Venki calls astrology a fake discipline

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

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.

I am skeptic of people calling these things as "science". I am of the sentiment that believing in this kind of hockus-pokus is dangerous and waste of time. I posted in the thread "Dristi", that in addition to be meaningless it is malicious.

Having said that I also contend that allopathic medicine is an inexact science. Each individual body is unique and reacts differently to different scenario. Sometimes the allopathic medicine also works only when you have faith in the system. When allopathic system is too expensive or not available "faith" healing may be better than nothing. So you have to weigh in the situation before proclaim your opinion. A person in an exalted position has more responsibility than a casual poster in a website or chat room.

 

[subbudu1]

I am skeptic of people calling these things as "science". I am of the sentiment that believing in this kind of hockus-pokus is dangerous and waste of time. I posted in the thread "Dristi", that in addition to be meaningless it is malicious.

Having said that I also contend that allopathic medicine is an inexact science. Each individual body is unique and reacts differently to different scenario. Sometimes the allopathic medicine also works only when you have faith in the system. When allopathic system is too expensive or not available "faith" healing may be better than nothing. So you have to weigh in the situation before proclaim your opinion. A person in an exalted position has more responsibility than a casual poster in a website or chat room.

There are so many people affected by blindly following these medicine systems and ignoring to take the required medicine on time. This is very much true in rural India and Africa. The worser part is that these medicines not only do not cure, but some of them like ayurvedic and siddha sometimes contain adulterated contents that have undocumented effects on patients. There are some time tested methods in Ayurveda which I think seems more reasonable than Siddha. But usually these are for simpler ailments or help in moderation in some ailments which cause persistent pain like arthritis. But that is about it. They dont have a whole sale cure. In villages this is a mallice.

To top it there are some quacks and others who exploit the ignorance of the masses.

Astrology is a much worser malice especially when it is used to make every day to day decision.

Venky is not wrong and I believe these systems can best be described as belief systems. One must carefully weight one's options and be prepared that they may not work and that probability cannot be predicted.

 

[sarang]

I wonder whether Venkataraman has read any original works on astrology by varahamihira or others before branding it as fake discipline. If he calls it fake without putting in any effort to understand it, then he is not a true scientist; some scientists have utter contempt for others working in other disciplines - for example pure research and applied research.

Anyway we have a vast and ancient literature on astronomy and astrology. People interested must be given the opportunity and resources to study these.

Daily, weekly, monthly and annual predictions appearing in magazines is different altogether; it is global phenomenon. Rational westerners are no exception in reading these. Perhaps Linda Goodman will be the right person to answer venkataraman.Her book, sun signs, is a best seller.

Is western astrology more true because it is more glamorous?

 

[Nara]

....Is western astrology more true because it is more glamorous?

No dear brother sarang, astrology is bunk no matter who practices it. West is also full of superstitious people, it is no "more true" here in the west than it is in India.

Cheers!

 

[Iyyarooraan]

Astrology & Science

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!!!!

Not necessarily Shri Nara Sir. Well, he is not the first scientist to say that 'astrology' is a fake science. Prof. Jayant Narlikar was vociferous against astrology. But astrology is very much older subject. There are believers and non-believers. In a way both of them equal each other. Life is hope. People seek solace in both to live on but neither can guarantee anything. What ever may be the profession, the doctor first attempts to give confidence to the patient. On the basis of science or on the belief that he has the tool to life? There are numerous stories for and against. Science and Astrology has not outwitted each other and hence they are on same footing. The mystery or maya is the spice of life. Why spoil the game.
Regards


​

 

[Nara]

....Science and Astrology has not outwitted each other and hence they are on same footing.

Thank you Iyyarooran for your reply. Needless to say we are not seeing eye-to-eye on this matter. Be that as it may, I just can't accept the above comment, they are not on the same footing, not at all. One is gaana mayil and the other is vaan kozi .

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

.....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 Tumeric, because they can explain their benefits (or not).

Dear Shri KRS, to me the point was to highlight certain logical fallacies in what you presented, namely, (i) personal anecdotes make empirical results, (ii) turmeric/neem being found out to have value means Astrology will also be found to be of value in the future. These claims are fallacies.

Now, you claim scientists (why within quotes??!!) will not analyze Astrology and have given your own reasons. This is your speculative opinion and is of no significance to anyone else but yourself.

You also claim the burden of proof is upon those who refuse to accept Astrology. This is very irrational. The burden of proof is always upon those who make a claim. Putting that burden on skeptics will lead to absurd and even dangerous situations like every random person coming up with silly claims and challenge the skeptics to prove them wrong -- case in point, Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey on vaccination.

Finally, in the case of turmeric, neem, etc., there is a solid theory behind why their medicinal properties must be taken seriously. In contrast, what we have on Astrology is nothing but personal recollections of its efficacy. If we scratch the surface we see that it is built on quicksand, no plausible theory worthy to be taken seriously.

Cheers!

 

[Nara]

One extreme example of what superstitious beliefs can lead to:

Indian Police Arrest 2 Men For Sacrificing Child

very sad ....

p.s. cross posted on drishti thread

 

[Yamaka]

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

Dear KRS:

As you may know already, Scientist should have a working hypothesis based on scientific thinking to plan an experiment to test that hypothesis.

In the case of Astrology, it is a consensus view among Scientists that there is NO scientific basis for it. Then how could you expect Scientists to work on this ART of Ancient India?

From your bias of calling people "Scientist", you show your disdain for Science or understanding of the process of Science!

That's very sad.

Not only Neem and Turmeric, million other plant products have some medicinal value... the issue is whether chemists/biochemists can isolate that particular compound from plants AND test it in the laboratory on cell growth, proliferation or cell death etc.

That's how Science progresses, very methodically... Unlike the Belief and Faith of Astrology or other Arts in India.

Therefore, it's up to the Believers to come up with ways of showing the veracity of their ART to the world.

But, these Believers have no way of knowing the Scientific Process and thinking Rational.

That's the LACK of Rationality that Dr. Venky Ramakrishnan is talking about!

And that's ruffling the feathers of some of the Believers in the Art of Astrology and other Exotic Matters of India. Lol.

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

My comments in 'blue' below.

Dear Shri KRS, to me the point was to highlight certain logical fallacies in what you presented, namely, (i) personal anecdotes make empirical results, (ii) turmeric/neem being found out to have value means Astrology will also be found to be of value in the future. These claims are fallacies.
I did not imply any such thing. My point is that age old disciplines, including gastronomy may or may not have scientific validity. But these disciplines can not be dismissed as 'quack' disciplines, without proper scientific study.

Now, you claim scientists (why within quotes??!!) will not analyze Astrology and have given your own reasons. This is your speculative opinion and is of no significance to anyone else but yourself.
Of course it is my speculation, very similar to your opinion that Astrology is 'bunk' without even looking at it.

You also claim the burden of proof is upon those who refuse to accept Astrology. This is very irrational. The burden of proof is always upon those who make a claim. Putting that burden on skeptics will lead to absurd and even dangerous situations like every random person coming up with silly claims and challenge the skeptics to prove them wrong -- case in point, Jenny McCarthy and Jim Carrey on vaccination.
I am talking about Scientific Skepticism, not a random person's silly claims. Science, rightfully so, starts with skepticism and tries to prove a hypothesis. The hypothesis here is 'Astrology is bunk'. It is very strange that Scientists would make such claims, without even conducting a rudimentary study of the discipline!

Finally, in the case of turmeric, neem, etc., there is a solid theory behind why their medicinal properties must be taken seriously. In contrast, what we have on Astrology is nothing but personal recollections of its efficacy. If we scratch the surface we see that it is built on quicksand, no plausible theory worthy to be taken seriously.
How do you know all these things about Astrology, especially Vedic Astrology? Looks like you have studied it and its efficacy thoroughly to come up with this opinion!

Cheers!

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

How do you know all these things about Astrology, especially Vedic Astrology? Looks like you have studied it and its efficacy thoroughly to come up with this opinion!

Dear Shri KRS, not all of us need to study everything under the sky to have a reasonable idea as to what can be believed and what cannot be. Scientific process has earned a reputation for believability and those of us who want to be rational about things trust the scientific process to be right much more often than not.

If Astrology must be treated with an a priori belief, it needs to establish at least a modicum of independently verifiable results in a controlled fashion. The more the faithful insist the skeptics will have to do this, the less reasonable Astrology seems.

If Vedic Astrology must be shown this concession, why not Kili Joshyam, or nAdi, or palm? One can just as well assert it that all of these must also be shown a priori respect unless the skeptics take it upon themselves to prove it wrong. To claim a special place for Vedic Astrology alone is irrational and probably borne out of Brahminism mode of thinking.

These are the bases upon which I reject Astrology as nothing more than moodanambikkai. I am willing to keep an open mind and change my position if only those who swear by its validity prove it in a truly empirical sense.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

Hello ALL:

Assume I really want to know more about Astrology, and I decide to ask three of my "poor" students to go after the truths of Astrology.

I must get funding from some agency like US National Academy of Sciences. I need at least $10,000 to support this mini-project towards the cost of living of these three students, their travel to India and interviews and collecting "DATA" from as many as 100 Astrologers spread out all of India etc etc..

The Agency will ask me write a one-page Proposal and the Rational behind the proposal, and how the information collected will be useful to the Society and/or the Scientific Community.

What will I write?

I can't even write one short sentence, let alone one full page!

If Mr. KRS or others can fund this project, then people will be willing to do the job in a systematic way.

Maybe, all the Astrologers can form an Association, and publish periodically their Predictions and Results to convince the Scientific Community that there is some truth in their Prediction.

Maybe, such publications are already available... I don't know!!!!

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

Okay. I think we need to agree to disagree on this. However before I close my side of the conversation, let me clear up a couple of things:
1. I believe in Science as a discipline based on logic. As I have said, I am an ex physicist.

2. That does not mean I reject all disciplines that Science has not studied as 'quackery'. There are many age old disciplines that defy logic in practice but are effective in their application. Yes, lots of them are based on 'faith', and as I have said, delve in areas where Science has no interest.

3. Again, proving Astrology as a 'fake' should come from the skeptics and not the other way around. To me it just seems curious that the scientific community is not even a least bit interested in looking at the statistical viability of vedic astrology predictions, yet have no hesitation to call it 'quackery' and 'bunk'. This seems like a closed minded approach.

4. By the way, I think I have posted this sometime ago:
Is There Really a Mars Effect? by Michele Gauquelin
When I said that I know of no study done on astrology, I meant predictions made by Vedic Astrology based on Parasara system. However one can see the controversy that the above study has generated and how the author of this study attacked. Please read: Mars effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Regards,
KRS

Dear Shri KRS, not all of us need to study everything under the sky to have a reasonable idea as to what can be believed and what cannot be. Scientific process has earned a reputation for believability and those of us who want to be rational about things trust the scientific process to be right much more often than not.

If Astrology must be treated with an a priori belief, it needs to establish at least a modicum of independently verifiable results in a controlled fashion. The more the faithful insist the skeptics will have to do this, the less reasonable Astrology seems.

If Vedic Astrology must be shown this concession, why not Kili Joshyam, or nAdi, or palm? One can just as well assert it that all of these must also be shown a priori respect unless the skeptics take it upon themselves to prove it wrong. To claim a special place for Vedic Astrology alone is irrational and probably borne out of Brahminism mode of thinking.

These are the bases upon which I reject Astrology as nothing more than moodanambikkai. I am willing to keep an open mind and change my position if only those who swear by its validity prove it in a truly empirical sense.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

Scientists not only come up with hypothsis to prove a point, but to disprove a point as well.

I love Science and that was why I studied Physics. I do not have any disdain for good scientists with skeptical but open mind. In fact I am somewhat offended that you need to remind me about science. I have, during my student days have my name on a couple of published physics papers. I forayed in to the study of astrology and practice as a skeptic. Over time I have found that it works amazingly better than 50/50.

The consensus among the scientists you are talking about against astrology is based on opinion and not facts. How can one decide that something does not have any scientific basis unless one studies it? One need not accept the basis of astrology on the basis of the placements and movements of planets in the sky at the time of one's birth. This may sound irrational. But look at the predictive side of vedic astrology in a systematic way, using scientific principles and statistics, and then decide whether it is fake or not. Those 'scientists' (yes, in quotes), who condemn any phenomenon as superstition, or fake, without studying the subject are exactly like the folks who threw stones at the scientists of yesterday. They violate the first requirement in science - understand, measure, and validate or invalidate something before condemning it. This is the issue.

Faith in the working of vedic astrology should not be confused with the fact that it works. The correlation between the stars and planets and human beings' lives have been observed and codified. Testing this correlation in a proper scientific way must be quite easy for those who are skeptics. As I have said, in my case, I absolutely have confirmed to myself that this correlation exists, because I have studied and have practiced the discipline. I have neither the resources nor the inclination at this stage in my life to set up any research projects to show the skeptics that it works.

But I can point out the thoughtlessness on the part of majority scientists who dismiss some concepts as 'superstition' and 'bunk' without even understanding the basic rules and their viability of a discipline.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

As you may know already, Scientist should have a working hypothesis based on scientific thinking to plan an experiment to test that hypothesis.

In the case of Astrology, it is a consensus view among Scientists that there is NO scientific basis for it. Then how could you expect Scientists to work on this ART of Ancient India?

From your bias of calling people "Scientist", you show your disdain for Science or understanding of the process of Science!

That's very sad.

Not only Neem and Turmeric, million other plant products have some medicinal value... the issue is whether chemists/biochemists can isolate that particular compound from plants AND test it in the laboratory on cell growth, proliferation or cell death etc.

That's how Science progresses, very methodically... Unlike the Belief and Faith of Astrology or other Arts in India.

Therefore, it's up to the Believers to come up with ways of showing the veracity of their ART to the world.

But, these Believers have no way of knowing the Scientific Process and thinking Rational.

That's the LACK of Rationality that Dr. Venky Ramakrishnan is talking about!

And that's ruffling the feathers of some of the Believers in the Art of Astrology and other Exotic Matters of India. Lol.

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

You have said:

To claim a special place for Vedic Astrology alone is irrational and probably borne out of Brahminism mode of thinking.

This not a good statement, sir. What is 'Brahminism mode of thinking?'. Since I know you reject what you call as 'Brahminism', should I then take it that since vedic astrology, in your mind is associated with such 'Brahminism' should be condemned as well? Don't you display your prejudice and judgment on a discipline based solely on your ideology and not science?

Who is 'claiming a special place for Vedic Astrology?' Not me. I do not push it on anyone, let alone on the skeptics. But when the uninformed speak out against astrology, I need to clarify the matter. I can defend only Vedic Astrology, because that is the discipline I know.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

Scientists not only come up with hypothsis to prove a point, but to disprove a point as well.

I love Science and that was why I studied Physics. I do not have any disdain for good scientists with skeptical but open mind. In fact I am somewhat offended that you need to remind me about science. I have, during my student days have my name on a couple of published physics papers. I forayed in to the study of astrology and practice as a skeptic. Over time I have found that it works amazingly better than 50/50.

The consensus among the scientists you are talking about against astrology is based on opinion and not facts. How can one decide that something does not have any scientific basis unless one studies it? One need not accept the basis of astrology on the basis of the placements and movements of planets in the sky at the time of one's birth. This may sound irrational. But look at the predictive side of vedic astrology in a systematic way, using scientific principles and statistics, and then decide whether it is fake or not. Those 'scientists' (yes, in quotes), who condemn any phenomenon as superstition, or fake, without studying the subject are exactly like the folks who threw stones at the scientists of yesterday. They violate the first requirement in science - understand, measure, and validate or invalidate something before condemning it. This is the issue.

Faith in the working of vedic astrology should not be confused with the fact that it works. The correlation between the stars and planets and human beings' lives have been observed and codified. Testing this correlation in a proper scientific way must be quite easy for those who are skeptics. As I have said, in my case, I absolutely have confirmed to myself that this correlation exists, because I have studied and have practiced the discipline. I have neither the resources nor the inclination at this stage in my life to set up any research projects to show the skeptics that it works.

But I can point out the thoughtlessness on the part of majority scientists who dismiss some concepts as 'superstition' and 'bunk' without even understanding the basic rules and their viability of a discipline.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

Please address my post #37.

For any Scientist to study any topic, there should be reasonable enthusiasm in the Funding Agencies, the Research Students and the Public who finally fund the studies.

And we need a Rationale why we want to study, and what's the working hypothesis.

Please watch Dam999 and the view of the consummate Astrologer there!

He did not predict the 6.5 RS Earthquake close to the Dam! It'a NOT the Dam per se that killed him and thousands of others, but the earthquake that destroyed the Dam!

But, he wanted to preach "All old colonial dams are dangerous"! That's the dirty politics of it all.

Sohan Roy totally botched up his view of Astrology there! And, he became a Propagandist of the Kerala Govt..

Now, tell me, as a Scientist, how will I get any confidence of the Ancient Art of Astrology today?

Regards.

Y

ps. Is there an Association of Astrologists in India or anywhere? Why can't those people do the systematic research and publish their Predictions and Results in a Journal of Astrology? That would serve the community... by this what I mean is only those Believers of Astrology can bring the usefulness of this Art to the world. Cheers.

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

I do not belong to any astrological societies. I consider myself as a student and as such I have read several books on astrology from time to time, most notably those of the famed late Dr. BV Raman. He has started the following org:
Welcome

He had also written a book on astrology in which he specifically tackles the issue of astrology as an empirical science with charts etc.
Bangalore Venkata Raman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are now secular universities offering astrology degrees in India. I am not in the know about any research that are being done in those universities. May be some of our members may be in the know.

My issue is not to prove whether the discipline is valid or not. My issue is calling this discipline with all sorts of names without knowing the discipline at all, based on a vague notion, 'how can planets influence human lives? it is impossible by any known physical laws and so it must be fake'. This is the assumption I am arguing against. It is one thing to say, 'I don't know much about it and so I do not know whether it is a valid discipline or not', but to say that it is 'superstition, bunk and fake' only betrays the animosity towards any heritage empirical discipline based on just the fact that they are associated with some religions is not based on correct scientific temperament. There is such a thing as secular prejudice towards religions and this is a perfect case.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

...This not a good statement, sir. What is 'Brahminism mode of thinking?'.

Dear Shri KRS, you wanted special treatment for Vedic astrology when you said, "especially Vedic Astrology". This reveals a special bias for Vedic stuff. This is the basis for my comment on Brahminism mindset.

Why does Vedic astrology deserve this "especially" that is not given to Kili Joshyam or chozi prasnam, or seance? If we are to apply the standard you are advocating, -- i.e. it is the responsibility of the skeptic to "understand, measure, and validate or invalidate" on even claims scientists reject, then kili joshyam, palmistry and a whole host of other silly practices also deserve the level of acceptance as Vedic Astrology.

Taking this a step further, if this standard is applied, then, until scientifically invalidated, we cannot reject the practice of sacrificing young virgin for good results as all bunk, after all this practice of human sacrifice is also Vedic, both sides performed it before the Mahabaratha Yuddam started.

The reason I am pointing out this extreme example is to emphasize how unreasonable this standard of requiring a skeptic to disprove theories that even their advocate do not care to study systematically really is.

I offer the same skeptical disbelief for all kinds of predict-the-future-ologies. In this, Vedic Astrology does not deserve any special consideration. In all the thousands of years of its existence if Vedic astrology could manage nothing more than personal testimony of better than 50% correlation as proof, then its practice does not deserve any more respect than mere moodanambikkai.

Still, as a skeptic I am willing to keep my mind open and be ready to be convinced of its authenticity. This is the best the believers have a right to expect. They have no right to demand that the skeptics must disprove or else accept it may be valid. Such expectation is irrational.

Cheers!

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

First of all your assumption is completely wrong. I said 'especially vedic astrology' based on two factors. One that is what I know and can testify to it's efficacy and this has nothing to do with Brahminism or any such factors. The second factor is that vedic astrology as opposed to the western astrology is accepted in the astrology world as a better predictor of events. Again, nothing to do with any pride in Vedas or anything. I could have very easily said 'Indian/Hindu astrology', but I said 'Vedic', because that is the term used by many today to differentiate from the western astrology. If you have read any literature on astrology you would know the use of these terms.

By the way, your analogy of the human sacrifice is actually inappropriate and unsound. Killing a human being is illegal and immoral. What does it have to do with astrology? This lumping of a dastardly human act with a helpful discipline is uncalled for.

Everyone in this world deserves to be treated with respect based on knowledge. I have adequately stated my issues with your rest of the statements elsewhere.

I do not care what you think of astrology. I am not here to push it on anyone. My issue was only with the non scientific approach in calling something with names without understanding the subject one is talking about. I have explained this above in my response to Sri Yamaka.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Nara]

.... I said 'especially vedic astrology' based on two factors. One that is what I know and can testify to it's efficacy and this has nothing to do with Brahminism or any such factors. .....

By the way, your analogy of the human sacrifice is actually inappropriate and unsound. Killing a human being is illegal and immoral.

Dear Shri KRS, I appreciate your clarification with respect to Vedic Astrology. I have no doubt you did not mean anything negative when you used the phrase "Vedic Astrology". However, I think my comments are still valid.

About human sacrifice, my comment was not whether it is legal or moral, but strictly about whether it is efficacious or not. To say that the burden of proof of effectiveness of Vedic Astrology is upon the skeptics is no different from demanding that we prove human sacrifice, one that has Vedic sanction, is ineffective before rejecting it.

Saying it differently, I hope you reject the validity of human sacrifice, in spite of its Vedic sanction, not only because it is gruesome and immoral, but also because it is moodanamkikkai of the worst kind. This should also mean we can reject moodanambikkai in general, the beliefs based on no more than long standing faith and personal testimonies, without having to bear the burden of proof of a negative, an impossible burden.

Shri KRS, I know you don't care what I think about Astrology, the Vedic kind. But that is not what is at issue. To me, what is at issue is the kind of evidence standard we must have for theories people believe in, for a very long time, and enjoy establishment support. On this issue, the rational position to adopt is like the motto of the State of Missouri, the Show Me State (never mind the pejorative origin of the term) -- Show Me and I will believe you.

Cheers!

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

I do not belong to any astrological societies. I consider myself as a student and as such I have read several books on astrology from time to time, most notably those of the famed late Dr. BV Raman. He has started the following org:
Welcome

He had also written a book on astrology in which he specifically tackles the issue of astrology as an empirical science with charts etc.
Bangalore Venkata Raman - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are now secular universities offering astrology degrees in India. I am not in the know about any research that are being done in those universities. May be some of our members may be in the know.

My issue is not to prove whether the discipline is valid or not. My issue is calling this discipline with all sorts of names without knowing the discipline at all, based on a vague notion, 'how can planets influence human lives? it is impossible by any known physical laws and so it must be fake'. This is the assumption I am arguing against. It is one thing to say, 'I don't know much about it and so I do not know whether it is a valid discipline or not', but to say that it is 'superstition, bunk and fake' only betrays the animosity towards any heritage empirical discipline based on just the fact that they are associated with some religions is not based on correct scientific temperament. There is such a thing as secular prejudice towards religions and this is a perfect case.

Regards,
KRS

Dear KRS:

You said, "My issue is not to prove whether the discipline is valid or not. My issue is calling this discipline with all sorts of names without knowing the discipline at all, based on a vague notion, 'how can planets influence human lives? it is impossible by any known physical laws and so it must be fake'. This is the assumption I am arguing against. It is one thing to say, 'I don't know much about it and so I do not know whether it is a valid discipline or not', but to say that it is 'superstition, bunk and fake' only betrays the animosity towards any heritage empirical discipline based on just the fact that they are associated with some religions is not based on correct scientific temperament. There is such a thing as secular prejudice towards religions and this is a perfect case."

1. Dr. R. Venkataraman KNEW enough of Astrology-Talk to make a statement that he made.

I concur with him 100% from the information I know and understand about Astrology.. it's another Vooddoo Art!

2. Your position is that he must know lot more, after doing a thorough scientific study on Astrology, before he makes that statement.

This is too much to ask, IMO... He has the right to use words like "FAKE, Superstitious, Bunk, Junk" etc. to describe Astrology and other similar Ancient Arts of India. I think by making use of such nice adjectives he drives home the message that would touch the younger generation:

Just do not buy into Superstitions; Follow a Scientific Approach to Life.

He is doing a Public Service by talking frankly about Astrology, IMO.

3. As a self-proclaimed Atheist, I consider Astrology as quite similar to Religion and Gods - all matters of Belief and Faith... Not of Science.

If Believers don't like this characterization, then they have the obligation and responsibility to step up to the plate and prove what's scientific about their Art of Astrology.

Why don't you explain in a scientific manner how you got a 70% Correct Predictions, and the Methodology of Astrology you used to this Forum participants?

Regards.

Y

 

[KRS]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

You have every right to your position on astrology. I have said enough to refute it. When a person repeats again what he has said several times and attach an ideology to it, what else I can say? I think that this Forum members can sort this out for themselves.

I do not need to defend my successful prediction percentage to anyone here, especially to those like you who consider it 'voodoo'. I said that for a reference to the efficacy of the discipline in my experience. It is personal.

Again, let me repeat my basic refrain: Anyone who does not know about a discipline deep enough to know it are not true scientists when they attack something they do not know about. I would like our members to think on it.

Regards,
KRS

 

[KRS]

Dear Professor Nara Ji,

Of course we condemn human sacrifice for any reason. Almost every culture had this as a part in history. Hinduism is no exception. But it has been stopped and no Hindu religious leader supports it today. Do people still have such moodanambikkai today? Of course! All over the world. Only education with enlightenment will cure it.

Again, as I have said multiple times already, I do not care what opinion you hold of astrology, vedic or any other kind. It is your prerogative. I have said enough to enlighten the folks here on the right scientific temperament. This will be my last posting on this topic.

Regards,
KRS

 

[Yamaka]

Dear Sri Yamaka,

You have every right to your position on astrology. I have said enough to refute it. When a person repeats again what he has said several times and attach an ideology to it, what else I can say? I think that this Forum members can sort this out for themselves.

I do not need to defend my successful prediction percentage to anyone here, especially to those like you who consider it 'voodoo'. I said that for a reference to the efficacy of the discipline in my experience. It is personal.

Again, let me repeat my basic refrain: Anyone who does not know about a discipline deep enough to know it are not true scientists when they attack something they do not know about. I would like our members to think on it.

Regards,
KRS

Hello ALL:

You please chime in

1. Whether Dr. R. Venketaraman CAN say about his view of Astrology using words like "FAKE and Superstitious" or not.

I say he has complete freedom to use those words, as appropriate. He is a fully informed Scientist.

2. If Believers of Astrology refrain from explaining their Art in a scientific way, then how could they expect a Scientist of Dr. RV's standing and stature to engage in a thorough scientific analysis of an Art of which he has poor opinion in the first place?

Very poor logic...

3. Dr. RV knows exactly when to say what to say and how to say it!

Because he is a true Scientist... and some Believers call him "not a true scientist"!

Dr. RV does not need any recognition from Believers! LOL

What say you?

 

[sarang]

I fully agree with you. sir. I have made a similar observation in an earlier post. people who judge astrology after seeing dam99 or making venkataraman's irrelevant observation on astrology without, I believe, reading some of the basic works on astrology, is definitely unscientific.

Not one scientist working in the relevant field had predicted chennai or japanese tsunami, danushkodi clean sweep, or the gujarat earthquake.

Predicting daily fortunes or failures is just one minor aspect of astrology.

If a tag is to be added, then astrology can be called as 'spiritual science' to differentiate it from the 'mundane science', we are all familiar with.

Again, let me repeat my basic refrain: Anyone who does not know about a discipline deep enough to know it are not true scientists when they attack something they do not know about. I would like our members to think on it.

Regards,
KRS