3 ms·

A Double-Blind Test of Astrology (1985) [pdf]

3 points by susam 5y ago

themodelplumber 5y ago
Thanks for sharing op. It's interesting how this result would in some ways align astrology theory more closely with the tarot. For example in the sense that a reading serves as a semi-random source of contextual perspectives to consider. Similar to Brian Eno's Oblique Strategies. Personally I tested out various astrology services and sources recently, paid and unpaid, and learned a lot I didn't expect. For example I found that an unexpected highlight for me was the advice taken in isolation. For example, "generally when X happens, it can help to try Y or Z," which in many cases was new to me and not obvious, but helpful. I also found entire subjects which taken into consideration were fascinating. Like astrocartography. The invitation to think more intentionally about places of dwelling and the sheer variety of effects on the subject was pretty cool. On the negative side, I paid for one report that was just terrible for a newcomer. Gobs of advice overlapping and contradicting on multiple timelines. It was computer-generated so I didn't expect the subjective quality to be great, but trying to read the report was actually more frustrating than just reading snippets of randomized advice. I also learned that predictive ability was (surprisingly to me) not really advanced by professional astrologers anymore, taken as a group. I was reading through some conference proceedings and there were a lot of interesting things said about this. They might say, "it could be that X happens" but the intent is often to communicate that it's an idea to weigh and consider rather than believe. Tarot and cleromancy practitioners were similar here too. One practitioner even said that humans gained the ability to think and act for themselves fully something like 200 years ago (?) so this predictive stuff wasn't worth much anymore. Overall it's a pretty fascinating world with a surprising variety of beliefs and practices. (Also just learning that cleromancy is a thing was pretty fun...)
adyashakti 5y ago
Doomed to fail by design. The study used a Digicomp Astrology computer, which calculated charts using the Western tropical zodiac system. Western astrology is practically useless because it does not take into account the precession of the equinoxes. Thus in the 2,500 years or so since it was translated from Persian and Sanskrit into Greek and Latin by Pliny, its reckoning of the planets’ positions has slipped almost 24° from their actual physical locations. Vedic astrology (Jyotish) does take equinoctial precession into account, thus it uses the actual location of the stars and planets to calculate and interpret charts and draw Astrocartography maps. Thus it is far more useful and accurate.

3 points by susam 5y ago

Thanks for sharing op. It's interesting how this result would in some ways align astrology theory more closely with the tarot. For example in the sense that a reading serves as a semi-random source of contextual perspectives to consider. Similar to Brian Eno's Oblique Strategies. Personally I tested out various astrology services and sources recently, paid and unpaid, and learned a lot I didn't expect. For example I found that an unexpected highlight for me was the advice taken in isolation. For example, "generally when X happens, it can help to try Y or Z," which in many cases was new to me and not obvious, but helpful. I also found entire subjects which taken into consideration were fascinating. Like astrocartography. The invitation to think more intentionally about places of dwelling and the sheer variety of effects on the subject was pretty cool. On the negative side, I paid for one report that was just terrible for a newcomer. Gobs of advice overlapping and contradicting on multiple timelines. It was computer-generated so I didn't expect the subjective quality to be great, but trying to read the report was actually more frustrating than just reading snippets of randomized advice. I also learned that predictive ability was (surprisingly to me) not really advanced by professional astrologers anymore, taken as a group. I was reading through some conference proceedings and there were a lot of interesting things said about this. They might say, "it could be that X happens" but the intent is often to communicate that it's an idea to weigh and consider rather than believe. Tarot and cleromancy practitioners were similar here too. One practitioner even said that humans gained the ability to think and act for themselves fully something like 200 years ago (?) so this predictive stuff wasn't worth much anymore. Overall it's a pretty fascinating world with a surprising variety of beliefs and practices. (Also just learning that cleromancy is a thing was pretty fun...)

adyashakti 5y ago

Doomed to fail by design. The study used a Digicomp Astrology computer, which calculated charts using the Western tropical zodiac system. Western astrology is practically useless because it does not take into account the precession of the equinoxes. Thus in the 2,500 years or so since it was translated from Persian and Sanskrit into Greek and Latin by Pliny, its reckoning of the planets’ positions has slipped almost 24° from their actual physical locations. Vedic astrology (Jyotish) does take equinoctial precession into account, thus it uses the actual location of the stars and planets to calculate and interpret charts and draw Astrocartography maps. Thus it is far more useful and accurate.