Are there any people left that believe in "Astrology"?

[Nick Batzdorf]

Dave, if drum beating and curses works, there's a cold, hard reason and scientific method would absolutely apply to it.

I've had a couple of experiences that seem "beyond science" myself. For example, one time I was walking up the driveway to my parents' house, and I sensed strongly someone had died; when I went around back, I saw my mom's face through the window and knew it for sure. It was an uncle (actually an "uncle") I'd been very close to.

To me it's obvious I have a connection to my mom that can't be explained by the five senses. But it's 100% real, and when you think about it, it makes sense that it would exist. It would be no surprise if many animals have the same thing.

So I could come up with any kind of story you want to explain what happened. My uncle was reaching out from the beyond. I shouldn't have been playing drums and swearing the night before. Whatever. Every explanation would be ludicrous!

The simple point is that unknown just means "not known," it doesn't mean "therefore every implausible explanation deserves to be taken seriously," nor does it necessarily mean "unknowable forever."

 

[Nick Batzdorf]

And by the way that's why I always say that religious orientations are all just different ways of looking at the same things.

We all see the magic of it all, the human spirit, life force, and so on. Whether it's God or whether it just evolved and isn't separate from live beings (which is what I believe), it's real.

 

[Hannes_F]

And by the way that's why I always say that religious orientations are all just different ways of looking at the same things.

We all see the magic of it all, the human spirit, life force, and so on. Whether it's God or whether it just evolved and isn't separate from live beings (which is what I believe), it's real.

I like the spirit of this :idea:

Ha ...

 

[Dave Connor]

I asked the question before: When has assuming a supernatural explanation lead to a demonstrable verifiable increase in our knowledge?

Your question is full of assumption: i.e. the explanation is supernatural. Something occurring in nature is by definition natural.

You also skipped everything else I wrote. I should have known I'd fall into the trap of you claiming that astrology is totally natural. But many times it has been suggested that "science can't explain everything" and therefore we can use some other method to explain something. That is why I ask, when has anything other than the scientific method verifiably increased our knowledge?

You missed the essence of my remarks on astrology. I simply stated that I personally (as well as many other people I have known) have quite easily been able tell what a person's sign is. This with an uncanny accuracy for decades on end. That unless you test every person who claims that, the science by it's own criteria is incomplete. So if you go back a half a century and say, We have tested one hundred thousand human beings and not one has been capable of running the mile in under four minutes. We have therefore determined it is beyond the scope of human ability. Even if that number was one billion the science would be incomplete and then proved errant by the one guy who finally came along and broke the limitation.

The premise of your question about scientific method being the only thing able to increase our knowledge seems grossly flawed to me. It leaves out imagination, intuition, the dream, the concept and whatever else. These are usually necessary before science can even be applied to them. Just because science within the construct of a highly orderly (scientific) universe is found in nearly every equation and can offer study-able properties doesn't negate the other parts of the equation.

[/u][/i]My answer is there are huge areas of knowledge that originated from a creative impulse that cannot be measured or captured. Science may follow and analyze da Vinci's pigments and brush strokes or Bach counterpoint but the scientific method doesn't begin to penetrate or explain the knowledge being displayed. Knowledge is probably not even the right word: the spirit or personality of the person. The creativity that's on display. People learn completely intangible things from others. Someone will say, Yes he learned how to build a beautiful violin from the master but never quite had the same touch or same result. Why not if there is only scientific method?

 

[Dave Connor]

Dave, if drum beating and curses works, there's a cold, hard reason and scientific method would absolutely apply to it.

I've had a couple of experiences that seem "beyond science" myself. For example, one time I was walking up the driveway to my parents' house, and I sensed strongly someone had died; when I went around back, I saw my mom's face through the window and knew it for sure. It was an uncle (actually an "uncle") I'd been very close to.

To me it's obvious I have a connection to my mom that can't be explained by the five senses. But it's 100% real, and when you think about it, it makes sense that it would exist. It would be no surprise if many animals have the same thing.

So I could come up with any kind of story you want to explain what happened. My uncle was reaching out from the beyond. I shouldn't have been playing drums and swearing the night before. Whatever. Every explanation would be ludicrous!

The simple point is that unknown just means "not known," it doesn't mean "therefore every implausible explanation deserves to be taken seriously," nor does it necessarily mean "unknowable forever."

Nick I appreciate that you replied with sincerity. It really added something to the discussion. I have had similar experiences. If we add up all the experience mankind has logged over millennia that cannot be explained by science it seems almost a childlike proposition to rationally conclude large areas of knowledge and experience outside of science's grasp. Presently anyway.