Monotheism vs. Polytheism

[DireWolfSpirit]

9 hours ago, Rippounet said:

As a sidestep, to attempt to defuse this conversation, here's a half-related piece of information I found interesting:

Also I posted a very open minded Ted Talk-

Dr. David Eagleman gives a wonderful Ted Talk on the Possibility Space.

https://youtu.be/LENqnjZGX0A?si=1_l7AjuUy-xDyAHB

 

With the same objective of something open minded people could find agreeable without the need for the arm wresting.

 

[Phylum of Alexandria]

7 hours ago, Kalbear said:

Sure, but he was a real pissant who was very rarely stable

I Kant...get past the intro to Critique. It's so dry.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

I wrote this a while ago for a shared writer's blog. I often write about music and silly things, but I sometimes try to insert nerdier or more serious-minded stuff. It feels germane to this thread.

No Stars Upon Thars

Lately I’ve been thinking more about…astrology.

I’ll admit, there’s a silly kick I get from being a twin who happened to be born into the Gemini sign, but beyond that, I never understood the attraction to astrology.

As a kid I would read daily horoscopes in the newspaper, and they seemed pretty obviously phony to me even then. Like the fortunes in a fortune cookie: randomly distributed, and depending on gullible readers who’ll believe them no matter what happens to be written.

By the time my career path entered the realm of scientific research, superstitious practices like astrology were barely a thought to me.

…Yet now, it’s that “barely a thought” dismissal of something regarded as worthless that has recently been bugging me. It now seems so callous and smug. But also unwise. Maybe even dangerous in a way.

People who scoff at astrology don’t simply declare that it can’t accurately predict the future. We usually take it further, into a narrative about Human Progress:

“We’ve moved on from these primitive superstitions,”  we scientists say, “let’s work to advance humanity rather than dwell on the ignorance of the past.” Basically, astrology is a relic of the Dark Ages, and we humans should put our focus on building upon the wealth of knowledge that we have cultivated since the Enlightenment.

It is undeniable that we humans have learned so much about how to explain, predict, and control the world around us. Advances in technology and medicine in recent centuries have immensely improved quality of life in so many ways. And all that is thanks to our constantly expanding body of knowledge, which is itself based on the careful testing of evidence.

That’s the “elevator chat” version of the Human Progress narrative that got me into science in the first place. It’s hard to argue with it, especially because the results of the progress are so easy to observe.

But, more and more, I think we are sometimes susceptible to being blinded by the light of human progress.

For most of my life, I’ve lived in a city. And when you live in or near a city, you rarely ever stop to notice the stars in the sky at night. You usually can only see a few at a time anyway, and they tend to be fairly dim.

But a few times in my life I have seen the night sky far away from the lights of modern civilization, as most humans throughout history probably would have seen it. And in those times the stars were absolutely majestic. Wondrous to behold. Literally awe inspiring. Almost magical.

And that impression was simply the result of being away from artificial lights for one night. The more comfort, security, stability, and certainty that you strip away from a person’s life…it’s easy to imagine how much more powerful and meaningful to a person’s life those wondrous stars would become. They are sources of light to cut through the darkness of night. They have regular movements and positions in the sky that lend a sense of certainty and reliability to what can be chaotic and dangerous surroundings.

In fact, astrology rituals may be one of the first systematic attempts by humans to explain and control the material world based on observable patterns. Certainly the first that accumulated and carried on across regions and cultures. Yes, it’s true, their assumptions about what the stars meant for human fates were inaccurate. But without those early efforts to systemize, understand, and control that which was mysterious, we probably wouldn’t have the system of knowledge and technology that we all currently benefit from. Astrology was in fact one the seeds of thought that eventually helped to give rise to science. 

So yes, I do think our casual dismissal of such beliefs is definitely smug. Our self-satisfaction with humanity’s current state of knowledge is unearned. After all, how much did we personally contribute? It’s also ungrateful to the innovators of the past, those giants upon whose shoulders we now stand upon.

Take for instance, Sir Isaac Newton. Would most people today say that they are smarter or more important for human progress than Isaac Newton? Probably not. He is revered as one of the fathers of the Enlightenment, rightfully honored as a genius. Yet Newton himself spent much of his life thinking quite seriously about alchemy, about the elixir of life, and the philosopher’s stone. 

Who are we to get judgmental, simply because he happened to be born in a different time and place than us? If I’d been born in Newton’s town and Newton’s time, it’s more likely that I would have cried “Witchcraft!” at his ideas than actually come up with my own. We've no right to judge, but that smugness comes so easily.

But again, I think there’s something here that’s worse than smugness, a more insidious danger. I think there is a failure of educated people to appreciate how the human mind operates, quite normally, in the absence of the knowledge and the comforts that many of us have enjoyed this past century. It’s as if the light of progress has dulled our perception about how humans typically think about, perceive, and gain knowledge about the world around us. 

This blindness exists, to some extent, for anyone who benefits from advanced knowledge relative to some other place or era. So pretty much everyone today has a “dimmer view” of the stars in the sky than most people did in previous generations. But I think it’s especially true of people who are well educated, and probably most true of people trained to think scientifically. Of course, there’s so much to learn, and so many problems to solve, who even has time to think about these old superstitions and bogus beliefs?

Well…I would say that this is the perfect time to be thinking about such things. As I said before, we live in a time of continued advancement of knowledge and rapid technical innovation. And yet, more and more, our time feels like an age of information overload. Of misinformation. Of polarization and fragmentation, of relativism. Of conspiracy theories, and widespread distrust in the established institutions of knowledge.

In these times, it feels not just helpful, but necessary to think carefully about how one thinks and how one knows. How do we know what’s true these days? And if we think we know what’s true, what do we do about it? How do we work effectively to build a better world, where we can share and benefit from that knowledge?

I don’t have good answers to those questions, but I have a feeling that our being blinded by the light of progress can keep us from ever getting to real solutions. I think it’s very important to try to take different perspectives, and try to see things in a new light…if you will.

The stars may not control our fates, but how we see, what we notice, what we prioritize, and how we comprehend the world around us, these are all in fact shaped by some factors that are beyond our control, such as one’s time in history, or one’s early education opportunities.

From now on, the stars I see at night can at least remind me to focus on things that I may have been so casually looking down upon, or dismissing, or ignoring, or simply not seeing. Even if it’s not for me, it’s worth seeing in a new light.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

wrong thread

Edited January 22 by Phylum of Alexandria

[Rippounet]

It's a nice text, but I can't help point out:

1 hour ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

That’s the “elevator chat” version of the "Human Progress" narrative [....]. It’s hard to argue with it, especially because the results of the "progress" are so easy to observe.

It's easy to turn this bit into something else.
I still wouldn't vote in favor of returning to superstition, but a bit of awe/humility could definitely help.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

11 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

I still wouldn't vote in favor of returning to superstition, but a bit of awe/humility could definitely help.

It's more about understanding where the superstitious belief or mistrustful stance might come from, in order to have any hope of properly addressing it. And yes, awe and humility.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Several points on Astrology:

• The modern newspaper variety has nothing to do with the way it was traditionally practiced.
• Astrology and Astronomy were considered the same thing for most of human history.
• Countless ancient writers, from Aristotle to Augustine, condemn astrologers. This notion of superstitious ancients versus sceptical moderns ignores that humans have been having this conversation for thousands of years.

[Larry of the Lawn]

11 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Several points on Astrology:

• The modern newspaper variety has nothing to do with the way it was traditionally practiced.
• Astrology and Astronomy were considered the same thing for most of human history.
• Countless ancient writers, from Aristotle to Augustine, condemn astrologers. This notion of superstitious ancients versus sceptical moderns ignores that humans have been having this conversation for thousands of years.

 

Galileo, Brahe, and Kepler were all astrologers, and it seems to have persisted amongst astronomers even after Newton.  In Mason & Dixon Pynchon has Neville Maskelyne, Charles Mason, and James Bradley all doing charts on the side for money, but I haven't been able to find any  confirmation on those three actually practicing astrology.

A good friend of mine is really into classical astrology and while I was initially skeptical and pretty judgmental about this interest, I was very impressed to see what a good grasp of astronomy he has.  

[Phylum of Alexandria]

25 minutes ago, The Marquis de Leech said:

Several points on Astrology:

• The modern newspaper variety has nothing to do with the way it was traditionally practiced.
• Astrology and Astronomy were considered the same thing for most of human history.
• Countless ancient writers, from Aristotle to Augustine, condemn astrologers. This notion of superstitious ancients versus sceptical moderns ignores that humans have been having this conversation for thousands of years.

Yes, true. Sometimes you gotta sacrifice detail for punchiness, though.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

19 minutes ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

A good friend of mine is really into classical astrology and while I was initially skeptical and pretty judgmental about this interest, I was very impressed to see what a good grasp of astronomy he has

Some interpretations sound cool to me. Like, when Mercury is in retrograde, using that time for rest and quiet contemplation. Doesn't have to be about fate or magical rites if you don't want it to be.

[Larry of the Lawn]

15 minutes ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Some interpretations sound cool to me. Like, when Mercury is in retrograde, using that time for rest and quiet contemplation. Doesn't have to be about fate or magical rites if you don't want it to be.

Yeah, listening to my friend talk about some of the Hermetic, Sumerian, and Mithraic myths and how they were incorporated into Hellenistic astrology was pretty cool.  Including the myth of Innana as an explanation for the planet Venus, which my friend made a rather convincing argument for being the story the Barbie movie was drawn from.  

I certainly have a very different opinion of astrology now than I did previously.  I don't put any stock in it but it's pretty fascinating to see some of the ways people have interpreted the movement of the planets and astronomical events over human history.

Edited January 23 by Larry of the Lawn

[Conflicting Thought]

3 hours ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

when Mercury is in retrograde

thats an illusion, right? it is good, i guess, if you want to contemplate but people realy think that retrograde mercury has an effect in their lives. many base  important decitions on this, when it doesnt mean anyhing.

[Tears of Lys]

37 minutes ago, Conflicting Thought said:

thats an illusion, right? it is good, i guess, if you want to contemplate but people realy think that retrograde mercury has an effect in their lives. many base  important decitions on this, when it doesnt mean anyhing.

Oh, ye of little faith.   

[Ormond]

Though I know there have on occasion been astrologers who have tried to postulate that some sort of gravitational or other physical forces are involved in their field, most of my friends who've really been into astrology do not think the planets and their positions have a direct causative effect. They rather have a spiritual belief that everything in the universe is connected on a non-material plane, and what they are doing is just finding correlations between the positions of the planets and what goes on in human lives, which are caused by this underlying spiritual connection. 

Of course newspaper astrology columns, purporting to give a couple of sentences about one twelfth of all humanity at a time, usually aren't even making any scientifically "falsifiable" statements but just state general advice which doesn't have any real predictive content. Statements like "Rely on your team, tribe, and community" or "Nurture youself. Broaden your exploration." are so vague as to be practically meaningless. 

Edited January 24 by Ormond
add missing letter

[Kalbear]

My vague working theory on why astrology occasionally feels a bit right and might be sometimes is that we are, as a rule, a very northern-hemisphere world and the combination of temperature, moisture and light does actually instill certain personality traits in humans from an early (like 0-3 months) age. This would be testable if we wanted to by seeing if people in the southern hemisphere exhibited more traits associated with 6-month lags in star signs - so, for example Scorpios (Oct 20-Nov 20) in the southern hemisphere would be more like Taurus (April 20th- May 20th).

It's probably bullshit but at least it's testable. 

[Phylum of Alexandria]

18 hours ago, Larry of the Lawn said:

Yeah, listening to my friend talk about some of the Hermetic, Sumerian, and Mithraic myths and how they were incorporated into Hellenistic astrology was pretty cool. 

I have an interest in esoteric traditions, so reading up on Hermeticism, Mithraism, and all of the syncretic variations out there is very interesting to me.

But admittedly it's pretty much just an amateur academic interest. I do read Tarot cards sometimes, but it's solely to stimulate thought and introspection. 

I did quite enjoy Alan Moore's tour of magic in Promethea... 

[Phylum of Alexandria]

15 hours ago, Conflicting Thought said:

thats an illusion, right? it is good,

Don't ask me. It's not my wheelhouse.

As long as someone keeps their beliefs and practices to themselves, I have no qualms with a little weirdness.

[Conflicting Thought]

1 hour ago, Phylum of Alexandria said:

Don't ask me. It's not my wheelhouse.

As long as someone keeps their beliefs and practices to themselves, I have no qualms with a little weirdness.

except...thats the problem or at leat a part of the problem, those kinds of beliefs breed other similar beliefs and you end up with people not trusting anything science related. i mean where does that little wierdenss stop, or when do they start to  become problematic at a societal level, does belive in treating ilness with bach flowers and other homeopathic "remedies" count as a little weirdness?. i dont know, but i admit that beign a "man of little faith" this things scare me, cuz i see them become extremely popular and with them come a host of other belives and problems.

just recently a "healer" came to my country to perform mass healings to people with cancer, saying that cancer is produced by trauma and things like that, now cancer is a serious subject so maybe you think that this is outside of just a little weirdenss, but i see it as being a part of the same problem.  many many people that belive in this "healer" person (and others "doctors" that heal you with energies that they send from their phones and that are thousands of kilometers away), also belive in things like astrology and the like.

[The Marquis de Leech]

6 hours ago, Kalbear said:

My vague working theory on why astrology occasionally feels a bit right and might be sometimes is that we are, as a rule, a very northern-hemisphere world and the combination of temperature, moisture and light does actually instill certain personality traits in humans from an early (like 0-3 months) age. This would be testable if we wanted to by seeing if people in the southern hemisphere exhibited more traits associated with 6-month lags in star signs - so, for example Scorpios (Oct 20-Nov 20) in the southern hemisphere would be more like Taurus (April 20th- May 20th).

It's probably bullshit but at least it's testable. 

The issue there is that the oldest form of astrology was not the natal variety, which focuses on the individual and their birth. Instead, the court astrologers of the ancient world were interested in the fate of entire societies - whether a given day was an auspicious occasion for a royal marriage, or a war, or something.

[Phylum of Alexandria]

1 hour ago, Conflicting Thought said:

except...thats the problem or at leat a part of the problem, those kinds of beliefs breed other similar beliefs and you end up with people not trusting anything science related. i mean where does that little wierdenss stop, or when do they start to  become problematic at a societal level, does belive in treating ilness with bach flowers and other homeopathic "remedies" count as a little weirdness?. i dont know, but i admit that beign a "man of little faith" this things scare me, cuz i see them become extremely popular and with them come a host of other belives and problems.

just recently a "healer" came to my country to perform mass healings to people with cancer, saying that cancer is produced by trauma and things like that, now cancer is a serious subject so maybe you think that this is outside of just a little weirdenss, but i see it as being a part of the same problem.  many many people that belive in this "healer" person (and others "doctors" that heal you with energies that they send from their phones and that are thousands of kilometers away), also belive in things like astrology and the like.

I think the core problem for that stuff, and also for conspiracy theories, is a lack of trust in established institutions, including medicine and scientific knowledge. Atheists can go down weirdo rabbit holes too, if they feel detached from and distrustful of the experts telling them what's what.

In any event, what does one do about it? I'm all for improved education, or any effort to improve trust (including reforming the institutions and their communication arms). But badgering someone for their weird belief will probably just make them worse, more defiant, kvetching and licking their wounds among people who think like them.