Social help

[barmar]

For those who think that describing astrology as nonsense is somehow different from describing religion as nonsense... consider the origins of astrology... a belief in our lives being influenced by the stars stems from now-obsolete religious beliefs. IOW, it is a form of religion.

And so was Greek mythology, but no one believes in it seriously now. To modern society it's just fairy tales, good source material for popular entertainment, like the Hercules and Xena TV shows.

 

So while there was a time when the Court Astrologer was as important a political figure as the Secretary of Treasury is now, that time has long passed. Astrology is no longer a mainstream religion, and the people who believe in it are on their own. Astrologers don't get tax-exempt status like churches do.

[gwnn]

Just don't say anything. If they ask your opinion directly, you have to tell them of course that you think it's unscientific and generally false.

[mikeh]

So while there was a time when the Court Astrologer was as important a political figure as the Secretary of Treasury is now, that time has long passed.  Astrology is no longer a mainstream religion, and the people who believe in it are on their own.  Astrologers don't get tax-exempt status like churches do.

Ronald Reagan reportedly used an astrologer, as did Hitler.. so it's not perhaps as outdated as it should be

[NickRW]

So while there was a time when the Court Astrologer was as important a political figure as the Secretary of Treasury is now, that time has long passed.

I don't know. I think sometimes, given the ups and downs of modern economies, that perhaps the post of Secretary of the Treasury should binned along with Court Astrologer.

[onoway]

One of our early Prime Ministers. William Lyon McKenzie King was a highly successful politician ( PM from 1921-1930 & 1935-1948). U of Toronto and Harvard grad, he was responsible for some evolutionary policies (old age pensions, appointing the first woman senator) as well as a some disgraceful ones(internment and confiscation of property of Japanese Canadians in WW2). Wikipedia says:

 

Privately, he was highly eccentric with his preference for communing with spirits, including those of Leonardo da Vinci, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, his dead mother, and several of his Irish Terrier dogs, all named Pat. He also claimed to commune with the spirit of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, American president and close friend.[32] He sought personal reassurance from the spirit world, rather than seeking political advice. Indeed, after his death, one of his mediums said that she had not realized that he was a politician. King asked whether his party would win the 1935 election, one of the few times politics came up during his seances. His occult interests were not widely known during his years in office, and only became publicized later, and have seen in his occult activities a penchant for forging unities from antitheses, thus having latent political import. In 1953 Time Magazine stated that he owned – and used – both a Ouija board and a crystal ball. In the 1970s biographers used the extensive diaries he kept during most of his life to delve deeper into his occult activities. One person he held seances with was Canadian Artist Homer Watson.

[Codo]

I won't care much if my Prime minister will ask an astrologer and follow his advice.

 

We all know that you can read "anything" into an horoscope. So what will the astrologer do when he has to decide what the state should do in the future?

 

He will use his knowledge and his feelings to get the Prime Minster into the direction he wants him to take. Or he will know what the PRime Minister wants and deliver the horoscope which makes him happy.

 

Okay, so you don't like when there are people who look into the future and try to influence our leaders in this ways?

 

Fair point, but in this case we should forbid all these "experts" and lobbyists who influence our political leaders today. After all, they do exactly the same: Influence the leaders in their way, to reach their own goals or simply agreeing with the leaders because they will lose their job if they don't.

 

Where is the difference?

 

Or do you habe any clues in history that the words of astrologers, witches or whatever had lead to more wars, harm, lost money etc then the words of our actual "experts"? It had needed a lot of witchcraft to burn these hundreds of billions of $ the bankers lost. And it needed a really hard look into the stars to find a reason to invade Iran.

[helene_t]

Roland, this is silly. Experts are experts or at least supposed to be. Astrologers are crooks.

[Codo]

Roland, this is silly. Experts are experts or at least supposed to be. Astrologers are crooks.

Do you think that the experts are able to see into the future?

 

Do you think that the governement has experts as advisors who are willing to serve the state and make their remarks to the best benefit of the state?

 

If you have those experts, I do agree.

 

However, we have experts in Germany who work different. :) And I doubt that this is just a german problem.

 

I can give you thousands of examples where the experts erred or gave advice due to their own wishes and not due to what is good for the state.

 

One problem is, that the governement is not able to get the best and most independent advisors. You can get the best or independent, but not both.

 

If they are good, they have great jobs in the industry and even if they work for the governement, they will do nothing what can hurt their industry.

 

A second problem is that you are simply not able to look into the future. In our global world, it is simply impossible to see what a single change will do.

 

So I think the idea is not so silly as it sounds. The advisor and lobbist system we have is not a good one, it is (nearly) as bad as witchcraft or astrology.

[blackshoe]

"What is good for the state." Interesting phrase, that.

 

I suggest that "what is good for the state" and "what is good for the individuals who live in the state" are not necessarily the same thing.

[barmar]

So while there was a time when the Court Astrologer was as important a political figure as the Secretary of Treasury is now, that time has long passed.  Astrology is no longer a mainstream religion, and the people who believe in it are on their own.  Astrologers don't get tax-exempt status like churches do.

Ronald Reagan reportedly used an astrologer, as did Hitler.. so it's not perhaps as outdated as it should be

I thought it was Nancy Reagan who had the astrologer. But either way, were they on the government payroll? Were they a member of the cabinet?

 

IIRC, Reagan's astrologer was the frequent butt of jokes. It wasn't a respected position, like the Court Astrologers of yore.

 

I don't understand why you're arguing this point. Is astrology afforded 1st Amendment protection, like Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and even Scientology? Have you noticed that newspapers put the horoscopes on the same page as the comic strips? They've been required for years to disclaim that these are purely for entertainment purposes, not "news".

[mike777]

So while there was a time when the Court Astrologer was as important a political figure as the Secretary of Treasury is now, that time has long passed.  Astrology is no longer a mainstream religion, and the people who believe in it are on their own.  Astrologers don't get tax-exempt status like churches do.

Ronald Reagan reportedly used an astrologer, as did Hitler.. so it's not perhaps as outdated as it should be

I thought it was Nancy Reagan who had the astrologer. But either way, were they on the government payroll? Were they a member of the cabinet?

 

IIRC, Reagan's astrologer was the frequent butt of jokes. It wasn't a respected position, like the Court Astrologers of yore.

 

I don't understand why you're arguing this point. Is astrology afforded 1st Amendment protection, like Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and even Scientology? Have you noticed that newspapers put the horoscopes on the same page as the comic strips? They've been required for years to disclaim that these are purely for entertainment purposes, not "news".

 

 

 

 

 

 

"She championed recreational drug prevention causes by founding the "Just Say No" drug awareness campaign, which was considered her major initiative as First Lady. Always protective of her husband, more controversy ensued when it was revealed in 1988 that she had consulted an astrologer to assist in planning the president's schedule after the 1981 assassination attempt on her husband."

[Gerben42]

Astrologers are crooks.

 

I don't think so. They are "alternative psychiatrists". Although proven nonsense, it's a service that anyone can evaluate for themselves. Getting reassured that your life will improve is a real service. Moral support can help you, even if it isn't based on anything.

 

No one knows the future, although up to a point you can make some predictions. Chaos theory tells you the time scale for different predictions. For weather, it's about 1 week. For the stock market, it's probably much less.

 

Real crooks are those who offer you a service that make you worse off, for example people offering you a scheme to pick better lottery numbers. Or people who lure you into a contract you never wanted in the first place, and don't let you out of it.

[helene_t]

Astrologers are crooks.

 

I don't think so. They are "alternative psychiatrists".

OK, it may be unfair to call the ones giving personal advice "crooks". But those who claim to be qualified as presidential advisers are crooks IMHO.

[y66]

My friend Marcelo is into astrology. If he were at a dinner party with bridge players, he would probably listen politely and interestedly, even though he doesn't know anything about bridge,and he would probably be curious about why people play this game.

 

Did someone really say that astrologers are crooks and that it "may" be unfair to call all astrologers crooks? Not a virgo surely! :)

[Al_U_Card]

Sciences are factual and rational.

 

Arts are interpretive and speculative.

 

Astrology is a mantic art and any who profess it to be a science are merely deluded or confused.

[Gerben42]

OK, it may be unfair to call the ones giving personal advice "crooks". But those who claim to be qualified as presidential advisers are crooks IMHO.

 

Perhaps a president should be required to pass a "sanity check"... I have often asked myself if astrologers believe in their own stuff, or just pretend. After all, to be a good astrologer, there is no need to believe in it. People will buy it anyway.

 

Although I am not "into" astrology, I have always had a fond interest in the apparently supernatural. You can call it a search for something I could believe in.

 

Anyway, I can say that I know a lot more about astrology, parapsychology and all these kinds of things than most. However, in my search for the supernatural I have found exactly nothing. Zero. Nada.

 

The most well-known astrologists in the world cannot pass simple scientific tests, world famous mediums are quickly uncovered practicing cold reading (but some of them are VERY skilled at it). Mentalists turn out to be con artists, worth only their entertainment value. Miracles consistently turn out to be hoaxes, and what seems like a divine coincidence doesn't pass a basic statistical test.

 

There is still a lot that cannot be explained, but even there one can see a path how things could be explained with future research. The universe works on a set of rules (called "laws of nature", and it's up to us to identify those rules and use them to our advantage.

[blackshoe]

Have you noticed that newspapers put the horoscopes on the same page as the comic strips? They've been required for years to disclaim that these are purely for entertainment purposes, not "news".

Eh? Required by whom, and on what grounds?

[barmar]

Have you noticed that newspapers put the horoscopes on the same page as the comic strips?  They've been required for years to disclaim that these are purely for entertainment purposes, not "news".

Eh? Required by whom, and on what grounds?

Sorry, I was wrong. The Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP) has been advocating this since the 80's, and a few dozen newspapers do it voluntarily.

 

IMHO, newspapers should be required to do this in order to enjoy the 1st Amendment "freedom of the press" rights. News organizations are supposed to be purveyors of facts, and publishing horoscopes without disclaimers goes against that responsibility.

[helene_t]

IMHO, newspapers should be required to do this in order to enjoy the 1st Amendment "freedom of the press" rights.  News organizations are supposed to be purveyors of facts, and publishing horoscopes without disclaimers goes against that responsibility.

Somewhat off-topic, I disagree with that. I am not comfortable with judges and politicians defining what constitutes scientific facts. Of course, judges and politicians have to weigh the expert advice they receive themselves, but advice given to the general public is IMHO better weighted by the "market". Some newspapers frequently publish "facts" which are later debunked. Some of us then take those newspapers less seriously, and that factors into the cost-benefit considerations of those newspapers.

 

The right to free speech is a right, not a privilege. Everybody has that right. Pseudo-scientists, too.

[the hog]

So while there was a time when the Court Astrologer was as important a political figure as the Secretary of Treasury is now, that time has long passed.  Astrology is no longer a mainstream religion, and the people who believe in it are on their own.  Astrologers don't get tax-exempt status like churches do.

Ronald Reagan reportedly used an astrologer, as did Hitler.. so it's not perhaps as outdated as it should be

So does Norodom Sihanouk, as well as many leading Thai politicians. If you called theroyal astrologer a crook you would be up on charges of lese majeste.

[shintaro]

;)

 

if a mixed group just tell them you are a virgin and see what evolves

 

:rolleyes:

[Winstonm]

;)

 

if a mixed group just tell them you are a virgin and see what evolves

 

:rolleyes:

Virgins don't evolve - they were created by Intelligent Design. B)

[blackshoe]

IMHO, newspapers should be required to do this in order to enjoy the 1st Amendment "freedom of the press" rights. News organizations are supposed to be purveyors of facts, and publishing horoscopes without disclaimers goes against that responsibility.

I agree with Helene. Besides, in the US at least your suggestion would require a Constitutional Amendmentment - one that's not, IMO, a good idea.

 

As for news orgs being "purveyors of facts" they no more do that in their more normal "reporting" than they do in publishing horoscopes.

[ASkolnick]

It's funny people mentioned the "alternative psychiatrist" theme.

 

Because on the TV show Frazier an astrologist said

 

"What's the difference between what you and I do? I listen and try to help people feel better about themselves"

 

Frazier's reply was "Yes, but I can prescribe drugs".

[han]

How about fortune cookies, does anybody take them seriously? Some of them can be rather distressing.