base talk Dua admits being an astrology weirdo

[kataraqueen]

2 minutes ago, Goaty said:

 

I'm very skeptical of this. Do you have a link to the research? 

Even better, I have a literature review for you if you want to delve into it.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9428062/

[Stunnah]

I've been meaning to spend less time on online, and the BRAINDEAD responses in this thread have really helped me log off today.

 

Thanks, Dua!

 

Thanks, ATRL! 

[Space Cowboy]

13 minutes ago, kataraqueen said:

hmm that's not true.

 

 

Astrology being a pseudoscience and it being considered incompatible with real science is strongly supported by the the scientific community and the scientific method.

 

Quote

Well-regarded research has touched upon certain mental illnesses having a higher chance of appearing in people born in certain times of year, indicating a link between behavioral patterns and birthtime.

There might be studies suggesting some correlations between birth season and certain health conditions, but these are rather explained due to environmental and biological factors, not astrological ones.

 

Quote

incompatibility between the two would be if the two claimed two entirely different things. in reality, astrology can be best-described as data analytics if anything imo. all they really do is take astronomy (real science) and apply data to it.

Astrology has also nothing to do with data analytics as well, which involves statistical methods and empirical data, while astrology uses unscientific premises and lacks evidence-based validation.

Like… if you really wanna believe that the stars and the planets condition your personality, you do you, but don't go spreading lies.

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

19 minutes ago, Goaty said:

 

I'm very skeptical of this. Do you have a link to the research? 

Even if it's true, I'm sure there are much more plausible theories to explain that fact than "planet's positions". There is so much stuff birthtime might affect that doesn't require buying bogus assumptions about mysterious forces at work that ~somehow~ (notice how there's no explanation for this) affect human psychology. 

[swissman]

8 minutes ago, Space Cowboy said:

Astrology being a pseudoscience and it being considered incompatible with real science is strongly supported by the the scientific community and the scientific method.

 

There might be studies suggesting some correlations between birth season and certain health conditions, but these are rather explained due to environmental and biological factors, not astrological ones.

 

Astrology has also nothing to do with data analytics as well, which involves statistical methods and empirical data, while astrology uses unscientific premises and lacks evidence-based validation.

Like… if you really wanna believe that the stars and the planets condition your personality, you do you, but don't go spreading lies.

Are you spreading the truth by saying the stars DON'T have an effect on personality? And if so, what have you done or read to prove this is the truth? Bringing up stuff about how people will relate to what they hear doesn't disprove astrology, it proves people will relate to what they hear.

 

Acupuncture is also a pseudoscience. Are you going around negating everyone who does it and feels better for it?

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

Also, this "well, the position of the planets affects the sea currents. It could theoretically affect us" is not the serve y'all think it is... the key difference is that we have a causal explanation that has been reliable in guiding our scientific experiments and even day-to-day experiences. 

Where is the causal mechanism of the effect of the planets in our psychology? There is none; someone just decides that if you are born in some period of time, you have such and such characteristics. Where is the ability to make predictions based on astrology? Nowhere. 

If we believed in everything that *might* be true despite no evidence or even credible theory supporting it we would be in a pretty dreary situation bffr. 

Edited May 15 by SweetOreosOfHeaven

[Goaty]

 

3 minutes ago, SweetOreosOfHeaven said:

Even if it's true, I'm sure there are much more plausible theories to explain that fact than "planet's positions". There is so much stuff birthtime might affect that doesn't require buying bogus assumptions about mysterious forces at work that ~somehow~ (notice how there's no explanation for this) affect human psychology. 

Looks like you and the authors are on the same wavelength. 
 

Quote

Seasonal effects of genes, subtle pregnancy and birth complications, light and internal chemistry, toxins, nutrition, temperature/weather, and infectious agents or a combination of these are all viable possibilities.

And really, this lit review highlights the fundamental problem with studying astrology in a scientific capacity — it's not falsifiable. And if it can't be proven true or false, it's incompatible with the scientific method. 

[Peak Now]

Look I absolutely agree that Dua can do/believe whatever she wants as long as she's not harming other people but are we really gonna start claiming astrology is a scientific method now 

 

Next thing y'all are gonna start saying feng shui is totally valid and I should place five jade stones in the corner of my room to help heal my migraine or something 

 

 

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

2 minutes ago, swissman said:

Are you spreading the truth by saying the stars DON'T have an effect on personality? And if so, what have you done or read to prove this is the truth? Bringing up stuff about how people will relate to what they hear doesn't disprove astrology, it proves people will relate to what they hear.

 

Acupuncture is also a pseudoscience. Are you going around negating everyone who does it and feels better for it?

I think the issue here is relying on it as if it substitutes therapy when it has no credible base to support it. If someone was trying to heal their physical illness by alternative methods without scientific credibility, I would advise them against it; the same goes for mental health, which is just as important and not something we should take lightly. 

[swissman]

5 minutes ago, SweetOreosOfHeaven said:

Even if it's true, I'm sure there are much more plausible theories to explain that fact than "planet's positions". There is so much stuff birthtime might affect that doesn't require buying bogus assumptions about mysterious forces at work that ~somehow~ (notice how there's no explanation for this) affect human psychology. 

I don't really think things like "the moon" or "the sun" or "Jupiter" or "Mars" are mysterious forces. They're real thing we know exist, and we also know that they have gravitation forces, too. Astrology presumes that these forces have an affect on us and so as the stars/planets move around and gravities change, so too may how we act, or react or communicate or love, etc.

 

Trying to make this into something more complex and mysterious than it is doesn't disprove the fact that it's as possible for these "forces" to have some effect on us, just as it's possible for them to not have an effect.

[Goaty]

 

27 minutes ago, kataraqueen said:

Even better, I have a literature review for you if you want to delve into it.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9428062/

I personally don't think this is strong enough evidence to draw a meaningful relationship between celestial positions, birth time, and human behavior, but it was an interesting read — appreciate your sharing it. 

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

2 minutes ago, Goaty said:

 

Looks like you and the authors are on the same wavelength. 
 

And really, this lit review highlights the fundamental problem with studying astrology in a scientific capacity — it's not falsifiable. And if it can't be proven true or false, it's incompatible with the scientific method. 

Not them citing a source that argues against their claim.  This is the problem with people using articles to grant their claims some legitimacy but cherry-picking and just going off the title. 

[Hephaestus]

44 minutes ago, swissman said:

And if you cannot prove that celestial bodies DO have an effect on us, have you proved they DO NOT?

I get your point but... If you (generally speaking) come with a claim that is generally not accepted by society (who bases their opinion on science in this case), you have the burden of proving or at least give substantial data to back up said claim, not the other way around.

[Peak Now]

2 minutes ago, swissman said:

doesn't disprove the fact that it's as possible for these "forces" to have some effect on us, just as it's possible for them to not have an effect.

So it's unfalsifiable  

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

1 minute ago, swissman said:

I don't really think things like "the moon" or "the sun" or "Jupiter" or "Mars" are mysterious forces. They're real thing we know exist, and we also know that they have gravitation forces, too. Astrology presumes that these forces have an affect on us and so as the stars/planets move around and gravities change, so too may how we act, or react or communicate or love, etc.

 

Trying to make this into something more complex and mysterious than it is doesn't disprove the fact that it's as possible for these "forces" to have some effect on us, just as it's possible for them to not have an effect.

My point is: how do they affect human psychology? This is they key question for which astrology does not have an answer, and which makes it tantamount to just wild guessing. 

[Taylor fanboy]

1 hour ago, kataraqueen said:

I'm in a top 30 uni in the world and doing my masters in STEM, I know how these things work babe 💀

 

facts are that we've let go of a lot of knowledge of our ancestors in favor of theories that were largely developed in the past century, and also largely developed with certain ideologies and behavioral preferences in mind

 

I feel like you also took philosophy as something negative (or idk what else could have caused your response tbh), when in reality most noteworthy scientists in history as we know it were philosophers 

To be fair, my reaction was about the dismissing tone about "therapy" which I extended to psychiatry and mental wellness approaches.

 

It's a given fact that not all science is exact, and research is ever growing, to dismiss therapy which helped a lot of people didn't sit well with me.

 

I wasn't invalidating your credentials, just the message implied.

Edited May 15 by Taylor fanboy

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

1 hour ago, kataraqueen said:

I feel like you also took philosophy as something negative (or idk what else could have caused your response tbh), when in reality most noteworthy scientists in history as we know it were philosophers 

This is true, but there is a difference between legitimate philosophy and esoteric "knowledge", even though the latter sometimes goes by the name of philosophy (and its proponents of philosophers). Those noteworthy scientists tend to be interested in the former in which astrology has no more credibility than in the scientific community. 

Edited May 15 by SweetOreosOfHeaven

[swissman]

4 minutes ago, SweetOreosOfHeaven said:

Also, this "well, the position of the planets affects the sea currents. It could theoretically affect us" is not the serve y'all think it is... the key difference is that we have a causal explanation that has been reliable in guiding our scientific experiments and even day-to-day experiences. 

Where is the causal mechanism of the effect of the planets in our psychology? There is none; someone just decides that if you are born in some period of time, you have such and such characteristics. Where is the ability to make predictions based on astrology? Nowhere. 

If we believed in everything that *might* be true despite no evidence or even credible theory supporting it we would be in a pretty dreary situation bffr. 

By "someone just decides" do you mean, thousands and thousands of years of people working in astrology across multiple cultures and societies? Because it was not "someone". It may not ever have been fully explained, but don't belittle the history of astrology just because you don't like it.

 

And what is this casual explanation you speak of that explains it isn't real?

 

Astrology is admittedly a very personal thing. If you don't believe in it, that's fine but why are you going to those that do to tell them how wrong they are? Most people who are into astrology have seen or identified how right it can be, and thus get deeper into it. No one is into astrology but never has related to it ever or never found it correct. There's a starting point.

 

Astrology is nearly impossible to prove because so much of it is subjective. How one sees oneself, how one sees others, etc. You may think you are strong-willed. Someone may see you as difficult. You may not think you are difficult. That doesn't mean you're not difficult, and it doesn't mean you are difficult. Scientifically, can you prove someone is a naturally difficult person? You can try and measure if they are difficult now, in the moment, but as a personality can you say they are a difficult person? Does that mean difficult people don't exist?

 

I'm not saying just because we can't prove otherwise, it IS true, I'm saying coming here to poo-poo others for something that theoretically can be true (and without evidence of your own too say its not) is arrogant and rude and annoying. That's really as simple as it gets.

[Peak Now]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

 

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

7 minutes ago, swissman said:

By "someone just decides" do you mean, thousands and thousands of years of people working in astrology across multiple cultures and societies? Because it was not "someone". It may not ever have been fully explained, but don't belittle the history of astrology just because you don't like it.

 

And what is this casual explanation you speak of that explains it isn't real?

 

Astrology is admittedly a very personal thing. If you don't believe in it, that's fine but why are you going to those that do to tell them how wrong they are? Most people who are into astrology have seen or identified how right it can be, and thus get deeper into it. No one is into astrology but never has related to it ever or never found it correct. There's a starting point.

 

Astrology is nearly impossible to prove because so much of it is subjective. How one sees oneself, how one sees others, etc. You may think you are strong-willed. Someone may see you as difficult. You may not think you are difficult. That doesn't mean you're not difficult, and it doesn't mean you are difficult. Scientifically, can you prove someone is a naturally difficult person? You can try and measure if they are difficult now, in the moment, but as a personality can you say they are a difficult person? Does that mean difficult people don't exist?

 

I'm not saying just because we can't prove otherwise, it IS true, I'm saying coming here to poo-poo others for something that theoretically can be true (and without evidence of your own too say its not) is arrogant and rude and annoying. That's really as simple as it gets.

As someone has said in this thread - the burden of proof is on the side of the people who are making very bold claims like the ones you are making: that the position of the planets when they are born directly influences people's personality. 

Human personality is a complex topic but psychiatry and psychology, even sociology are much more reliable in their attempts to study it and explain it. In every of those fields there are causal explanations at work which astrology just completely lacks.  This is why I think it's dangerous to promote astrology as a substitute for therapy. 

Edited May 15 by SweetOreosOfHeaven

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

5 minutes ago, AndThenTheCocaine said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot

 

Only one of the greatest philosopher and scientist of the 20th century. 

Edited May 15 by SweetOreosOfHeaven

[Kiel D-01]

I mean astrology is not different to all religions. All are fantasies. 

[swissman]

11 minutes ago, SweetOreosOfHeaven said:

My point is: how do they affect human psychology? This is they key question for which astrology does not have an answer, and which makes it tantamount to just wild guessing. 

I believe at this point science has proven a lot about the brain, has it not? And would science not say that altering even the smallest thing in a human brain can have big change in the person? And does science not at this point know that our brains are responsible for how we think and act? And so if that is true, why is it impossible for certain gravitational changes that can move mass amounts of water from the oceans to not also potentially affect a brain (which is predominantly water), and thus affecting it slightly, also effect things like psychology?

Furthermore, we know that air pressure can have affects on humans either when they go to different altitudes or when pressure changes in the atmosphere, so logically if that can also affect us not so subtly, why can't something like the moon's changing gravity also affect us?

 

It's surely not a fact, but it's also not a wild guess. It's speculative based on some stuff we know.

[SweetOreosOfHeaven]

1 minute ago, swissman said:

I believe at this point science has proven a lot about the brain, has it not? And would science not say that altering even the smallest thing in a human brain can have big change in the person? And does science not at this point know that our brains are responsible for how we think and act? And so if that is true, why is it impossible for certain gravitational changes that can move mass amounts of water from the oceans to not also potentially affect a brain (which is predominantly water), and thus affecting it slightly, also effect things like psychology?

Furthermore, we know that air pressure can have affects on humans either when they go to different altitudes or when pressure changes in the atmosphere, so logically if that can also affect us not so subtly, why can't something like the moon's changing gravity also affect us?

 

It's surely not a fact, but it's also not a wild guess. It's speculative based on some stuff we know.

No explanation in sight; we're going in circles at this point. Why does being born in December would make you more likely to de adventurous, for instance? 

 

[glitch]

I didn't realise astrology had actual die hard fans? I mean looking at your horoscope every now and then is just a bit of fun, like opening a fortune cookie. People actually believe it's real?