MeDotOrg wrote: ...spiritual alternatives ...
... You are referring to astrology, no? I've asked this question before on this board: what on earth does this word 'spirituality' mean in such a context? Astrology, per se, has no specifically religious content at all. I don't want to turn this into a seminar, but if you read writing from the last period when astrology was still seen in Europe as being worth serious scientific attention, you will see that it was presenting itself as on equal terms with other sciences. See my earlier post.
MeDotOrg wrote:Personally I feel astrology is a lot more accurate than it used to be. Probably computers and telescopes, but my horoscope is always correct. It just keeps getting better and more accurate, because it is based on solid science. ...
The improvements made in calculating the apparent positions of the heavenly bodies against the background of the stars seen from earth over the last three hundred years or so have been quite small from any practical point of view,* and certainly from the point of view of the kind of data used by astrologers.
Anyway ... it seems that your subjective sense that your horoscope is 'accurate' may not have a great deal of evidential value. See:
What do you mean, “test” astrology?Possibly the most detailed test of astrology using this type of method, was performed by Shawn Carlson. His paper, “A Double-blind Test of Astrology”, was published in the peer reviewed scientific journal Nature, in 1985. The interesting thing is that the San Francisco chapter of the National Council for Geocosmic Research recommended the 28 professional astrologers who took part, and (with Carlson), designed the tests. They also predicted, in advance, what they would consider to be a successful test.
Two tests were performed:
Test #1: Astrological charts were prepared for 83 subjects, based on natal data (date, time and place of birth), provided by the subjects. Each subject was given three charts: one chart based on their own natal data, and two charts derived from natal data of other people. Each subject was asked to identify the chart that most correctly described them. In only 28 of the 83 cases, the subject chose their own chart. This is the exact success rate expected for random chance. The astrologers predicted that the subjects would select their own chart more that 50% of the time.
Test #2: 116 subjects completed California Personality Index surveys and provided natal data (date, time and place of birth). One set of natal data and the results of three personality surveys (one of which was for the same person as the natal data) were given to an astrologer who was to interpret the natal data and determine which of the three CPI results belonged to the same subject as the natal data. In only 40 of the 116 cases, the astrologers chose the correct CPI. As with test #1, this is the exact success rate expected for random chance. The astrologers predicted that they would select the correct CPI profiles in more that 50 per cent of the trials.
Conclusion by Carlson:
"We are now in a position to argue a surprisingly strong case against natal astrology as practiced by reputable astrologers. Great pains were taken to insure that the experiment was unbiased and to make sure that astrology was given every reasonable chance to succeed. It failed. Despite the fact that we worked with some of the best astrologers in the country, recommended by the advising astrologers for their expertise in astrology and in their ability to use the CPI, despite the fact that every reasonable suggestion made by advising astrologers was worked into the experiment, despite the fact that the astrologers approved the design and predicted 50% as the "minimum" effect they would expect to see, astrology failed to perform at a level better than chance.
"I have not yet received a serious scientific challenge to the paper. The newsletter of the American Federation of Astrologers Network published a response in January (1986). I was very disappointed to see that it largely consists of personal attacks. Its few substantive criticisms are attributable to ignorance of the experiment, of the CPI, and of basic scientific methodology."
Edited to add:
* Of course the improvements that have taken place are very useful in ensuring that space probes can be put in orbit round Mars ... but we are talking astrology here
