3 ms·

By this logic art is anti-science. The value of the I Ching or elements of astrology is the value of art.

by jmkd 7y ago

malvosenior 7y ago
Art doesn't pretend to have the ability to predict the future through mystical means. It doesn't present an illogical premise that's meant to be taken seriously. You might view astrology as art, which is fine but plenty of people really believe in it.
- jmkd 7y ago
  To be clear, only some parts of astrology pretend to predict the future through mystical means. Just as some parts of religion insist their version is the only truth. So I believe the most reasoned response on these topics will depend on whether we are talking about the whole or a part.
  - malvosenior 7y ago
    Isn't mysticism the most important part? I've only ever heard people who believe in astrology reference that aspect of it (opposed to say the aesthetics of the movement).
    - bena 7y ago
      They're engaging in a traditional motte and bailey argument. Astrology is bullshit mysticism, so you can't defend it on any practical issue. But it is fanciful, so you can kinda suggest that it has some value as fiction. But Harry Potter is just as fanciful and no one is trying to predict the future by figuring out which House they belong to. Which is just about as useful as astrology.
      - jmkd 7y ago
        Was unaware of motte and bailey so thanks for the heads up. You can say astrology is bullshit mysticism if you can also say religion is bullshit mysticism. If you want to say the latter that's fine, but I believe the discussion should be more nuanced (despite being an anti-theist myself). I'm just trying to find a way to say that astrology is a bigger, broader topic than those merely aware of newspaper horoscopes know about. As such to discuss it in a single generalist put down is to exhibit ignorance of or disinterest in complexity.
        bena 7y ago
        Ok. Religion is bullshit mysticism. I'm not a big believer in the paranormal
    - jmkd 7y ago
      For the mainstream modern audience, yes you're probably right. But astrology has rich and deep history of specialist variations, unsurprising if you spent a moment comparing Aztec, Mayan, Indian, Ancient Greek and several other civilizations who all furthered debate and branched this way and that. Each of them was merely attempting to understand themselves further, and succeeding in part no thanks to science but to wisdom.
  - otikik 7y ago
    > only some parts of astrology pretend to predict the future through mystical means. This is the first time I hear this and I am pretty sure if I asked anyone on the street they would feel the same.

By this logic art is anti-science. The value of the I Ching or elements of astrology is the value of art.

by jmkd 7y ago

By this logic art is anti-science. The value of the I Ching or elements of astrology is the value of art.

Art doesn't pretend to have the ability to predict the future through mystical means. It doesn't present an illogical premise that's meant to be taken seriously. You might view astrology as art, which is fine but plenty of people really believe in it.

jmkd 7y ago
To be clear, only some parts of astrology pretend to predict the future through mystical means. Just as some parts of religion insist their version is the only truth. So I believe the most reasoned response on these topics will depend on whether we are talking about the whole or a part.
- malvosenior 7y ago
  Isn't mysticism the most important part? I've only ever heard people who believe in astrology reference that aspect of it (opposed to say the aesthetics of the movement).
  - bena 7y ago
    They're engaging in a traditional motte and bailey argument. Astrology is bullshit mysticism, so you can't defend it on any practical issue. But it is fanciful, so you can kinda suggest that it has some value as fiction. But Harry Potter is just as fanciful and no one is trying to predict the future by figuring out which House they belong to. Which is just about as useful as astrology.
    - jmkd 7y ago
      Was unaware of motte and bailey so thanks for the heads up. You can say astrology is bullshit mysticism if you can also say religion is bullshit mysticism. If you want to say the latter that's fine, but I believe the discussion should be more nuanced (despite being an anti-theist myself). I'm just trying to find a way to say that astrology is a bigger, broader topic than those merely aware of newspaper horoscopes know about. As such to discuss it in a single generalist put down is to exhibit ignorance of or disinterest in complexity.
      - bena 7y ago
        Ok. Religion is bullshit mysticism. I'm not a big believer in the paranormal
  - jmkd 7y ago
    For the mainstream modern audience, yes you're probably right. But astrology has rich and deep history of specialist variations, unsurprising if you spent a moment comparing Aztec, Mayan, Indian, Ancient Greek and several other civilizations who all furthered debate and branched this way and that. Each of them was merely attempting to understand themselves further, and succeeding in part no thanks to science but to wisdom.
- otikik 7y ago
  > only some parts of astrology pretend to predict the future through mystical means. This is the first time I hear this and I am pretty sure if I asked anyone on the street they would feel the same.