• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Venki calls astrology a fake discipline

  • Thread starter Thread starter ShivKC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

ShivKC

Guest
Nobel laureate Dr Venkatraman Ramakrishnan provoked a few and enthralled many with his talk on 'The Sceptical Scientist' in the city on Thursday.

He termed astrology and alchemy fake disciplines that depended on the power of suggestion and said homeopathy was based on belief. Terms like 'positive and negative energy' used by various "quacks were complete mumbo jumbo" and had no precise meaning, he said. Science, he added, had a particular definition of energy.

​
Nobel laureate Venki calls astrology a fake discipline - The Times of India

seeking counter views
 
ShivKC said:
Nobel laureate Dr Venkatraman Ramakrishnan provoked a few and enthralled many with his talk on 'The Sceptical Scientist' in the city on Thursday.

He termed astrology and alchemy fake disciplines that depended on the power of suggestion and said homeopathy was based on belief. Terms like 'positive and negative energy' used by various "quacks were complete mumbo jumbo" and had no precise meaning, he said. Science, he added, had a particular definition of energy.

​
Nobel laureate Venki calls astrology a fake discipline - The Times of India

seeking counter views
Click to expand...

Astrology is not fake but may be astrologers can make mistakes.
Just like some doctors fail to make the correct diagnosis and some hit the correct diagnosis spot on.

Homeopathy is based in believe at times and what is wrong in that?
We need to believe in ourselves before we can believe in anything else.
Homeopathy has worked where main stream medicine has failed too.
Seen many cases.

Whats so surprising of Positive and Negative Energy?

Even magnets have Positive and Negative poles.

Protons are positively charged and electrons are negatively charged.

A flow of electrons give rise to electrical energy.

Even a cell membrane at its resting state is at -70Mv.

So why cant there be positive and negative energy?
 
Last edited:
astrology and homoeopathy are not 'scientific' disciplines. Still they do deliver some benevolent results to some people. As for astrology, we have discussed its scientific status etc., more than once in this forum. Homoeopathy has probably not been. But the basic principle viz., similia similibus curantur, seems to be valid since vaccination is accepted as scientific enough.

Shri Venkatraman spoke possibly from the point of view of a scientist.
 
We are giving homeo medicines to pet animals and for plants with better results. are they taking medicines with faith? We are giving medicines to infants and the disease is cured. these infants are not taking medicines with faith.

Exciting or maintaining causes are those which are irritating . keeping or prolonging the malady or disease. If they are removed with care they leave some symptoms which can be treated by giving medicines according to the law of similars for example: One way of removing the symptoms is very clear. That is to remove the cause of certain symptoms.

Thus. if a bullet or an arrow pirced the body and causes pain redness swelling, heat, fever and pus the removal of the bullet or arrow will cause these symptoms to subside. If by over eating colicky pain appears then by minimising the food=intake the colic disappears.

Thus the removal of the cause , exciting or maintaining results in the disappearance of the major portions of the symptoms and the remaining symptoms of become amenable to the drug indicated. This is one method of treatmentbut is not sufficient in all cases.

Again, the initial removal of the cause does not always remove the symptoms. The symptoms may at times persisits even after the removal of the bullet or arrow. A cough caused by eating too much of sour things, does not disappear only by avoiding sour things.

Secondly the causes of many diseases are not definitely known even to the medical science to day. Thirdly some of the known causes cannot be completely cured, likely Hereditory causes . particular physical constituion etc; Fourthly the cause of the disease disappears by itself leaving the symptoms behind. Such a cause is incapable of being removed.

For example; Fire causes burns on the body , but disappears by itself leaving the symptoms behind. Such a cause is incapable of being removed. Here we have to remove the symptoms and not the cause. which has already disappeared.

Every physician would first remove these causes ( Exciting and maintaining) where it exists, the indisposition there upon generally ceases spontaeneously. He will remove from the room strong smelling flowers , which have a tendancy to cause syncope and hysterical sufferings, extract from the cornea the foreign body that excites inflammation of the eye , and lastly extract foreign substances from the body , the nose, gullet ears etc; This is removing the exciting and the maintaining cause , the apparent aggravating cause of the suffering.
 
renuka said:
Even a cell membrane at its resting state is at -70Mv.
Click to expand...
Renuka
-70mV represents a negative voltage and not negative energy.Science speaks about positive and negative charges, positive and negative voltage , but there is no scientific term as negative energy.That is why Dr.Venkatraman says Science has its own definition of energy.
 
We are giving homeo medicines to pet animals and for plants with better results. are they taking medicines with faith? We are giving medicines to infants and the disease is cured. these infants are not taking medicines with faith.

Exciting or maintaining causes are those which are irritating . keeping or prolonging the malady or disease. If they are removed with care they leave some symptoms which can be treated by giving medicines according to the law of similars for example: One way of removing the symptoms is very clear. That is to remove the cause of certain symptoms.

Thus. if a bullet or an arrow pirced the body and causes pain redness swelling, heat, fever and pus the removal of the bullet or arrow will cause these symptoms to subside. If by over eating colicky pain appears then by minimising the food=intake the colic disappears.

Thus the removal of the cause , exciting or maintaining results in the disappearance of the major portions of the symptoms and the remaining symptoms of become amenable to the drug indicated. This is one method of treatmentbut is not sufficient in all cases.

Again, the initial removal of the cause does not always remove the symptoms. The symptoms may at times persisits even after the removal of the bullet or arrow. A cough caused by eating too much of sour things, does not disappear only by avoiding sour things.

Secondly the causes of many diseases are not definitely known even to the medical science to day. Thirdly some of the known causes cannot be completely cured, likely Hereditory causes . particular physical constituion etc; Fourthly the cause of the disease disappears by itself leaving the symptoms behind. Such a cause is incapable of being removed.

For example; Fire causes burns on the body , but disappears by itself leaving the symptoms behind. Such a cause is incapable of being removed. Here we have to remove the symptoms and not the cause. which has already disappeared.

Every physician would first remove these causes ( Exciting and maintaining) where it exists, the indisposition there upon generally ceases spontaeneously. He will remove from the room strong smelling flowers , which have a tendancy to cause syncope and hysterical sufferings, extract from the cornea the foreign body that excites inflammation of the eye , and lastly extract foreign substances from the body , the nose, gullet ears etc; This is removing the exciting and the maintaining cause , the apparent aggravating cause of the suffering.
 
Just a comment about naming of the thread.When one addresses his friend or relative, one can call him venki , venkat etc. But when referring to a third person, I think it is proper to call him Venkatraman.This is my personal opinion.
 
GENERAL SYMPTOMS are those that affect the patient as whole showing the picture of his disease and not the disease,in the mental and physical planes , about which he or she speakes in terms of 'I' or in first person . And because of this very fact , they are of higher value than the particulars which affect a given organ.

For example; I am sleepy; I am thirsty; I hate cold I hate fat; I am burning all over I feel hot etc; The general symptoms are divided into two (a) mental generals and (b) Physical generals.
 
MENTAL GENERALS; All mental symptoms are to be claased as GENERALS , because they reflect the inner self and the individuallity of the patient. They rank very high if they are marked and strange or charecteristic. Among the mental symptoms , changes of the will and emotion come first. e.g. loves and hates, loathing,suicidal tendancies, lasciviousness, revulsion to sex, sexual perversions , fears, greed, various impulses, attitudes towards company, family, friends etc; jealousy, suspicion, obstinacy, deppression, weeping, loquacity, hurry, impatience etc;

Followed by the understanding e.g. Delusion, Delirium, hallucination,mental confusion, loss of time, sense etc; Lastly the symptoms of intellect e.g. memory, concentration, mistakes in writing speaking etc; These mental symptoms should always be given first place in the picture of characteristics and for diagnosis of the remedy.
 
ShivKC said:
Nobel laureate Dr Venkatraman Ramakrishnan provoked a few and enthralled many with his talk on 'The Sceptical Scientist' in the city on Thursday.

He termed astrology and alchemy fake disciplines that depended on the power of suggestion and said homeopathy was based on belief. Terms like 'positive and negative energy' used by various "quacks were complete mumbo jumbo" and had no precise meaning, he said. Science, he added, had a particular definition of energy.

​
Nobel laureate Venki calls astrology a fake discipline - The Times of India

seeking counter views
Click to expand...

Dear ALL:

As Dr. Ramakrishnan said the way Science works and progresses is by a working hypothesis, experimentation, evaluation of data, critiquing of the Results and providing open Discussions among the Expert Panel of Peers, and confirmation of the Results by independent Labs anywhere anytime in the world etc etc.

Many initial Scientific Observations turned out to be simply Wishful Thinking by the person doing the Experiment... Science has very many safeguards against such deviant behaviors.

Using a well thought out impartial methodology, Science, Engineering & Technology (SET) have grown leaps and bounds enriching our lives (whether you are a Secular or a Theist) in the last 200 years at least.

That's the Majesty of SET I have been writing about for so long here in this Forum.

Such rigor is totally absent in Astrology and other fake disciplines. Most are dependent on some FAITH and Belief (and a good dose of simple Superstition! :)).

Dr. R is right on the money.

Where's the problem?

:)
​
 
Last edited:
saarangam said:
Renuka
-70mV represents a negative voltage and not negative energy.Science speaks about positive and negative charges, positive and negative voltage , but there is no scientific term as negative energy.That is why Dr.Venkatraman says Science has its own definition of energy.
Click to expand...

I thought I was very clear in my post..let me paste again what I wrote


Whats so surprising of Positive and Negative Energy?

Even magnets have Positive and Negative poles.

Protons are positively charged and electrons are negatively charged.

A flow of electrons give rise to electrical energy.

Even a cell membrane at its resting state is at -70Mv.

So why cant there be positive and negative energy?
Click to expand...

Isnt it clear that I mentioned negative poles,negative/positive charge?
What I meant is if negative and positive charges can exist why can't negative and positive energy exists?

Science hasnt been able yet to measure negative and positive energies I guess but that doesnt mean it does not exist.

I am waiting for the day we humans will be able to measure Prana.

There is so much we humans dont know yet..so I am never impressed by anyone who sums it up and says "It does not exists!"

Just to add if we can have matter and anti matter why we cant have negative and positive energy.
May be when we say positive and negative we think of good and bad but thats not always the case.
we can just view it as opposing factors..that way even gravity opposes our movements but would we want to call gravity negative(bad) energy?
Certainly not isnt it?

In the gross world Postive,Negative and Neuter only exists in the plane of duality(I am being philosophical here).
There is a school of thought that says that energy is neutral but when we personalize it with emotions it takes on the positive or negative role and affects the thought wave.

But I would not want to 100% agree that energy is Neutral cos in reality only the Supreme Energy exists and Lord Krishna did say that the Atma is neither Male,Female or Neuter.
Atma is also form of energy.

Male and Female here should not be confused with gender but rather understood as the Male Principle(some call it positive) and Feminine Principle(some call it negative)..please dont think positive is good and negative is bad...may be you can compare it to a magnets positive and negative poles.

So may be in reality there is actually no definition for anything as in beyond description(Anirvacaniyam)
 
Last edited:
On the basis of the above argument, can we speculate the existance of positive and negative DNA, positive and negative red corpuscles etc. Would like to know whether any research is being carried out on this .
 
saarangam said:
On the basis of the above argument, can we speculate the existance of positive and negative DNA, positive and negative red corpuscles etc. Would like to know whether any research is being carried out on this .
Click to expand...


Took this from Wikipedia..

DNA sense


Schematic showing how antisense DNA strands can interfere with protein translation.​

Molecular biologists call a single strand of DNA sense (or positive (+) sense) if an RNA version of the same sequence is translated or translatable into protein. Its complementary strand is called antisense (or negative (-) sense). Sometimes the phrase coding strand is encountered; however, protein coding and non-coding RNA's can be transcribed similarly from both strands, in some cases being transcribed in both directions from a common promoter region, or being transcribed from within introns, on both strands (see "ambisense" below).
[edit]Antisense DNA

The two complementary strands of double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) are usually differentiated as the "sense" strand and the "antisense" strand. The DNA sense strand looks like the messenger RNA (mRNA) and can be used to read the expected protein code by human eyes (e.g. ATG codon = Methionine amino acid). However, the DNA sense strand itself is not used to make protein by the cell. It is the DNA antisense strand which serves as the source for the protein code, because, with bases complementary to the DNA sense strand, it is used as a template for the mRNA. Since transcription results in an RNA product complementary to the DNA template strand, the mRNA is complementary to the DNA antisense strand. The mRNA is what is used for translation (protein synthesis).
Hence, a base triplet 3'-TAC-5' in the DNA antisense strand can be used as a template which will result in an 5'-AUG-3' base triplet in mRNA (AUG is the codon for Methionine, the start codon). The DNA sense strand will have the triplet ATG which looks just like AUG but will not be used to make Methionine because it will not be used to make mRNA. The DNA sense strand is called a "sense" strand not because it will be used to make protein (it won't be), but because it has a sequence that looks like the protein codon sequence.
Students may find this confusing if they misunderstand the meaning of "sense" and if they misunderstand complementation. To make things more confusing, before the convention was set, very early textbooks disagreed on the DNA strands called "sense" and "antisense."[SUP][citation needed][/SUP]
In biology and research, short antisense molecules can interact with complementary strands of nucleic acids, modifying expression of genes
 
Last edited:
Venky says
Dr Ramakrishnan said homeopathy had been advocated for life-threatening diseases like AIDS and cancer, for which there are real effective medicines, while astrology can be abused and used to influence decisions. "Both can lead people away from taking more effective actions based on logic and contemplation. A culture based on superstition will always do worse than that based on science," he said. He added that doctors could, however, use the power of suggestion to enhance the effect of their medicine.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with what venky says which can be taken offensive. Even if we assume Homepathy to be valid, it is valid as a belief system. There can be no logical explanation to the way it works. So it is a belief in this concept. There is not much evidence of its effect on AIDS patients and to such patients who are facing life and death crisis if long survival is the solution it may be good to go by allopathy. If a person has been written off by allopathy, and has only a few months or an year of life to go, he can stop allopathy and take up homeopathy. There is no point in being a human vegetable and no advancement of science can take place suddenly in just a few months.
 
It is not wise to discredit any discipline without knowing about it.

Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere.

Albert Einstein.

1. We call mathematics 'queen of sciences'; but its rules are different - no validation by experiments.
2. In astronomy, study of universe, and even in down to earth subjects like physics, many hypotheses are initially made by intuition. Some are verified and some not.
3. Even in our native disciplines - astrology, ayurveda etc. there are rules and conclusions derived by long time observations by tuned souls. A good astrologer and a good ayurvedist is expected to study all the available literature, lead a satvik life recommended, sharpen his intuitive powers, and then start practicing his profession.
4. Our systems recommend us to live in tune with nature, and maintain a proper balance of gunas, physical processes etc. In aurveda too, prime aim is to balance the three vata-pitta-kaba rather than direct treatment of the disease as indicated by the symptoms. So the need to invent new medicines for new diseases is not strictly relevant. So I am not surprised when I get a message from web-md in my inbox, recommending holistic and balanced living for most of the illnesses.
 
Renuka
Thank you for your posts#13 & 14 which are very informative, though I could not not grasp most of the content as I am not a student of Biology.
Reg. RBC the article says RBC cell membranes of all vertebrates are negatively charged and the article is about a study of the influence of an external electric field on RBCs. But there is no mention of any positively charged RBC membranes.So it disproves the very notion that all negative entities have a positive entity.So we cannot speculate that there is positive and negative energy.
 
sarang said:
1. We call mathematics 'queen of sciences'; but its rules are different - no validation by experiments.
2. In astronomy, study of universe, and even in down to earth subjects like physics, many hypotheses are initially made by intuition. Some are verified and some not.
Click to expand...
sarang
My mail id is very much in resemblance to yours.
Physics, Chemistry or any other branch of Sciene is based on Mathematics. One of my Professors used to remark that Mathematics is the tool to study other sciences.So when the theories of Physics, Chemistry etc. are validated, the theories of matheamatics are also validated indirectly.

In all disciplines of Science, some axioms or hypotheses are made.Some of them are validated by experiment as you suggested. Those which fail to be verified by experiments are discarded. That is essentially the difference between Science and Pseudo science.

John Dalton said atom is the smallest particle of matter and it is atomos (indivisible).Now Science has progressed so far that Dalton's theory is only of historic relevance.
 
saarangam said:
Renuka
Thank you for your posts#13 & 14 which are very informative, though I could not not grasp most of the content as I am not a student of Biology.
Reg. RBC the article says RBC cell membranes of all vertebrates are negatively charged and the article is about a study of the influence of an external electric field on RBCs. But there is no mention of any positively charged RBC membranes.So it disproves the very notion that all negative entities have a positive entity.So we cannot speculate that there is positive and negative energy.
Click to expand...

My dear..all RBCs are of the same charge that is negatively charged.

For now we only know about the negative charge of RBCs and Cell membranes.

But that doesnt mean that there cant be positive and negative energy.
 
Last edited:
I think Sir Venky overstepped his domain. There is a page(Times/Trends) in TOI here dedicated to Science - Discoveries, Contradictions, "Amendments" in Science, etc. Reading this page you will be as confused as learning astrology. In fact, this is the most entertaining page. There was a Maharashtrian astrologer virtually attached to some doctors in Bombay Hospital whose counselling on anatomical site helped doctors manage their operations better. In the end one would find that astrology does less or least harm whereas science would already have done irreparable harm to life or environment. Both are different tools to be handled by different hands. Science helps but astrology only guides. It will be more adventurous to enjoy a tour without a guide.
 
Last edited:
If one reads the TOI article, Professor Venkatraman does admit to power of suggestion on human beings.

He also admits that modern medicine uses this phenomenon to treat patients, even though we do not know why it works. Yet he decries Homeopathy and Astrology as not 'sciences' but superstitions. Here are two disciplines that have been used by a very large group of folks from ancient times. No one will use these if the outcomes are poor. A lot of folks I know use Homeopathy either because the modern medicine can not address their situation or inject poison in to their body to cure, sometimes with poor percentages of success. There is a gap between the rate of cure for some diseases by the modern medicine and the hope generated by the power of suggestion generated by alternative treatments. This is why many physicians trained in modern medicine will recommend alternative treatments in what they think as hopeless cases.

These are the complexities that 'Science' today can not tackle. For example, I do not think that there is negative energy. What we have is the attribute of energy, either positive or negative. Let us take fire as an energy. It positively gives warmth and heat, but negatively burns human flesh. It is not then far fetched to think that energies generated within a human body can be termed either positive or negative based on the effect of such energies.

As for astrology, we have already discussed enough on it as Sri Sangom Ji has said.

I disagree with the premise that somehow folks who accept Homeopathy or Astrology are illogical. They are perfectly logical, because the modern science is not in a position to delve in to the areas that these disciplines delve in to. No one with the knowledge of modern scientific protocals are claiming that these disciplines are 'scientific' in that sense. However they claim them to be 'scientific' (which I think is the wrong word to use) based on empirical results.

Mooda Nambikkai is based on faith and not logic. Prime example is those who still believe that the world is flat, even though Science has clearly established that it is a globe. Such thinking is illogical and non informed. Those who adopt Science as their religion conveniently combine the concept ofr Mooda Nambikkai with the so called 'Superstition' to discredit any and all heritage disciplines.

People over centuries brushed their teeth with neem branches and added turmeric in their diet in India. No research papers were published, no peer review was done. Yet over a long time, positive results of these practices were noticed and adopted. Thank god, the scientists of today probed in to them and found 'scientific' basis for them. They could have very well claimed that these were 'Superstitions' as well! :)

Regards,
KRS
 
Last edited:
Iyyarooraan said:
I think Sir Venky overstepped his domain. ....... There was a Maharashtrian astrologer virtually attached to some doctors in Bombay Hospital...
Click to expand...
If Professor Venkatraman had endorsed these I think none of the faithful would accuse him of overstepping his domain, instead there would be triumphant rejoicing that these are not superstitious beliefs as even a Nobel laureate has endorsed them!!!!

BTW, many hospitals also have prayer rooms and chaplain of many kinds. These can at best be psychological solace to come out of terrible circumstances in which they find themselves, and if these gods to whom they pray for solace can deliver, surely they are the ones who put them into such nasty circumstances.


KRS said:
.... However they claim them to be 'scientific' (which I think is the wrong word to use) based on empirical results.
Click to expand...
Personal anecdotal testimonies do not constitute empirical results.

People over centuries brushed their teeth with neem branches and added tumeric in their diet in India.
Click to expand...
Not just neem and turmeric, but the efficacy of many indigenous medicinal plants and herbs from many parts of the world including India are of great interest to the pharmaceutical community. This is based not on simply accepting the superstitious beliefs of the indigenous peoples, but based on scientific analysis of their chemical and medicinal properties.

Further, even if use of neem and turmeric were once considered superstitious until their true value was discovered, it does not necessarily follow the same will come true for astrology. The faithful may hope it will, but hope is not proof.

So, drawing a parallel between these and purely superstitious astrology is unacceptable.

Further, these plants and herbs are adopted as therapeutic drugs only to the extent careful research shows efficacy. Many drug companies have unscrupulously attempted to trademark some of these products in the hope of developing blockbuster drugs. But, to do so, they have to show results, not just testimonies from people who may claim neem juice cured cancer, or some such thing.

Similarly, for astrology to amount to anything more than moodanambikkai, true and verifiable empirical results must be presented, personal testimonies even from the most honest of men are not sufficient. This has to be done only by those who believe in this stuff, no use asking others to test the pet theories of the faithful of all kinds.

Cheers!
 
Dear Professor Nara Ji,

The point is that 'Scientists' will not analyze the likes of Astrology, because they then need to explain why it beats the statistical theory of averages, They can analyze the effect of Neem and Turmeric, because they can explain their benefits (or not).

Astrologers have no responsibility to prove that they are correct. Examination and proof always fall on the sceptics, like the claims on Neem and Turmeric.

A group of folks can not just call something as invalid based on their definition of what is 'scientific'. I have not heard of or know a single serious scientific study in to Astrology. Because if they did, they would have to accept that this ancient discipline provides answers beyond the random statistical norms. And then they have to explain why. Whoever does this will have his/her reputation in tatters and career in ruin in the 'Scientific' religious community.

Regards,
KRS



Nara said:
If Professor Venkatraman had endorsed these I think none of the faithful would accuse him of overstepping his domain, instead there would be triumphant rejoicing that these are not superstitious beliefs as even a Nobel laureate has endorsed them!!!!

BTW, many hospitals also have prayer rooms and chaplain of many kinds. These can at best be psychological solace to come out of terrible circumstances in which they find themselves, and if these gods to whom they pray for solace can deliver, surely they are the ones who put them into such nasty circumstances.


Personal anecdotal testimonies do not constitute empirical results.

Not just neem and turmeric, but the efficacy of many indigenous medicinal plants and herbs from many parts of the world including India are of great interest to the pharmaceutical community. This is based not on simply accepting the superstitious beliefs of the indigenous peoples, but based on scientific analysis of their chemical and medicinal properties.

Further, even if use of neem and turmeric were once considered superstitious until their true value was discovered, it does not necessarily follow the same will come true for astrology. The faithful may hope it will, but hope is not proof.

So, drawing a parallel between these and purely superstitious astrology is unacceptable.

Further, these plants and herbs are adopted as therapeutic drugs only to the extent careful research shows efficacy. Many drug companies have unscrupulously attempted to trademark some of these products in the hope of developing blockbuster drugs. But, to do so, they have to show results, not just testimonies from people who may claim neem juice cured cancer, or some such thing.

Similarly, for astrology to amount to anything more than moodanambikkai, true and verifiable empirical results must be presented, personal testimonies even from the most honest of men are not sufficient. This has to be done only by those who believe in this stuff, no use asking others to test the pet theories of the faithful of all kinds.

Cheers!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
In QFD (quality function deployment) to arrive at a best compromise solution four types of weighting factors - absolute importance, weighted importance, relative importance and ordinal importance - are used. The outcome will to a great extent depend on the weighting given. In empirical science, say weather prediction, if the outcome is different from the prediction, parameters assumed are blamed or new parameters, not taken into account are blamed.

Astrology too has a big base of theory and rules, some mutually exclusive and some even contradictory. If the rules in the astrology treatises are written by the wise based on observation and intuition, the astrologer has to be very competent to select a most probable prediction (like visvanathan anand from a thousand possible chess moves).

It is neither necessary to apply the so called 'scientific touchstone' for astrology or defend its veracity to skeptics.
 
Why are people here going by the blind adoration of disciplines like astrology and homeopathy. Even in ancient days, there were sanskrit shlokas composed making fun of people who believed in astrology.

Astrology tends to blunt the natural human determination to face the challenges in life. There is no astrologer whose predictions have not gone wrong. In that case to place faith in this system in important circumstances can be bad. Like starting new work, deciding date and time of c-section and other operations etc.

The problem with homeopathy and siddha is that people refer to these medicine systems as an alternate to allopathic systems. It is too much to trust in cirumstances when sufficient proof is unavailable. Is your siddha doctor going to stand up and own up, if the medicines he gives do not help you at all on and cause some other side effects. Can he quote percentage of people who are cured completely with his medicine. One must be very careful not to get misled by such system and use them only in a carefully considered manner , fully understanding the pros and cons of taking such medicines. It is not like I am having some home made remedy to cure my viral fever. Things are far more dangerous and we have to take Venky's opinion in the right spirit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest ads

Follow us on Social Media

Back
Top