Dear Jeffrey! Wow, you were indeed fortunate to have a long term association with this clear thinking man! He must have been very pleased to have you, who did more than prepare for interviews, you engaged in full discussions! Such a listening pleasure.
astrology is the mother of all science. it was praised by kings and philosophers for thousands of years. It has always been the premise of serious thought. Look to ancient astrology, not modern.
Astrology is the only field of study created by a couple of advanced civilizations, also responsible for math, astronomy and geometry, that modern people love to laugh at, ridicule and put down. As Michael O'Conner says below, "To reject something without deeply studying it is simply a form of bigotry disguised as intelligence." I work in science and astrology and patterns. I know astrology works as a symbolic language based in time and space, but no one cares to spend the money to fully investigate a symbolic, language-like, formulae that uses probabilities and fuzzy logic, but not specific and simplistic 'laws'. Time and space (position) has to be combined into the eventual study of astrology.
Well the proof of burden is on the astrologers not the scientist. Why are the astrologers not investigating astrology using fuzzy logic and probabilities? Most astrologers I have seen do not have the mathematical abilities to construct a chart ever less use fuzzy logic or probabilities. I mean come on folks there are about 10 different house systems? Which is the right one? I have seen studies done where you have like a sample of a 1000 folks and astrology can predict 550 and cannot predict 450. It passes the chi-test and every one jumps up and starts a hollerin this proves astrology? Well all it proves is that it passed the chi-test, better than chance. But if you look at it how would one use that in chart interpretation? Might as well flip a coin. There have been astrology groups that have used neuro net. A Statistical program that goes through the data an associates certain weights with the planetary aspects ..blah blah blah...And whoopy do it dont mean squat. I am just curious you being a scientist and all how would you go about proving astrology with fuzzy logic? Is astrology linear or non linear. What do I think of it all? Well i prefer to look at things like we follow the material world/scientific world/spiritual world (subjective). Scientist make theories and then try to prove them....that is why we have cell phones/tv's/automobiles ect. Do i believe that astrology is scientific? No I believe it is subjective and you are never going to prove it scientifically. I do believe that certain folks can look at charts and through intuition do a good job of interpretation. Most forget it. So it is a subjective field of study... make it up as you go along.
Thank you.. I was stuck in a limbo of thought and growth, cause I chose to use but not believe for the reason of no proof (and because I'm very logical)... but the way you explain it made so much sense that I'm very grateful for u sharing this knowledge.. and I hope the speaker gets to read this too so he could at least receive my thank you.. Best, Juan P.S. If it means anything this first actual comment in UA-cam thanks
Astrology can be defined as the influence of Astronomy on Bio-social systems, as such the Day (Circadian Cycle) & the Year (Seasonal Biology) constitute "proof of concept" for Astrology.
I am quite familiar with evolutionary biology. Mutations in DNA happen by 'chance,' which is just to say that DNA sometimes doesn't copy itself correctly for whatever reason (no system is perfect all the time). However, evolution itself is NOT random. The genes that manage to survive long enough to make copies of themselves become more numerous with time than genes that don't, or that make less copies. This is called natural selection. Young needed to read some Dawkins before he talked biology.
Michel Gauquelin used something like a 36 divisions or so...not 12 houses in his so that is not astrology that uses the 12 house system...so even if you say mars conj midheaven will make a soldier out of you ...why do I have mars conjunct midheaven and i shore in the ell never made it into the military or had a desire to do it. And does one example prove that all of astrology is true..I do not think so. I would really like to see some astrologers quit talking about how true it is an give me more than a few examples...If they have been around with the kings and queens we should have it pretty much nailed down by now.
It is certainly true that “science” has blind spots, or at least, areas that are very weak. Eg human health, eg consciousness, eg the healing that occurs in the zone of the placebo effect.
guys doesn't it tell you enough that the world has wobble over the past 2,000 years, and that you r not the star sign you think you are?? Astrology is an ancient study which was part of us humans evolving, but as we evolve we learn more and we apply changes, we cannot think that we where capable of studing the human nature better 2,000 years ago than now in the 21st century.
Pastorino Fabio ....Hello sir....Yes u r right...we might not b the star sign we consider it now....but I guess when we consider the full Date of Birth of a person...it takes care of the planetary positions of the 21st century & everthying else...
Hi: astrology zero aries = science zero aries = NASA zero aries = VE vernal equinox of that precessional wobble! It does not equal the right ascention of Misarthim at zero zodiacal aries for another 24,000 years
Not trying to pick a fight, but Young loses credibility with me with his participation in this conversation on Astrology. I'm open to conversations on the limits of thought within the scientific community, but Astrology can't be the premise of serious conversations.
Why not? Reputation? Astrology as practiced by the ancient Egyptians and Hindi is as complicated or perhaps more complicated as a modern discipline like chemistry. If I scattered 50 random pages of a first year chemistry book written in a language that has been dead for 5000 years or more, you wouldn't be able to get any meaningful results from them. I daresay that not understanding something is not the same thing as it lacking credibility.
Dear Jeffrey! Wow, you were indeed fortunate to have a long term association with this clear thinking man! He must have been very pleased to have you, who did more than prepare for interviews, you engaged in full discussions! Such a listening pleasure.
astrology is the mother of all science. it was praised by kings and philosophers for thousands of years. It has always been the premise of serious thought. Look to ancient astrology, not modern.
Astrology is the only field of study created by a couple of advanced civilizations, also responsible for math, astronomy and geometry, that modern people love to laugh at, ridicule and put down. As Michael O'Conner says below, "To reject something without deeply studying it is simply a form of bigotry disguised as intelligence." I work in science and astrology and patterns. I know astrology works as a symbolic language based in time and space, but no one cares to spend the money to fully investigate a symbolic, language-like, formulae that uses probabilities and fuzzy logic, but not specific and simplistic 'laws'. Time and space (position) has to be combined into the eventual study of astrology.
Well the proof of burden is on the astrologers not the scientist.
Why are the astrologers not investigating astrology using fuzzy logic and probabilities? Most astrologers I have seen do not have the mathematical abilities to construct a chart ever less use fuzzy logic or probabilities. I mean come on folks there are about 10 different house systems? Which is the right one? I have seen studies done where you have like a sample of a 1000 folks
and astrology can predict 550 and cannot predict 450. It passes the chi-test and every one jumps up and starts a hollerin this proves astrology? Well all it proves is that it passed the chi-test, better than chance. But if you look at it how would one use that in chart interpretation? Might as well flip a coin. There have been astrology groups that have used neuro net. A Statistical program that goes through the data an associates certain weights with the planetary aspects ..blah blah blah...And whoopy do it dont mean squat. I am just curious you being a scientist and all how would you go about proving astrology with fuzzy logic? Is astrology linear or non linear. What do I think of it all? Well i prefer to look at things like we follow the material world/scientific world/spiritual world (subjective). Scientist make theories and then try to prove them....that is why we have cell phones/tv's/automobiles ect. Do i believe that astrology is scientific?
No I believe it is subjective and you are never going to prove it scientifically.
I do believe that certain folks can look at charts and through intuition do a good job of interpretation. Most forget it. So it is a subjective field of study...
make it up as you go along.
Thank you.. I was stuck in a limbo of thought and growth, cause I chose to use but not believe for the reason of no proof (and because I'm very logical)... but the way you explain it made so much sense that I'm very grateful for u sharing this knowledge.. and I hope the speaker gets to read this too so he could at least receive my thank you..
Best,
Juan
P.S. If it means anything this first actual comment in UA-cam thanks
I wish I could listen to/read everything Arthur Young ever said/wrote. He has DEEP understanding of everything.
Astrology can be defined as the influence of Astronomy on Bio-social systems, as such the Day (Circadian Cycle) & the Year (Seasonal Biology) constitute "proof of concept" for Astrology.
I love this man
That chronos concept just blew my mind
This man is very intelligent !
Brilliance.
The proof of astrology must be in the transits, due to the fairly high coincidence rate.
I am quite familiar with evolutionary biology. Mutations in DNA happen by 'chance,' which is just to say that DNA sometimes doesn't copy itself correctly for whatever reason (no system is perfect all the time). However, evolution itself is NOT random. The genes that manage to survive long enough to make copies of themselves become more numerous with time than genes that don't, or that make less copies. This is called natural selection. Young needed to read some Dawkins before he talked biology.
Nothing to it but you explain why.
Heard of Michel Gauquelin, by the way?
Michel Gauquelin used something like a 36 divisions or so...not 12 houses in his
so that is not astrology that uses the 12 house system...so even if you say mars conj midheaven will make a soldier out of you ...why do I have mars conjunct midheaven and i shore in the ell never made it into the military or had a desire to do it. And does one example prove that all of astrology is true..I do not think so. I would really like to see some astrologers quit talking about how
true it is an give me more than a few examples...If they have been around with the kings and queens we should have it pretty much nailed down by now.
It is certainly true that “science” has blind spots, or at least, areas that are very weak. Eg human health, eg consciousness, eg the healing that occurs in the zone of the placebo effect.
And to show of human limitations. Science is ruled by Saturn, so does have limitations.
guys doesn't it tell you enough that the world has wobble over the past 2,000 years, and that you r not the star sign you think you are?? Astrology is an ancient study which was part of us humans evolving, but as we evolve we learn more and we apply changes, we cannot think that we where capable of studing the human nature better 2,000 years ago than now in the 21st century.
Pastorino Fabio ....Hello sir....Yes u r right...we might not b the star sign we consider it now....but I guess when we consider the full Date of Birth of a person...it takes care of the planetary positions of the 21st century & everthying else...
Hi: astrology zero aries = science zero aries = NASA zero aries = VE vernal equinox of that precessional wobble!
It does not equal the right ascention of Misarthim at zero zodiacal aries for another 24,000 years
Not trying to pick a fight, but Young loses credibility with me with his participation in this conversation on Astrology. I'm open to conversations on the limits of thought within the scientific community, but Astrology can't be the premise of serious conversations.
Why not? Reputation? Astrology as practiced by the ancient Egyptians and Hindi is as complicated or perhaps more complicated as a modern discipline like chemistry. If I scattered 50 random pages of a first year chemistry book written in a language that has been dead for 5000 years or more, you wouldn't be able to get any meaningful results from them. I daresay that not understanding something is not the same thing as it lacking credibility.