Astro Talk

Or, as some commenters like to call it, anti-intellectual batshit delusion!!!

Mercury goes direct today. (Road Runner stops short at end of cliff, Wile E. Coyote slam into him. Got that image?)

We still have the ongoing square (stressful aspect) between Saturn, Pluto and Uranus. As Astrobarry says, “It’s hard not to interpret this combination in terms of provocation, confrontation and tumult.”

Hah! You think you got problems? Saturn exactly conjuncts my natal sun this year on my birthday. That’s going to blow goats, I think. It’s gonna be a damned pivotal year for just about everyone.

18 thoughts on “Astro Talk

  1. Wow, “anti-intellectual batshit delusion” would make a great refrain to a rock song!

    “provocation, confrontation and tumult?” Just another day in the trenches with rethugs.

  2. Thanks Susie, I finally get astrology!

    You aren’t responsible for your failures! I see why that would be appealing for some people!

    Here’s to hoping that those darn planets stop messing up your life.

    *shakes fist at mischievously orbiting hunks of gas and rock millions of miles away*

  3. You’re right. One of my failures is that I can’t resist mocking silly stuff I see online.

    You practically begged me with that “some commentors” stuff. I wouldn’t say “anti-intellectual” though. I think its just an ignorant, sometimes willful, delusion that tends to be associated with anti-scientific thinking. If you were curious!

  4. Apparently you’re laboring under the delusion that you’re the first asshole who’s taken it upon himself (and it is invariably a male, because they live to explain to women how their intuitive senses are worthless) to straighten me out on this subject. Don’t flatter yourself, dear.

  5. You infer so much from facts not in evidence!

    My dear Susie, welcome to the internet. People disagree about things. I would be happy to discuss the factual basis for our respective opinions without needlessly insulting dialogue, yet the last time we began to do that you deleted all the comments after I rebutted a scholarly work you referenced! An inauspicious start! To stridently claim that disagreement with you is born from sexism does not help the matter much, though I can ignore it because it doesn’t strike very close to the mark at all.

    If you want to express opinions without having them challenged, perhaps a self-published book is a more appropriate venue than an A- list blog?

  6. Excuse my ignorance, I’ve not seen such discussions here before, and clearly since I don’t know you, I don’t know what kind of similar discussions you’ve had elsewhere.

    Either you’re interested in discussing it, or you’re not. I happen to be interested in how belief in astrology can be best explained through psychology and sociology rather than any justifiable defense of the evidence. To that end, I make snarky comments to astrologers.

    If it bothers you, refute me or ignore me. I won’t hold my breath for the former.

  7. How about I give you a list of 100 astrology textbooks, you read all of them and then you might have something to say that isn’t blowing smoke out your ass.

  8. This seems to be a fundamental point of contention. I contend that I need not be intimately familiar with the practice of astrology to reach a firm conclusion that the claims thereof are without merit.

    For instance, I have more than a passing familiarity with the global warming “controversy,” and the arguments of the anthropogenic global warming deniers. I have read arguments for and against, and have accepted the conclusion that the scientific evidence is firmly on the side of AGW. If a wingnut claimed that I could not reach such a conclusion without first reading 100 books by Mark Levin and Glenn Beck, I would dismiss them with prejudice.

    I have looked for evidence of the credibility of the claims of astrology and found nothing substantial or convincing. If your list of textbooks holds such evidence, I would be interested.

  9. In other words, your “intuition” is that there’s no validity to astrology, and therefore doesn’t require actual knowledge. Just so we’re clear.

  10. No, I’m sorry if I was unclear. This has nothing to do with intuition, though I obviously admit that the lack of plausible physical mechanisms makes me assume a low a priori probability of its validity. Exactly the same as homeopathy.

    Like homeopathy, though, I could be convinced by evidence. I have looked for evidence of astrology, and as far as I have found it all points in one direction.

    That does not mean that I am as familiar with the subject as practicing or devoted astrologers. I simply repeat that I do not need to study the minutia of how it is practiced when others have studied and tested it and credibly reported their findings. Unless I assume a conspiracy on the part of the scientific community, I trust their conclusions in the inefficacy of astrology.

    Was that clearer?

  11. You made it clear that you’re not willing to apply the scientific method to the hypotheses you reject based on your intuition.

  12. Again, I am trying to explicitly make clear that that is not so, Susie. You can continue to claim it, but I think my comments are clear.

    Let’s back up a second. Do you think the scientific method can be applied to astrology? Because I think it obviously can, but I don’t know your opinion.

    Let’s start there.

  13. That’s a “no” to my question about using the scientific method to evaluate astrology? Maybe we should take a second step back and see if we agree on the meaning of the scientific method then.

    Regarding the books, I’m obviously not going to read “100 textbooks” on astrology. Surely there are one or two books, however, that could make a compelling enough case that they would interest me to learn more.

    Could you suggest then one or two books to start with? Surely that will save you the effort of compiling a list 100 long.

  14. Susie, I suspect you are being intentionally obtuse.

    Am I to believe that you have withheld judgement on all topics you blog about until you have read “100 textbooks” in the field?

    Clearly I have a lay interest in astrology. I have read scientific accounts of investigations and accepted their conclusions that it is bunk.

    Indeed, your arguments above are incoherent. You lambast me for allegedly refusing to apply the scientific method to astrology, when in fact I clearly stated it was the basis for my opinions, and then you claim astrology cannot be subjected to the scientific method, and that I must read “100 textbooks” thus far unnamed on te subject before I can draw any conclusions.

    I can only presume that your intentionally obtuse style is aimed at securing a column in the Washington Post. To that end may I suggest using astrology to support neoconservative undertakings? That’s a niche I think they may be interested in..

Comments are closed.