Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is modern astrology a con compared to the ancient?
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813 		  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is modern astrology a con compared to the ancient?
    Posted: 20-May-2008 at 18:59
I never trusted what we call astrology nowadays. Besides, whenever I care to read what astrologers write i tend to laugh with the innacuracies that are supposed to represent my zodiac. Moreover, if i accept that modern astrology is correct then i was not born in april judging from people of the same zodiac i've met. I also think that i should throw away all my philosophy books concerning peoples behaviour and inner characteristics, since i would have no chance to evolve as a human being if i was bound to a zodiac.

From a small study i have seen, ancient astrology does not deal with masses that are born on a specific day. It is more religiously bound and connected to good and bad spirits. It is also related to the behaviour people had towards their animals. In certain cases, astrology refers to a big timeframe, not just a month or a year.

So, what are your thoughts? Has anyone done a deeper study on how astrology was used back in the days and if modern astrology has any basis on its usage today?

Note: I know planets around us that affect the eartly waters, may have an effect on some people...How significant is that however?


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2008 at 03:37
Complex question. It depends on which you want to look in astrology.
 
First, before the 16th century, or which is the same, before Kepler, there was not distinction between astrology and astronomy, so both supersticion and science where a single entity. In fact, many of the terminology and calculations modern astrologers do where developed by the Greek genious Claudius Ptolmey. And since his times (3rd century BC) the ideas on the influence of the hour of birth are the same than today. However, unlike modern astrologers, Ptolmey was a brilliant mathematician who was able to develop the mathematics of the geocentric model to predict the movements of planets.
 
In Middle Ages' China, astrologers used high precisition hydraulic clocks, to move armillary spheres and to predict the exact moment on which the next emperator should be concieved! All based in the same astrological supersticion.
 
So, astrology helped to developed science. Even more, Kepler made an extra money saling horoscopes.
 
 
Back to Top
Richard XIII View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar

Joined: 06-Jun-2005
Location: Romania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 651 		  Quote Richard XIII Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2008 at 09:57

Is modern astrology a con compared to the ancient?

Yes, both are stupid
"I want to know God's thoughts...
...the rest are details."

Albert Einstein
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2008 at 12:08
What you call 'modern astrology' is probably not what astrologers call 'astrology'. The predictions and analyses based solely on sun signs were only invented by a journalist on the London Daily Express in the 1920s, and has always been viewed with disdain, rightly, by astrologers who work with complete horoscopes.
 
I don't believe there is any reality in the basic astrological hypothesis that what happens on high is related to what happens below, but much cheap criticism that is hurled at 'astrology' is unfounded. Modern (and ancient) astrologers are in fact also serious students of the science of astronomy itself.
 
I don't think 'con' is the right word for such people's activities, because they are sincere. However, 'con' is certainly the right word for sun-sign 'astrology'.


Edited by gcle2003 - 21-May-2008 at 12:09
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813 		  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2008 at 20:02
Thank you people for your answers.


I don't think 'con' is the right word for such people's activities, because they are sincere. However, 'con' is certainly the right word for sun-sign 'astrology'.


Sorry for that. I didn't intend to use it as an insult or so.


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664 		  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2008 at 00:02
I'm afraid, that there has to be some kind of hinting in the way the world moves on to the meaning of life. But I doubt that the stars are the answer... What on Earth does a billion-lightyears-away-star know (or even care) of one human whose fate it is supposed to change? That sounds a bit silly to me...Dead

And as far as I know, the ancient astrology, along with the predictions and such depended very much on the person who read them - pretty much that when the Pontifex Maximus was your brother, then you'd be rather safe from all happenings that might have happened to normal people...
Back to Top
Flipper View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 23-Apr-2006
Location: Flipper HQ
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1813 		  Quote Flipper Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2008 at 08:39
Originally posted by rider

What on Earth does a billion-lightyears-away-star know (or even care) of one human whose fate it is supposed to change? That sounds a bit silly to me...Dead


That's a exactly what I would say!!! Thumbs%20Up

I can understand that the moon, Jupiter, Saturnus etc can have an effect on people but those stars..?.?.? However, while thinking about this matter, i remembered that Plato (Timaeus) said that each soul at its birth is assigned to a star. When this soul after many reincarnations reaches virtue, it returns to its native star.

So, there I was troubled for some seconds...However, even if what Plato said is based on astrology, he is talking about 1 star for 1 soul, not 1 star formation for millions of people.


Edited by Flipper - 24-May-2008 at 08:43


Så nu tar jag fram (k)niven va!
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664 		  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2008 at 11:15
But how do the astrologers know what star it was? Perhaps it's a binary star? They can't be certain in which of the two would be correct?
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2008 at 11:46
That's for identical twins? SmileSmile
Back to Top
rider View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Suspended

Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664 		  Quote rider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-May-2008 at 12:14
Lol... But then, there are two types of 'binary stars' - either appearing or real (free translation of Estonian terms) which would mean that...

Well, I just don't believe that..

And Plato... Well, if his Atlantis isn't generally trustworthy (I like it though), why is the star-migration theory better?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.064 seconds.