--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "hugheshugo" > > > <richardhughes103@> wrote: > > > > > > > > The idea that planets can go "retrograde" is all due to the > > > > ludicrous maths involved in making the earth appear to be > > > > the centre of the solar system, it really isn't. > > > > <snip Barry's comment in which he appears to express the belief that astrologers think the planets really do change direction> > > > > >> For the record, since the time of Copernicus > > (1473-1543), astrologers have known that > > retrograde motion is only apparent. Sorry, but > > they don't "believe" that planets actually turn > > around and move backward. They're also well > > aware that the earth revolves around the sun. > > > > And retrograde motion never did have anything to > > do with "maths." You don't need "maths" to > > detect retrograde motion, just careful > > observation of the night sky. > > The maths I refer to is the ludicrous system of cosines, > tangents etc needed to make the earth appear to be the centre > of the solar system, of course we have known since the time > of copernicus that isn't true but every time an astrologer sits > down to do a "chart" he uses the same maths! Iknow this because > I used to be interested in it and got a book on how to draw up > horoscopes.
Well, yes, but in any case, again, the math isn't the reason the planets appear to go retrograde, it's just visual observation. <snip> > > What gives me the shivers is that if you wanted to *design* a > > system for divination for human beings on earth, you could hardly > > do better than the sun, the moon, and the planets in the > > constellations. The system seems tailor-made for that purpose. > > "Seems" is the operative word here, it wasn't made at all as > we now well know. Well, we *don't* know, really, either way. But I'm not making a claim that it was, just pointing out how natural and logical it was for humans to draw that conclusion way back when (I think you agree with me on that). <snip> > Someone else on here uses the idea that because it has been > around so long "it's stuck to the wall" it must be true. This > is faulty reasoning. Sooner or later every culture has to > accept that the earth isn't flat, counter-intuitive though it > is the weight of evidence eventually becomes overwhelming. Yeah, but in fact, the premise of astrology--the data on which it is based--has to do with how the sky appears from earth. There's no conceivable evidence to the contrary for that premise! If you think about it for a moment, astrology doesn't depend operationally on the idea that the earth is flat, or even that the earth is the center of the universe, nor that the celestial bodies actually influence affairs on earth. What's in question is whether the appearance of the sky from earth is *correlated* with affairs on earth, such that predictions about the latter can be derived from what the sky is going to look like at some future point (which astrologers can determine with great precision). In other words, astrology *could* be valid even though the earth is flat, goes around the sun, and isn't the center of the universe, and even though science tells us there's no possible mechanism of influence. It doesn't *have* to involve an accurate description of reality in terms of how the solar system really operates, as long as it *does* involve an accurate description of what the sky looks like from the earth. The sky's appearance from earth has its own very solid reality. > So the question is not "is astrology an accurate descritption of > reality" but "why do so many continue to believe in it?" I think the person who said astrology has "stuck to the wall" was referring to what he perceives to be the record of accuracy of the predictions astrology makes. That's certainly questionable--it's extremely difficult to do any kind of valid scientific test-- but it isn't inherently faulty reasoning. > I think it > sticks to the wall because it's such a seductive idea that > we can see the future and avoid returning karma, it can > even help with relationships and tell us how wonderful we are! Sure. The accuracy of predictions and personality analysis can be very much a matter of wishful thinking, no question about it. > I also think there is a fear of loneliness or that we are > truly responsible for ourselves and all that happens in our > lives, blame is better to give than recieve. On the other hand, science fulfills the same needs in many respects, e.g., genetics. > So the meme continues to propagate to every new generation. Most > people encounter astrology in some form long before they come > across physics or cosmology but they have taught us much more > about the universe and ourselves than jyotish ever could but as > you say that was the starting point. Tangentially, I recently copy edited a book with a fascinating premise. The author suggests that the ubiquitous ancient myth in virtually all cultures of the "fall" of humankind from divinity is a result of the discovery over time of the precession of the equinoxes--the perception that the "slippage" of what had been seen to be a perfect system of heavenly cycles indicated that something had gone wrong with the harmonious relationship between humans and the gods (the stars). If so, what an agonizing and prolonged existential crisis that must have been, the slowly dawning recognition that humankind and divine perfection had parted company and were no longer aligned. It almost seems as though the human race may be still suffering corporately from a kind of deeply buried, archetypal post-traumatic stress syndrome passed down through the generations as a result of that awful ancient discovery. Gives me chills just to think about it.
