Validity of Astrology *split from INFJs and western astrology*

[Duty]

I think it's difficult because a lot of what INFJs go on can be internal, without any external proofs. If we say God exists, it's because we *know* God exists, and no matter the evidence no one can persuade us of the contrary.

Does that mean we're right? No. But it will be a heck of a lot harder to sway an INFJs opinion once they've decided something. It's the judging factor. We've decided, that settles it.

It seems like a good goal for personal growth, then, is to start being more open to being wrong...to be more critical of your opinions in those times they are brought into question.

The problem is when there isn't enough data to prove the point. Then both the INTP and the INF/TJ will use different methods to obtain the end result that satisfies them.

Despite my attitude about this months ago (I'm rereading myself...and geez I was frustrated easily), I think this is the critical point: when there isn't enough data we don't make something up or fill in the gaps with guesses or say "It hasn't been disproven so I can believe it" (which is called a fallacy from ignorance), we instead make likely guesses, test their predictions, and then believe according to the outcome. Astrology has failed in its predictions (when its predictions aren't vague enough to be impossible to measure) and so is a belief that must be discarded.

This isn't a type thing at all. I know INTPs that are into mystical and religious stuff...it goes against the stereotype, but they're certainly there. This means many different things to different people, and for me it's about realizing the world for what it is and for the limits of my knowledge. Personal growth doesn't happen until one acknowledges the truth about themself, their limits, and the truth of the world outside of them (it's why mental illness is so bad...you can't grow up because there is some truth about the world or self that your brain absolutely can't see).

So that's why, months ago, I argued this thread so hard. I have good intentions and I want to see people grow...there is a vital lack of concern for personal growth in the world.

 

[Lucifer]

Just out of curiosity, but why do people care about this stuff?

They can offer nuggets of wisdom even if its not accurate.

 

[Duty]

They can offer nuggets of wisdom even if its not accurate.

Can you give an example? And are those nuggets of wisdom obtainable from a more reliable source? Are those nuggest of wisdom worth the unreliability of astrology (and why are they worth it) if they can't be gotten from a reliable source?

 

[Lucifer]

Can you give an example? And are those nuggets of wisdom obtainable from a more reliable source? Are those nuggest of wisdom worth the unreliability of astrology (and why are they worth it) if they can't be gotten from a reliable source?

You clearly don't want to debate me so I wont go into it.

 

[gloomy-optimist]

I like astrology because I think it's fun and interesting. It has a lot of history to it, and it's like a game I play with myself.

Whether or not it's valid isn't really a big deal. It's just...interesting. You can't really explain it.

 

[the]

Despite my attitude about this months ago (I'm rereading myself...and geez I was frustrated easily), I think this is the critical point: when there isn't enough data we don't make something up or fill in the gaps with guesses or say "It hasn't been disproven so I can believe it" (which is called a fallacy from ignorance), we instead make likely guesses, test their predictions, and then believe according to the outcome. Astrology has failed in its predictions (when its predictions aren't vague enough to be impossible to measure) and so is a belief that must be discarded.

This made me laugh.

 

[Duty]

This made me laugh.

You missed the part about "test their predictions." You're too busy looking at the little details and didn't see the whole picture: those lists are meant to be taken together as a whole.

 

[the]

You missed the part about "test their predictions." You're too busy looking at the little details and didn't see the whole picture: those lists are meant to be taken together as a whole.

No I read it. A guess is a guess. What makes you think the people who believe in astrology aren't doing your second option and coming to different conclusions?

 

[IndigoSensor]

No I read it. A guess is a guess. What makes you think the people who believe in astrology aren't doing your second option and coming to different conclusions?

This is the biggest purpose it has for me.

 

[Duty]

No I read it. A guess is a guess.

A guess designed to be a possibility, which is then tested, is in a class very different from a guess that is just believed so as to put an end to guessing, and which goes untested.

What makes you think the people who believe in astrology aren't doing your second option and coming to different conclusions?

Because I've heard a great deal many of them out, and they don't do that. The evidence they always present is circumstantial and anecdotal (and just as easily can be serendipity or a huge host of untested possibilities), and that's if it gets past the stage of being so vague it can't be interpreted in any manner specific enough to be tested. It is because some people have gotten curious and tested the predictions of astrology in a proper scientific manner, and found it to not be, in any statistically relevent way, more accurate than random chance. It's all over wikipedia with links to their sources if you want to look it up.

 

[Duty]

Honestly, just let this thread go. I don't care to debate it anymore. You resurrected this thread with questionable posts seemingly intended to antagonize me. Well, I don't care what people want to believe. I have reason why I don't believe things like astrology and that's good enough for me.

 

[AhSver]

Astrology is invalid. I am not sure what this thread is doing in "Philosophy and Religion", someone should move it to "Mysticism" where it belongs.

 

[enfp can be shy]

INTPs and ISTPs are often very distrustful towards astrology, but they also may not be able to get a feeling about people (without the proper scientific testing).

I'm one of those who think sooner or later there would be a way to validate at least some aspects of astrology through scientific methods, which isn't an easy task at all. Describing people's characters with words is not good enough approach; languages are too ambiguous. However, average physical features might help - there are similarities, and if you are very experienced, you could try to guess signs only by faces/bodies/mimics/gestures/posture/movements.

The root explanations may have nothing to do with constellations, but seasons, hormones in embryonic stages etc. As to other planets' influence on us - the sun and the moon have enormous effects on the biological functions of all the Earth's creatures, maybe some of the planets also have their less obvious influence.

What the current approaches of science lack is patience and time. There are processes in life that require generations and generations of calm and dedicated observation. With all our advancements today, we still can't solve problems that require centuries of concentrated work. And to pass that knowledge (that data) to a doubtful individual, who has never gathered it by themselves (and doesn't have an easy way to gather it) is almost impossible. You need very good intuition about people and a lot of time, and a lot of test subjects, in order to claim you got some impression.