Astrology (from Greek: 汐考而?老, 汐考而老?? (ast谷r, astr車s), "star", and 竹?污羊?, 竹?污羊耒 (l車gos, l車gou), "word" or "speech") is a group of systems, traditions, and beliefs in which knowledge of the relative positions of celestial bodies and related details is held to be useful in understanding, interpreting, and organizing information about personality, human affairs, and other terrestrial matters. A practitioner of astrology is called an astrologer, or, less often, an astrologist. Numerous traditions and applications employing astrological concepts have arisen since its earliest recorded beginnings in the 2nd millennium BCE.[1] It has played a role in the shaping of culture, early astronomy, and other disciplines throughout history.Historically, astrology and astronomy were often indistinguishable, with the desire for predictive and divinatory knowledge one of the primary motivating factors for astronomical observation. Astronomy began to diverge from astrology after a long period of gradual separation in the 18th century, and has since distinguished itself as the scientific study of astronomical objects and phenomena, placing no significance on these phenomena's supposed astrological correlation.
Astrology is variously considered by its proponents to be a symbolic language, a form of art, science or divination. The scientific community considers astrology to be a pseudoscience or superstition as numerous Western astrologers have failed empirical tests in controlled studies. Despite the lack of scientific evidence, belief in astrology remains widespread.
By the time of Francis Bacon and the scientific revolution, newly emerging scientific disciplines acquired a method of systematic empirical induction validated by experimental observations, which led to the scientific revolution. At this point, astrology and astronomy began to diverge; astronomy became one of the central sciences while astrology was increasingly viewed as an occult science or superstition by natural scientists. This separation accelerated through the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Astrology has been criticized as being unscientific both by scientific bodies and by individual scientists. and has been labeled as a pseudoscience. In 1975, the American Humanist Association published one of the most widely known modern criticisms of astrology, characterizing those who continue to have faith in the subject as doing so "in spite of the fact that there is no verified scientific basis for their beliefs, and indeed that there is strong evidence to the contrary". Astronomer Carl Sagan did not sign the statement, noting that, while he felt astrology lacked validity, he found the statement's tone authoritarian. He suggested that the lack of a causal mechanism for astrology was relevant but not in itself convincing.
Although astrology has had no accepted scientific standing for some time, it has been the subject of much research among astrologers since the beginning of the twentieth century. In his landmark study of twentieth-century research into natal astrology, vocal astrology critic Geoffrey Dean noted and documented the burgeoning research activity, primarily within the astrological community.
Claims about obstacles to researchAstrologers have argued that there are significant obstacles in carrying out scientific research into astrology today, including funding, lack of background in science and statistics by astrologers, and insufficient expertise in astrology by research scientists. There are only a handful of journals dealing with scientific research into astrology (i.e. astrological journals directed towards scientific research or scientific journals publishing astrological research). Some astrologers have argued that few practitioners today pursue scientific testing of astrology because they feel that working with clients on a daily basis provides a personal validation for them.
Another argument made by astrologers is that most studies of astrology do not reflect the nature of astrological practice and that existing experimental methods and research tools are not adequate for studying this complex discipline. Some astrology proponents claim that the prevailing attitudes and motives of many opponents of astrology introduce conscious or unconscious bias in the formulation of hypotheses to be tested, the conduct of the tests, and the reporting of results
Astrology has been criticized as being unscientific both by scientific bodies and by individual scientists. and has been labeled as a pseudoscience. In 1975, the American Humanist Association published one of the most widely known modern criticisms of astrology, characterizing those who continue to have faith in the subject as doing so "in spite of the fact that there is no verified scientific basis for their beliefs, and indeed that there is strong evidence to the contrary". Astronomer Carl Sagan did not sign the statement, noting that, while he felt astrology lacked validity, he found the statement's tone authoritarian. He suggested that the lack of a causal mechanism for astrology was relevant but not in itself convincing.
Although astrology has had no accepted scientific standing for some time, it has been the subject of much research among astrologers since the beginning of the twentieth century. In his landmark study of twentieth-century research into natal astrology, vocal astrology critic Geoffrey Dean noted and documented the burgeoning research activity, primarily within the astrological community.
Claims about obstacles to researchAstrologers have argued that there are significant obstacles in carrying out scientific research into astrology today, including funding, lack of background in science and statistics by astrologers, and insufficient expertise in astrology by research scientists. There are only a handful of journals dealing with scientific research into astrology (i.e. astrological journals directed towards scientific research or scientific journals publishing astrological research). Some astrologers have argued that few practitioners today pursue scientific testing of astrology because they feel that working with clients on a daily basis provides a personal validation for them.
Another argument made by astrologers is that most studies of astrology do not reflect the nature of astrological practice and that existing experimental methods and research tools are not adequate for studying this complex discipline. Some astrology proponents claim that the prevailing attitudes and motives of many opponents of astrology introduce conscious or unconscious bias in the formulation of hypotheses to be tested, the conduct of the tests, and the reporting of results
No comments:
Post a Comment