extremely difficult task trying to sift through (a) what most of think is hunk and (b) the cases where most of us are actually wrong.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#157
My wife likes astrology. I just put it as one of those quirks in people. This is especially curious because of just how intelligent she is. She has several degrees, including a PHD. Then, she pointed out something to me: something doesn't necessarily have to be true to have value.

She uses astrology not in any predictive manor but as a qualitative evaluation. All of the signs have descriptions and ways to think about the character. For instance, Cancers tend to keep people out because the only thing that protects them from their soft, emotional insides is their shell. This makes them also tend to avoid direct conflict, which makes them move in sideways directions. However, if they interact, they don't have much more than claws, so they may pinch without knowing it. They also tend to find their place to bury and if kept happy will tend to stay where they are. If not, they tend to move on without creating a huge issue out it.

I'm not going to suggest in any shape or form that A) all people born Cancers behave this way or B) planets have anything to do with causing this. What I am saying is: if you see someone acting with these traits, you can decide that maybe the reason why is because they're concerned about being hurt. I've learned to have a bit less judgement and a bit more grace in people now. Maybe people just have a difference view of priorities and not all motivations are spoken:

  * Aries - Brash, bold, and like taking the lead in situations.  Also tend to be naïve and more morally black-and-white.
  * Taurus - Stubborn but reliable. Tend to value only what they find for themselves, ie "you can't lead a horse to water..".
  * Gemini - Appear as twins, because something is definitely _the best way_ until the next thing is _best way_.  They're not flighty, just not that concerned with opportunity costs.
  * Cancer - Emotional and nurturing, doesn't want to be crushed.  Tend stay where they are unless moved by discomfort, but won't tell you.
  * Leo - Confident, charismatic, and is concerned about accomplishments and family.  Very loud more than anything else and can be pacified by stroking their mane.
  * Virgo - Detail-oriented and practical. Often perfectionists because they are comfortable with repeated process.  Get uncomfortable unknowns, which makes them not want to complete projects.
  * Libra - Diplomatic and charming, value balance and harmony, but judge everything even if inappropriate.
  * Scorpio - Intense, passionate, but reserved.  Often so reserved that people wonder if they are going to get stabbed when all the Scorpio is doing is being quiet on their rock in the sun and ignoring everyone.
* Sagittarius - Adventurous and optimistic, they love exploring and new ideas. Shares stores and thoughts, often without considering if it is appropriate or not. * Capricorn - Ambitious and disciplined, focused on long-term goals, even if it is at the cost of ramming something through. Doesn't mean to be mean, but a challenge is hard to resist. * Aquarius - Independent and innovative, they march to the beat of their own drum. Big things can tank because "it seemed like a good idea at the time." * Pisces - Compassionate and dreamy, enjoys the ideas. Can be frustratingly non-concrete, but also have have spontaneously amazing insights. The one who points out "you know you could just..?"

This is now stuff I think about before assigning malice to someone's actions or just brushing someone off who isn't thinking like me.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#158
post #74
post #53

Obviously 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…

Kary Mullis (nobel laureate for discovering PCR, allowing DNA sequencing) disagrees in his book “dancing naked in the mindfield” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kary_Mullis

All this points to is the danger of believing someone based on reputation rather than evidence.

Empirical evidence is the basis of science, not reputation. No one, no matter what they've done before, gets to present their hypotheses as fact without evidence.

One problem that outsiders to a field have is that we may lack the background knowledge to evaluate the evidence for a hypothesis. In that case, I try to rely on consensus rather than one expert opinion.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#159
post #119

Earlier 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…

> It is entirely plausible that babies born during the Summer months share something in common, and babies born during Winter months share something else. This would not account for reversal of the seasons in opposite hemispheres... ... or do the northern and southern hemispheres practice a different "western" astrology (!).

90% of humans live in the northern hemisphere, it would still be strongly predictive if true.

Re: Does Astrology Work?

#160
I find these studies a waste of time. If you disbelieve in astrology and believe in science, then this is or course what it will show you.

If you believe in astrology, you probably also believe in some unfalsifiable statements about it and have reasons to not trust studies like this.

It's like trying to convince flat earthers using General Relativity. If you believe the earth is round, you don't need GR, and if you don't, it doesn't help.

So it goes back to what you believe, and the statistics is clever decoration.

Post reply on HN