Ians Chart

[Daz Madrigal]

;D

<< what astrologers do: using selected scientific facts and discoveries to ‘evidence’ /their/ qualitative/cultural interpretations and beliefs. >>

Yes you've got it in one, Piccione!

The only error is that its only some astrologers that do so. The Guaquelin stuff is a typical example of scientists constantly arguing about unbelievably trivial stuff.

Are weight lifters 'sportsmen' or 'just steroid addled freaks' ?

I'm with Sandy on this..the proof of the pizza is in the eating. If it tastes good then I'm happy, occasionally the base is overdone or the topping a bit too expansive for someones palate - but its better than nowt!

[Daz Madrigal]

<< Who exactly was it to bring science/medicine into the equation - when we were talking about astrology? Remember – /your/ red herring argument about science/medicine having caused more harm than astrology? I suppose in that ‘argument’ (ie /yours/) it was ‘perfectly legitimate’ to compare ‘a stick with a rifle’, and quantitative with qualitative, yes? >>

Now you've used a sleight of hand there because the invention of an Atom Bomb is obviously far more potent and dangerous in the hands of a Dictator than a few cards inside some Gypsy tarot readers tent.

So you've suddenly slipped behind into complete bollox again.

[piccione]

////The only error is that its only some astrologers that do so. The Guaquelin stuff is a typical example of scientists constantly arguing about unbelievably trivial stuff.////

And you can /verify/ that yours is the /true/ ‘version’ of astrology, apart from /claiming/ it is? Erm no you can’t, because it ain’t testable. Which goes back to my argument that we have to accept /all/ ‘versions’ of astrology as equally valid (….which is logically and factually impossible).

////Are weight lifters 'sportsmen' or 'just steroid addled freaks' ?////

Is taking steroids testable? Yes, it is. Is your claim that /your/ ‘version’ of astrology is ‘legitimate’ and others are not testable? No, it isn’t.

///I'm with Sandy on this..the proof of the pizza is in the eating. If it tastes good then I'm happy, occasionally the base is overdone or the topping a bit too expansive for someones palate - but its better than nowt!///

Yes, and that’s fair enough. As I said – belief systems have an important meaning for humans. But nonetheless, that’s ‘all’ they are – belief systems, which not everyone shares. As long as ‘believers’ acknowledge that and don’t try and tell me it’s a scientifically based discipline that ‘non-believers’ should accept as ‘fact’, that’s fine by me. I like my pizza ‘traditional’ Italian style btw, and preferably in Italy, since the ‘original’ version is very hard to get in the UK. I hate all these ‘Americanised’ pizzas, and I’d rather have none at all if that’s my only choice. But I wouldn’t tell people that /my/ preference is the one and only true way of enjoying pizza, because it’s a matter of taste (ie ‘belief’).

////Now you've used a sleight of hand there because the invention of an Atom Bomb is obviously far more potent and dangerous in the hands of a Dictator than a few cards inside some Gypsy tarot readers tent. So you've suddenly slipped behind into complete bollox again.////

You have suddenly ‘slipped behind’ into comparing the two incomparable levels again – scientific facts and interpretation/use of these facts. Remember? You said yourself they weren’t comparable….?

Ah but....yes….they /are/ when it serves your ‘argument’. It’s only when it doesn’t that they are not.

You can’t have it both ways Daz, ie whenever it suits /you/. Maybe you should get some consistency into your argument/s - they might make more sense then.

[Daz Madrigal]

I've gone back through the thread and I don't recall making comparisons between Medicine and Astrology so unless its on another thread its you who is making a false analogy between the two. They aren't comparable so theres no reason for me to do so. As for using astrology to make dangerous medical decisions...its certainly news to me (and most everyone else). If theres any evidence or example of it taking place I'd be interested to hear about it.

[piccione]

////I've gone back through the thread and I don't recall making comparisons between Medicine and Astrology///

[As far as I know Astrologers haven't yet managed to put half the child population on mind numbing drugs or created a bomb capable of destroying the entire world.]

The point I made about a similar comment of yours on another thread is that there is a massive difference between the /discovery/ and /reality/ of (in themselves /neutral/) scientific facts and data, and how this data is, or can be used or manipulated by scientists and others in a certain cultural climate – a climate which scientists are as much part of as everybody else. You implied they were both the same. Scientists are driven by the same /cultural/ ‘forces’ as other people are in that same society. Hence why I can’t understand the moral outrage when /scientists/ (as opposed to other menbers of that society), deliberately or unintentionally, f*ck up, especially since (as I also pointed out on that thread) /we/ (society) ourselves are a crucial part of this cultural driving force.

Saying that, given the -proportionately- far greater impact of science and medicine on today’s society (compared to that of astrology, for example), it is obvious that we feel any /cultural/ use of such data more severely, whether that use is ‘good’ or ‘bad’.

In times when astrology (and other belief systems) had greater influence (because medical/scientific disciplines as we have them today had not ‘developed’ yet), it was the other way round, and /their/ ‘outcomes’ and practices impacted far greater.

Hence why the /cultural/ use (or exploitation) of scientific data /today/ is a far greater threat than that of astrology, but, equally, its positive effects and potentials are far greater. Either of this, however, is merely a red herring argument to the question of whether astrology /itself/ is a ‘science’ or a belief system, and to the question as to whether it is ‘ethical’ for astrologers to ‘sell’ it to their clients as a discipline of ‘science’.

The one and only 'argument' astrologers have (and use) for that assertion is that 'in the past' it was a widely respected ‘scientific discipline’, conveniently ‘forgetting’ the fact that what constituted ‘science’ in that distant (and also more recent) past was very different from what constitutes ‘science’ today. The two (belief systems and ‘science’) were closely interwoven. People lacked the knowledge, skills and tools to distinguish between the two, but still had the (human) need to explain all sorts phenomena somehow.

////As for using astrology to make dangerous medical decisions...its certainly news to me (and most everyone else). If theres any evidence or example of it taking place I'd be interested to hear about it////

I don’t know whether these medical decisions based on astrology are necessarily (or even mostly) ‘dangerous’. But given the vast amount of money people spend on charts etc, it is obvious that they have a substantial meaning to them, regarding crucial life, career, financial and medical decisions. The problem is as well that to the ‘lay person’, there is no obvious distinction between variations of astrology, because astrologers can’t even evidence such distinctions amongst themselves (never mind to anyone else), apart from /experience/-based distinctions and personal accounts/interpretations.

Anyone who has read a book on astrology can set themselves up as an astrologer, and if they have good sales pitches, they can make a lot of money out of it. Saying that, equally, everyone who has done a crash course in counselling can set themselves up as a ‘psychotherapist’, and unashamedly exploit people. But unlike with astrology, counselling/psychotherapy has an evidenced-based ‘body of authority’, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, setting an ethical framework and professional standards of (evidenced-based) training, qualification, development and practice. It takes /years/ to become a fully qualified and accredited counsellor/therapist – not six weeks at evening college.

Google medical astrology, astro-diagnosis and related terms to see how popular that branch of astrology is, and the 'explanations' of 'expertise' used by such astrologers.

[Daz Madrigal]

;D

<< [As far as I know Astrologers haven't yet managed to put half the child population on mind numbing drugs or created a bomb capable of destroying the entire world.] >>

Come come, Piccione..that was in reply to you.

You really have far more to fear from your tobacco and drug use than you have from any astrologer. Let me calm your fears on that matter.

[Daz Madrigal]

<< ////As for using astrology to make dangerous medical decisions...its certainly news to me (and most everyone else). If theres any evidence or example of it taking place I'd be interested to hear about it////

I don’t know whether these medical decisions based on astrology are necessarily (or even mostly) ‘dangerous’. But given the vast amount of money people spend on charts etc, it is obvious that they have a substantial meaning to them, regarding crucial life, career, financial and medical decisions. The problem is as well that to the ‘lay person’, there is no obvious distinction between variations of astrology, because astrologers can’t even evidence such distinctions amongst themselves (never mind to anyone else), apart from /experience/-based distinctions and personal accounts/interpretations.

Anyone who has read a book on astrology can set themselves up as an astrologer, and if they have good sales pitches, they can make a lot of money out of it. Saying that, equally, everyone who has done a crash course in counselling can set themselves up as a ‘psychotherapist’, and unashamedly exploit people. But unlike with astrology, counselling/psychotherapy has an evidenced-based ‘body of authority’, the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy, setting an ethical framework and professional standards of (evidenced-based) training, qualification, development and practice. It takes /years/ to become a fully qualified and accredited counsellor/therapist – not six weeks at evening college.

Google medical astrology, astro-diagnosis and related terms to see how popular that branch of astrology is, and the 'explanations' of 'expertise' used by such astrologers. >>



Ahh moving the goalposts a tad.

Psycho-analysis is questionable anyway. When a few set themselves up as also using Astrology to suggest it makes matter life threatening is another example of some hysteria. It more commonly found residing in Richard Dawkins who manages to get himself in a ludicrous lather about Astrology which is hugely amusing.

Its laughable that such people give us such hitherto unknown superpowers. At this rate I could fight off Batman with exquisite ease!

[Daz Madrigal]

<< The one and only 'argument' astrologers have (and use) for that assertion is that 'in the past' it was a widely respected ‘scientific discipline’, conveniently ‘forgetting’ the fact that what constituted ‘science’ in that distant (and also more recent) past was very different from what constitutes ‘science’ today. The two (belief systems and ‘science’) were closely interwoven. People lacked the knowledge, skills and tools to distinguish between the two, but still had the (human) need to explain all sorts phenomena somehow >>

Whats in the past is in the past but if we are to be led there then yes, Nicholas Culpepper was indeed an Astrologer and a Herbalist and an esteemed one. There was a glowing documentary about him just a month ago.

Really he is held in high regard but to attempt to somehow put him in 21st century garb is again...hysterical.

He did his best with the limited instruments and knowledge he had to hand. What pray tell is wrong with that?

Theres no real need for it now. Each person fills the vessel that his time and generation provides him with. With Sandy it is in thee Science of Pizzology and with the advent of the TV Chef and Armchair Soothsayer (both equally nauseous) he may well be able to combine the two.

Reading your stuff though I get the impression that your trying to brand me with an anti-Science stance and by putting the onus on medicine somehow insinuating that I'm the type of loon who goes to the local homeopathies to cure serious illness rather than to my GP.

That would make the GP happy as he usually describes me as he either describes me 'a hypochondriac's or berates me for a foolhardy and complete negligence of all personal health!

No you're barking up the wrong tree totally. In fact I'm tempted to just leave it as barking. Full stop. If the Surgeon wants to cut my leg off then I'd be far happier being away with the fairies then awake to watch him wielding a rusty saw!!!



btw. I agree in some respects Piccy..particularly re the nonsense of Psycho Analysis and there are a few of them about..possibly Noel Tyl is the best known. I can't help feeling that Sandys lampooning of me by the use of Pizzas was far more effective.

[piccione]

////You really have far more to fear from your tobacco and drug use than you have from any astrologer. Let me calm your fears on that matter.////

Thanks. My fit of the vapours has vanished miraculously, and I am just about to light a cig in celebration of the good news.

////Psycho-analysis is questionable anyway.////

It certainly is. But who mentioned anything about psycho-analysis?

////When a few set themselves up as also using Astrology to suggest it makes matter life threatening is another example of some hysteria.////

And who said anything about ‘life-threatening’ ?

Nonetheless, should a rip-off that isn’t life-threatening be spared from criticism?

Btw Richard Dawkins seems to be your favourite hate figure (....next to James Randi of course). I wonder who your idol is....Uri Geller? ;D

////Its laughable that such people give us such hitherto unknown superpowers. At this rate I could fight off Batman with exquisite ease!/////

I don’t know what sales pitches have to do with super-powers. Should I ask the slimy git who tries to sell me a mobile phone every time I walk past his bloody phone shop for his ‘Superman’ autograph, rather than smacking him one (…for purely educational purposes of course), as I had planned?

////Whats in the past is in the past but if we are to be led there then yes, Nicholas Culpepper was indeed an Astrologer and a Herbalist and an esteemed one. There was a glowing documentary about him just a month ago.

Really he is held in high regard but to attempt to somehow put him in 21st century garb is again...hysterical.

He did his best with the limited instruments and knowledge he had to hand. What pray tell is wrong with that?

Theres no real need for it now. Each person fills the vessel that his time and generation provides him with.////

I don’t know how this is ‘supposed’ to contradict or refute anything I said. In fact it’s a confirmation - /obviously/ put far more eloquently!

Maybe /that’s/ the point of disagreement....

////Reading your stuff though I get the impression that your trying to brand me with an anti-Science stance and by putting the onus on medicine somehow insinuating that I'm the type of loon who goes to the local homeopathies to cure serious illness rather than to my GP./////

I wouldn’t dream of insinuating /what/ type of loon you are....

With your constant red herring references to nuclear bombs and drugged up kids I, on the other hand, get the impression that you interpret my ‘defence’ of scientific facts/knowledge as a defence of unscrupulous scientists, or anyone else, abusing that knowledge.

////In fact I'm tempted to just leave it as barking. Full stop. If the Surgeon wants to cut my leg off then I'd be far happier being away with the fairies then awake to watch him wielding a rusty saw!!!////

Fairies and rusty saws? Jeezz that explains a lot! You are posting from a long bygone century! Welcome to the 21st, Daz - if only as a cyber time-traveler.

[Daz Madrigal]

<< Btw Richard Dawkins seems to be your favourite hate figure >>

Not really..I just can't force myself to attack Stephen Hawking despite his Wife doing so.

[Daz Madrigal]

<< There are quite a few people who base crucial life -and even medical- decisions on astrology >>

Aren't crucial medical decisions potentially hazardous, Piccione.

Oh come come..you can do better than to constantly contradict yourself.

[Daz Madrigal]

<< Fairies and rusty saws? Jeezz that explains a lot! You are posting from a long bygone century! Welcome to the 21st, Daz - if only as a cyber time-traveler. >>

Away with the fairies is a most commonly used term, even today, Piccione, one that could aptly describe the inhabitants of bars and pubs and maybe even..drug takers. - in such a way.

[Daz Madrigal]

<< I don’t know whether these medical decisions based on astrology are necessarily (or even mostly) ‘dangerous’. But given the vast amount of money people spend on charts etc, it is obvious that they have a substantial meaning to them, regarding crucial life, career, financial and medical decisions. >>

Again..'crucial medical decisions'..what are you thinking of?.

"Scalpel, Nurse!"

"But its a full Moon, Doctor?"

"Oh forget it then, we'll sew him up and do it next week instead"

If you actually had any evidence of such events then it might actually be of interest and I'd be genuinely interested to read them.

[piccione]

////Aren't crucial medical decisions potentially hazardous, Piccione.///

Yes, but there is ‘potentially hazardous’ and ‘almost certainly fatal’.

Btw....

[<< There are quite a few people who base crucial life -and even medical- decisions on astrology >>]

....reads: ‘crucial life decision, and medical decision’

Better....?

What do /you/ suggest ‘medical astrology’ stands for? To advice the consultant which of the nurses on the ward is the best shag?

////Away with the fairies is a most commonly used term, even today…////

Oh /really/ is it? Gosh – I didn’t know that!

Hmmm – that only leaves the ‘rusty saw’ then - in which case you should consider changing your doc....or rely on medical astrology instead, and hope for the best....

////Again..'crucial medical decisions'..what are you thinking of?.

"Scalpel, Nurse!"

"But its a full Moon, Doctor?"

"Oh forget it then, we'll sew him up and do it next week instead"////

;D

Y’know you’re wasting your talents on this board. You should be writing scripts for Holby City - or whatever the latest hospital cr@p TV is called.....

Anyway, I’m off to the pub, and ‘away with the fairies’....or the bar maids, rather.... ;D

[Daz Madrigal]

I'd write for Holby City if I knew what it was..I always get it mixed up with HollyOaks..its the 'H' that confuses me and the fact that both are complete tripe.

Now you're probably wondering..crikey its only an hour away from the FA Cup Final. Well the fact is that I agree with Roy Keane and Eric Cantona - about everything..even seagulls. The FA Cup means nothing to me, whereas being known as the Champions of Europe and then - World Champions! is of course a far superior accolade.

Its doubtful that the Italians and Brrazilians will be glued to their TV sets and if they are its only to sniffily remark on the hustle and bustle of English Football. Even the winning of the League means nothing to me..err.partly because I'm not on of those oddities who sing 'We Won the Cup'.

No you didn't.

The team won the Cup.

And the team won the cup because of..

Ronaldo.

Therefore by sheer logic we can say that Ronaldo Won the Cup' and 'we' had nothing whatsoever to do with it.