Re: Astronomy in--Psychology out

Rodney Wines (R_WINES@TRZCL1)
3 May 1995 15:06:27 GMT

In <> writes:

> : Of course, no one would claim that the trains were run by the
> : stars. In this case, the analogy to astrology would be synchronicity.

Well, I know a bit about astrology, and I've numbered a few professionals
among my friends and acquaintences, but I'm not sure what "... the analogy
to astrology would be synchronicity" means.

The astrologers I knew a few years ago didn't claim any cause and effect
whatsoever. They claimed a correlation between planetary and stellar
events and happenings down here (and in some areas they were right, "When
the sun rises with Acquarius the Nile will flood, at least until you dam
the thing.") I'm not so sure that they haven't claimed more of a
correlation than actually exists, but that's another argument ...

The time does "cause" the trains to run; they're scheduled to leave at a
certain time, and when that time arrives, they leave, or at least the Swiss
and German ones do ...

> : Once again, the output is not connected with
> : astronomy--nor is it of interest to astronomers, most of whom are
> : untrained in psychology.

Astrologers are also GENERALLY untrained in psychology.

> : Having studied both astronomy and astrology, I would say that
> : astronomical training is of no use at all to someone who wonders if
> : astrology is useful for themselves. That answer comes through the heart.

I'd say people who get the answer there are those that're the prime targets
for rip-off artists.

> : In particular, any "debunking" of astrology in the name of astronomy
> : is as foolish as claiming that railroads really don't use time signals.

Any "debunking" of astrology in the name of astronomy is foolish without
knowing just what astrology is claiming. I always get a kick out of the
astronomy types who say that it's bunk because "Leo" ain't in leo anymore,

Any "debunking" of astrology, like debunking anything else, is done by
showing how good the theory is at prediction, and this isn't meant as a
defense of astrology. I read this in "".

| Internet: | "I always wanted roots, |
| X.400: c=CH a=arCom p=Alcatel | but if I can't have roots |
| s=Wines g=Rodney | I'll have wings." |