Re: virus: Objectivism vs Astrology in Cyberspace

Dave Pape (
Sun, 16 Feb 1997 21:38:22 GMT

At 14:45 16/02/97 -0600, Ken wrote:

>> The other test would be to find out what personality traits astrology's
>> mentioning, knock up a questionnaire designed to fish those traits out of
>> people, then run it on a large sample, asking for birthdate info.


>With the multiplicity of methods for calculating the technojargon
>'houses' [I think at least 12 are extant], I think scientific testing
>[even limited to their framework] would be useful. If I were to
>believe, my bet would be on the only one that doesn't shatter at the
>Arctic/Antartic circles....
>Computing a horoscope from a date of birth, without any other data, is
>NAIVE. That's like predicting air time for a basketball to 10
>significant digits, and having only only 1 significant digit in the
>initial velocity.

Well yeh, but... astrology could be only 1 sig fig accurate (eg) and still
confer a benefit on people... meaning that if someone's horoscope is
/ballpark/ accurate then it might not let you predict their behaviour more
than 1% of the time, but that's still better than chance.

What?! I'm DEFENDING the validity of astrology? I've got to get this
argumentative shit under control!

Dave Pape
Ran out of sig. ideas.

Phonecalls: 01494 461648 Phights: 10 Riverswood Gardens
High Wycombe
HP11 1HN