5 ms·

nowadays, you can just ask about astrology. It's both obviously wrong and socially acceptable to believe in. It filters a solid 30% of the population, at least

nowadays, you can just ask about astrology. It's both obviously wrong and socially acceptable to believe in. It filters a solid 30% of the population, at least in my country.

dazc 4y ago
Typical Virgo
eimrine 4y ago
Too obvious if an interlocutor is an engineer. Too severe if an interlocutor is a woman.
Lammy 4y ago
- bee_rider 4y ago
  Historically, I bet you could find trends based on which seasons certain developmental landmarks were hit. I'm sure it isn't a coincidence that Leos are attributed all the heroic traits, when they are mostly gestating in the Summer, and get their first couple months of life in the Fall harvest season. Nowadays I guess it would line up to school seasons. If you are born in August your parents can arrange for you to be among the oldest kids in the class. First couple grades, that extra year of development helps out, and then you get the reputation as the smart kid, it snowballs... Baseball player? Bet he's a Leo.
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    > when they are mostly gestating in the Summer Leos gestate throughout the year, depending on where they are located. Perhaps that remark was US-centric?
    - bee_rider 4y ago
      Wouldn't it be northern-hemisphere-centric? Which makes sense -- I mean, there isn't like a uniform standard for astological signs. Even within the northern hemisphere there are different labels. The trend I'd look for is an association between strength and being born near the beginning of the local harvest season, or so. But this stuff is all ad-hoc folk observations and the practitioners are motivated to add extra history, to give it the appearance of "ancient wisdom." So I'm not motivated enough to gather the data to back it up, haha. Edit: It also would be the case, I guess, that summers being generally pleasant-ish would be regional, right? Like some hotter regions can have pretty lean summers I think.
- vidaj 4y ago
  Seems like something that could be "easy" to validate. Compare children's development in the US with those in Australia and see if there's a 6 month difference. Note I put easy in quotes, because this should be provable, but I don't think it's trivial to do so due to all the different factors that contribute to a child's development. Edit: And by "6 month difference", I mean that if seasons have anything to do with child development, you would see the same kind of development in children born in March in the US and children born in September in Australia.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- emptyfile 4y ago
  I'm so infuriated by your link I'm at a loss for words. EDIT: This is an UNIVERSITY newspaper? I thought it would be some kind of british tabloid or something... depressing
  - Planktonne 4y ago
    The article makes an important point. Astrology isn't meaningful or rational. However, the level of contempt shown for people who are believers in astrology is wildly out of proportion. There are lots of equally dumb things that don't get the same level of vitriol. It's valid to dismiss astrology, but that doesn't mean that all dismissal of astrology is based on high-minded scientific ideals. A lot of it is based on sexism.
    - Astrology_Dumb 4y ago
    - istinetz 4y ago
      Really? What equally dumb things are believed by 40% of women and 20% of men (as per the article) and are a constant topic of conversation? I'm really struggling to think of any.
    - mistermann 4y ago
      It seems to me that epistemically indeterminate ideas (astrology, religion, health (viruses), politics, etc) do something strange to the human mind. It's hard to miss what they do to the minds of believers, but it's very easy to overlook what they do to the minds of non-believers. I wonder if this has something to do with the increase in polarization among the public, where some people cling ever harder to religion, while other people increasingly cling to science. The mind seems to seek "certainty" (correct or otherwise) first and foremost, but epistemic soundness shows up much further down the list, if at all.
      - trinsic2 4y ago
        Good observation. I wonder if we go through certain cycles of polarization and if there are external causes for these events. I believe there is something to astrology, at least the part about the planets gravitational forces having an effect on human physiology. I'm not sure what that something is, but I don't reject it out-of-hand simple because there isn't enough scientific understanding around it.
- hcks 4y ago
  Your explanation is 100 times worse than basic astrology to me. It's astrology wrapped in scientism. We can't even be sure about what part of character comes from all of the environment versus what part comes from genetics without very careful experimental settings. Obviously any systematic change due to ecological seasons would have a minuscule effect, drowned in the noise of a million other parameters. It's not even like astrology can make any predictions about anything, there is nothing to be explained.
- istinetz 4y ago
  >I dunno, I'm willing to believe the timing of birth can influence a child's development That's a post-hoc justification for an obviously ridiculous belief. 1) Astrology makes much stronger claims. "Today, you will be lucky in love, but avoid conflicts at work". You're committing a motte-and-bailey. 2) If that's the justification, say "winter babies" and "summer babies", not virgo and capricorn. 3) If that's the justification, there should be much stronger effects, such as "born in an ex-communist state, so different nutrition", "born in colder climate, so less sun" that absolutely dwarf that effect. Yet you don't see idiots making intricate psychological profiles based on what latitude you were born in. >I don't hate women; I just hate everything women like It's a retarded belief regardless of who holds it. >There are many reasons that the gender gap in modern astrology belief exists, but some sociologists say that it is, like most things, a result of the patriarchy. Well, this is something else people say that makes me immediately lose respect for them.
- swilliamsio 4y ago
  The timing of birth does at least slightly influence a child's development through the relative age effect - the oldest kids in each academic year get a few benefits over their peers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect

nowadays, you can just ask about astrology. It's both obviously wrong and socially acceptable to believe in. It filters a solid 30% of the population, at least in my country.

dazc 4y ago

Typical Virgo

eimrine 4y ago

Too obvious if an interlocutor is an engineer. Too severe if an interlocutor is a woman.

Lammy 4y ago

bee_rider 4y ago
Historically, I bet you could find trends based on which seasons certain developmental landmarks were hit. I'm sure it isn't a coincidence that Leos are attributed all the heroic traits, when they are mostly gestating in the Summer, and get their first couple months of life in the Fall harvest season. Nowadays I guess it would line up to school seasons. If you are born in August your parents can arrange for you to be among the oldest kids in the class. First couple grades, that extra year of development helps out, and then you get the reputation as the smart kid, it snowballs... Baseball player? Bet he's a Leo.
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  > when they are mostly gestating in the Summer Leos gestate throughout the year, depending on where they are located. Perhaps that remark was US-centric?
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    Wouldn't it be northern-hemisphere-centric? Which makes sense -- I mean, there isn't like a uniform standard for astological signs. Even within the northern hemisphere there are different labels. The trend I'd look for is an association between strength and being born near the beginning of the local harvest season, or so. But this stuff is all ad-hoc folk observations and the practitioners are motivated to add extra history, to give it the appearance of "ancient wisdom." So I'm not motivated enough to gather the data to back it up, haha. Edit: It also would be the case, I guess, that summers being generally pleasant-ish would be regional, right? Like some hotter regions can have pretty lean summers I think.
vidaj 4y ago
Seems like something that could be "easy" to validate. Compare children's development in the US with those in Australia and see if there's a 6 month difference. Note I put easy in quotes, because this should be provable, but I don't think it's trivial to do so due to all the different factors that contribute to a child's development. Edit: And by "6 month difference", I mean that if seasons have anything to do with child development, you would see the same kind of development in children born in March in the US and children born in September in Australia.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
emptyfile 4y ago
I'm so infuriated by your link I'm at a loss for words. EDIT: This is an UNIVERSITY newspaper? I thought it would be some kind of british tabloid or something... depressing
- Planktonne 4y ago
  The article makes an important point. Astrology isn't meaningful or rational. However, the level of contempt shown for people who are believers in astrology is wildly out of proportion. There are lots of equally dumb things that don't get the same level of vitriol. It's valid to dismiss astrology, but that doesn't mean that all dismissal of astrology is based on high-minded scientific ideals. A lot of it is based on sexism.
  - Astrology_Dumb 4y ago
  - istinetz 4y ago
    Really? What equally dumb things are believed by 40% of women and 20% of men (as per the article) and are a constant topic of conversation? I'm really struggling to think of any.
  - mistermann 4y ago
    It seems to me that epistemically indeterminate ideas (astrology, religion, health (viruses), politics, etc) do something strange to the human mind. It's hard to miss what they do to the minds of believers, but it's very easy to overlook what they do to the minds of non-believers. I wonder if this has something to do with the increase in polarization among the public, where some people cling ever harder to religion, while other people increasingly cling to science. The mind seems to seek "certainty" (correct or otherwise) first and foremost, but epistemic soundness shows up much further down the list, if at all.
    - trinsic2 4y ago
      Good observation. I wonder if we go through certain cycles of polarization and if there are external causes for these events. I believe there is something to astrology, at least the part about the planets gravitational forces having an effect on human physiology. I'm not sure what that something is, but I don't reject it out-of-hand simple because there isn't enough scientific understanding around it.
hcks 4y ago
Your explanation is 100 times worse than basic astrology to me. It's astrology wrapped in scientism. We can't even be sure about what part of character comes from all of the environment versus what part comes from genetics without very careful experimental settings. Obviously any systematic change due to ecological seasons would have a minuscule effect, drowned in the noise of a million other parameters. It's not even like astrology can make any predictions about anything, there is nothing to be explained.
istinetz 4y ago
>I dunno, I'm willing to believe the timing of birth can influence a child's development That's a post-hoc justification for an obviously ridiculous belief. 1) Astrology makes much stronger claims. "Today, you will be lucky in love, but avoid conflicts at work". You're committing a motte-and-bailey. 2) If that's the justification, say "winter babies" and "summer babies", not virgo and capricorn. 3) If that's the justification, there should be much stronger effects, such as "born in an ex-communist state, so different nutrition", "born in colder climate, so less sun" that absolutely dwarf that effect. Yet you don't see idiots making intricate psychological profiles based on what latitude you were born in. >I don't hate women; I just hate everything women like It's a retarded belief regardless of who holds it. >There are many reasons that the gender gap in modern astrology belief exists, but some sociologists say that it is, like most things, a result of the patriarchy. Well, this is something else people say that makes me immediately lose respect for them.
swilliamsio 4y ago
The timing of birth does at least slightly influence a child's development through the relative age effect - the oldest kids in each academic year get a few benefits over their peers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect