Val:

I am sorry, I thought I answered you...

HWGA:

IMHO: But Pagans will often cling to things that Science has shown to have no validity, like astrology. My guess is that you are talking about New Agers. Very few pagans I know take astrology as something more than an entertainment.

I did not say I can see an astorolgy text, I said I can see the stars. In addition, plenty of traditional religionists believe in astrology.

Is there evidence to support Yahweh? What?

I tried, ok? I am sorry it makes no sense to you--- but everything comes down to personal incredulty in the end--- including your views.

All I am saying is that I see more 'evidence' for astrology to hold a grain of truth than I do for the Christian god. The stars and the moon and the tides are all 'evidence' of it. Gravitational pull is. Show me one piece of evidence for the Christian god (and we'll have to move this thread). You seem to think that no evidence is better than a minimum of evidence. We disagree.

Who said 'base decisions'? I said 'gain insight'. Twice. And I could gain insight from pulling words from a hat. So?

I am afraid that your personal experiences with pagans and wiccans (obviously not including me ) is quite different than mine--- although it does sound similar to pagans/wiccans I have met who go back to Chrtianity when they 'grow up'. We can't argue personal experience here--- if we try we will both be right.

jess
(ANSIMC)

“Psychologist B.R. Forer found that people tend to accept vague and general personality descriptions as uniquely applicable to themselves without realizing that the same description could be applied to just about anyone.”

This is quite assumptive and I certainly made no claims that I believed it to be uniquely applicable or that I believe that it could not be applied to just about anyone! Of course it can be applied to just about anyone – just as all personality tests, performed by a doctor in some mass quiz given at a lecture or wherever! On the contrary, I completely understand that many people can and do have similar personality traits. Also – as I stated numerous times in my posts, I do not take these things to be science or perfect. They are nothing more then tools, like any other advice column or personality test. I have found some validity in them for myself and for others.

“We will often give very liberal interpretations to vague or inconsistent claims about ourselves in order to make sense out of the claims. Subjects who seek counseling from psychics, mediums, fortune tellers, mind readers, graphologists, etc., will often ignore false or questionable claims and, in many cases, by their own words or actions, will provide most of the information they erroneously attribute to a pseudoscientific counselor.”

I agree that many people certainly fall into this categorical description of what most people do or believe. But ANYONE who places faith in an astrologer, fortune teller, priest or any other counselor without first thorough examining their own motives, desires, actions and past and ignores claims they KNOW are false – well, I am sorry but those people are setting themselves up for failure. I certainly can’t expect anyone to be able to predict or determine my personality traits perfectly, when I still have questions about myself. None of these “pseudosciences” are meant to be absolutely accurate and infallible. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a charlatan – period.

Can we say – for ENTERTAINMENT purposes ONLY again!

When I “read” someone for a friend I have learned not to tell them the “vibe” I get, but rather I go home, write what I feel on a piece of paper and mail it to them so they aren’t influenced by what I feel. I instruct them to not open it until the feel the time is right. Some open it right away, others wait until after they have broken up. For a long time I would tell them up front … Each one has come back to me later and said – Brighid – how did you know? I should have listened to your advice. I don’t know the scientific explanation for how I know thing I should not, I just do. I don’t always have control over it either, some times it comes without warning. I could not sit in a room, with cards with symbols or numbers in front of them and “read” what they are. Have you ever had the experience of meeting someone and within moments they give you the creeps? What is the explanation for that?

I have had many varying experiences with different psychics. I specifically speak with vagueness to test the abilities of this person, with yes and no answers and never any specifics. I have had very accurate readings and readings where this person was an absolute sham.

Certainly, we can see the stars, the moon, the sun, the constellations, see the affect nature and its forces has on every living thing. We cannot escape nature, nor can we tame Her. We can affect Her, but never control Her.

My experience has been that the pagans I know do not disregard science in any way. They don’t make claims about the superiority of paganism or it’s infallibility. They understand that they do not have all the answers to life and it’s many mysteries. They admit their limitations as human individuals and respect the path of others, but simply believe that right or wrong, the pagan path is one that enriches their daily lives more then other paths. There are plenty of cooky, narrow-minded people in this world, but the exist in every facet of society whether that be in the atheist community, Catholic, Islamic, scientific, pantheistic or what not. That is the nature of the individual who uses that avenue to justify their prejudices and lack of effort to understand their world, or the complexities of the lives of others. It’s human nature plain and simple and human nature does not discriminate in regards to who possess it or not!

Make no mistake that I will not claim the scientific accuracy of astrology or scrying or other “pseudoscientific” methods that can be claimed with physics or biochemistry, etc. Claiming that one has experienced personal accuracy is not the same as claiming absolute accuracy of that method. I can only speak of my personal experience and admit my own personal strengths and weaknesses.

I don’t consult a book of astrology, runes or tarot cards before I make decisions in my life. I do not pick up a holy book and magically wish it answer my questions. I understand that I can gain insight into myself through a variety of educational materials at my disposal and that I enjoy partaking in the “pseudosciences.” In everything I do I acknowledge the good and the bad, logging it into my memory banks for later (if they are accessible) and using it when it is needed. Is there something wrong with that?

I don’t attribute any of these things to a deity, or the intervention of one so I may know or see things. I completely believe that these are absolutely natural occurrences that have biological explanations. I just have not found the scientific source that backs up that claim. Maybe one does not exist.

And very many pagans I know DO take it seriously. *shrug*




1. Text or not, it is seen as evidence of the existence of a God in much the same way astrologists point to stars as the evidence for astrology. One might as well point at a plant and say "See? Evidence for a God!". Indeed the ID arguments often do rely upon such things.

2. I never claimed that religionists DON'T believe in astrology. This is a straw man.




I never claimed there WAS evidence for a God. Again, a straw man. I'm merely pointing out that the belief in astrology is no more grounded in reality than the belief in gods.




Sorry, but no it doesn't. I would believe in astrology, regardless of how fantastic it sounds, if the evidence was there to support it. But it isn't.




Gravitational Pull is no more evidence for astrology than my morning bowl of cereal is. One has to show that astrology actually DOES work before one can start theorizing about HOW it works. Unfortunately, there just isn't evidence to support that astrology DOES work, so inventing ad hoc explanations about how it works is meaningless.




No evidence is better than evidence to the CONTRARY, yes. It's not that astrology has little evidence to support it, it's that it has a mountain of evidence to refute it. We don't see people of a particular sun sign more broadly represented in occupations or situations that suit their personalities. Indeed the mechanisms for why people find astrology "works" are well known.

Incidentally, I am atheist, so It's unlikely you'll find me putting forth evidence for the existence of a God.

My point is that astrology is NOT more reasonable than the idea of a deity. Just because it SOUNDS more reasonable to you, doesn't make it so. Many things that sound reasonable aren't true. It's the evidence that matters, not the "it sounds reasonable" factor.




'Gaining insight' is something that could be done in any number of ways by any number of people. To state that you "gain insight" from Tarot, and therefore Tarot works misrepresents the common understanding of what is meant by "Tarot Works".





Indeed. Yet, New Age and Paganism often overlap in practice. The belief systems of both often involve irrational beliefs like spells and magic.

The point I'm making is that the "Validity" of these kinds of readings is able to be scientifically tested. When it is, it's found to not exceed chance. It is only when people use their own subjective experiences with the readings that they determine it is valid.

If you want to feel that astrology, psychics, tarot, etc.. is a valid way to determine information about someone, go right ahead. But the evidence doesn't support that belief.

Exactly. Are we done now? Oh, almost.

No, it isn't a straw man. It was a very tired jess rambling... Sorry.

But you aren't pointing out how. Sorry.
according to your reqirements, right? thus it comes down to personal incredulty in the end...

And I think you missed my initial point. I said that I feel there is more likely a chance of astrology having a grain of truth than the Christian god matching their specifications.

I never said the latter.

<shudder>

We done? Bored now. Bored long time now. In my world humans are chained and we ride them like ponies.

ANSIMC

I can't stop picking at scabs, either.

I just read the page listed above on the Forer effect.

If I had come to those conclusions with that evidence as an undergrad, I would have been laughed out of class and failed.

I am not saying that the conclusion is laughable--- far from it--- just that the evidence sited (the student's self evaluating, and the mixing up of the results) is.

jess.

Who is going to shut up now.

ANSIMC

Sorry, but they are both unfounded beliefs. Your insistence for one being more likely over the other seems to be based on nothing more than personal preference.




According to scientific evaluation, which is a far more accurate method for truth determination than simply "It works for me".




But YOU haven't explained WHY.

The Forer effect is well known and easily demonstrated, even by an undergrad. There's a good example of it in "Secrets of the Psychics". (I believe that's a Nova episode, but it's been a while since I've seen it).

If you don't LIKE that it exists, well that's too bad, but it is easily demonstrated.




It only takes a simple experiment to demonstrate the Forer Effect.


Well, since your "refutation" seems to consist merely of "I don't like the experiment demonstrated there", I'm not sure why you would end this way.

You don't have to believe in the Forer Effect, but every Stage Magician in the world who does "mind reading" can show you it exists.. I used to rely upon it myself for entertainment when I did stage magic.

I'm curious to know why YOU think that after hundreds of applications of the test mentioned in that article, the average comes to 4.2 out of 5 for accuracy?




Why? That's what the experiment is DESIGNED to test. Duh.

Read it again. The same results were given to EACH student after the test, they were then supposed to rate the accuracy of this result. That the accuracy was rated so highly (when it was simply pulled out of an astrology column) is what indicates the Forer effect at work.

Surely if people were able to objectively evaluate examinations of their character, we wouldn't see such a consistently high rating for accuracy, now would we?

All this indicates is that subjective impressions are not a good method for determining the validity of such things.

jess wrote:

jp: I am confused--- your 'take' on Wicca doesn't really narrow it down
much... How does that preclude them 'stealing' from other religions and not being "internally inconsistent as a world-view?"

jpbrooks:

Even if it is the case that Wicca "freely" "borrows", (or "steals", if you insist), from other religions, it does not do so indiscriminately. It accepts some "elements" from the religions and rejects others, and/or reinterprets what it "steals".
You mentioned the sect of Wicca that follows Christ in an earlier post. I would like to ask you what you think makes that sect a Wiccan one and not a Christian one. It has apparently "stolen" the Christ symbol from Christianity, but has it "stolen" all of Christianity's "elements"? (I think not. For, if it "stole" everything from Christianity, including those "elements" that are distinctively Christian, it would be a form of Christianity and not a sect of Wicca.) And for the "elements" that it has "stolen" from Christianity, has it reinterpreted those "elements" so that they are consistent with the Wiccan world-view?

My first post was deleted. There may be a problem with your bulletin board.


[This message has been edited by jpbrooks (edited June 07, 2001).]