Portalrosacruz is published in :
" THE ACCURACY OF ASTROLOGY
have been used millions of words, printed and verbal, in arguing astrology
whether or not" exact " and "scientific" anti-astrology group (those who are not students, misinformed, exoteric religious timorous mind) are expressed in arguments that ultimately only be reduced to considerations
dismissive about the personal skills of those who "read horoscopes,
They argue that, if astrology is scientifically accurate, it must be proved by the agreement
perfect all astrologers on any given point of
case, all actual argument is false and a waste of time since
no concerns at all like the basic essence of the subject.
(A brief pause to inquire about these "antis": If all Christians are of
agree on the meaning of the message of his Master, if all the musicians,
regarding the correct interpretation of a Brahms symphony, if
all physicians regarding treatment "right" infantile paralysis, and all
parents as to how "perfect" to raise children.)
Each actor of astrology differs from another astrologer
the ability to interpret a horoscope. Each one differs from his colleagues in the "rapprochement" in
the ability to understand the symbolism, the accuracy of
mathematical calculations, ability to sense the dynamic essence of the horoscope, the
ability to understand the psychological problems
represented and the potential for resolution. This is the "human variation."
Astrology is an exact science because: Each factor in a horoscope correctly calculated
is a symbolic representation of the exact effect of an impartial and
specific cause. Represents the immutable cosmic law of cause and effect
operating in the circumstances and experiences of a man in a
evolutionary progress of many incarnations. In a horoscope
nothing calculated correctly by chance, accident, inheritance,
or whim of blind fate. Each planetary position and every aspect is a factor
the body-soul of the subject, one phase of his conscience, a stone in his
ancient spiritual path. According
as the astrologer identifies your horoscope with the law findings
of "Whatever a man sows. it will also reap "- will be able to synthesize properly
map in its entirety.
will be able to deduct past causes of present conditions and will be able to identify potential solutions
impediments. ***
the book "Astrology Studies I", by Elman Bacher "
I get a comment saying, more or less:
" Hi Edgar,
Above all, do not believe in astrology. I am not "anti" in so far as the prefix implies, from my point of view, a proactive attitude that I have.
just do not believe in astrology, and I understand and agree that this lack of belief is subjective does not invalidate, that is understood, that astrology is actually existing reality in the future, through some kind of proof, I have to reveer my position.
To simplify my comment, and I understand better, the question I ask is "why did not I think."
And I reply that it is because there is no scientific evidence to support the facts involved in archeology.
And here I explain better the reason for my comment.
extract that you share has a number of incorrect assertions.
To begin, reducing the group of "anti" to a universe of people without sufficient qualifications or malicious. The reality is that there are lots People who have studied the subject thoroughly and has not found a way of maintaining the concepts of astrology from the scientific. People
also has approached the subject from astrology good faith belief that the shape which the article quotes is disqualified.
on "the brief pause to inquire about the antis" but the example of physicians, the endorsements do not correspond to science, so the comparison (and consequent disqualification) is irrelevant. I'm tempted to deepen this, but I think the poor of argumentation paragraph exempts me no more. Bacher
underlying the functioning of astrology in the existence of a law (Scientifically untestable) of "cosmic cause and effect, which operates through successive incarnations of the human being. Embodiments, incidentally, are far from scientifically proven power.
cosmic level, on the other hand, some time ago that scientists questioned the concept of "cause and effect, at least since the early twentieth century with the birth of quantum mechanics and relativity.
(by the way, and I anticipate: no quantum mechanics or justify metaphysical phenomena, but that is another story.)
My fundamental point in this review, I return to the point, is simple: The
Astrology is a science.
I think if anything has been discussed, and what there is consensus in the scientific community is that astrology does not meet the minimum requirements to qualify as a science.
would also like to dwell on this, but the abundance of literature about what is or is not a science is overwhelming. I suggest that you verify on your side, and I think it hard to disagree.
And about the accuracy ...
How can we describe something precisely (according to the academic definition of that word) if it is not possible to obtain evidence to verify repeatability? Accuracy is a
concept that refers to how much a measured value is close to real. This apply to astrology? (The answer of the writer is obviously yes, but you can not give a single example to substantiate his claim. In fact, if you reread carefully what it says, you can not find a logical support your claim of accuracy).
For clarification, in no way mean that this (the lack of applicability of the concept of accuracy in astrology) is disqualifying in itself, but only to invalidate the paper's columnist.
Nor is it relevant to whether or not astrology a science. People who believe in God does from the faith, and need not, by definition, an evidence. If God exists or might not manifest itself at any time, beyond our ability to rationalize (one of the foundations of scientific thought) and would be all right.
Again, astrology does not qualify (yet) as a science and it is not definable (hence, and so far) the concept of accuracy.
will tell whether my non-belief is justified or if what he says Mr. Bacher is true.
At present, in this present, after some thousands of years astrology NO ONE incontrovertible evidence, his article is just an act of faith.
And as such, as valid as my non-belief in this topic.
Greetings! "
visitors leave this space their own conclusions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment