hgcjr@utastro.UUCP (Harold G. Corwin Jr.) (08/02/85)
Dick Pierce at ...!teddy writes: > I have a proposal to make. Instead of casting the heathens of atrology out > of the Astronomical temple, let's engage in a cool, rational, scientific > debate on the merits or lack thereof of astrological principles. It is > only this way that a homeland can be found for the wandering astrologists. I don't think this will work. Astrology is a BELIEF which, by its very nature, is not subject to rational debate. I gave up trying to convince my classes that astrology is a waste of time and money years ago. I can prove that it doesn't work in a cool, rational, scientific, nonjudgmental manner -- so what? If someone BELIEVES in astrology, my being able to PROVE that it doesn't work won't do a thing except earn me (and by association, other astronomers) the enmity of the other person or people involved. Thomas Aquinas wrote an elegant proof in the thirteenth century that God does not and can not exist. Has it made any difference since then? Of course not. Aquinas even got canonized. Finally, three pleas to keep in mind as you folks continue this debate: 1) Don't jump on other people because they believe in something different than you do. 2) Don't call them names under ANY circumstances. And 3) be considerate; it feels nicer to everyone. Thanks. Harold G. Corwin, Jr. uucp: {ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao,charm}!utastro!hgcjr arpa: hgcjr@utastro.UTEXAS.ARPA mabell: 512-471-7463 Dept. of Astronomy, RLM 15.308, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712-1083
demillo@uwmacc.UUCP (Rob DeMillo) (08/08/85)
> Dick Pierce at ...!teddy writes: > > > I have a proposal to make. Instead of casting the heathens of atrology out > > of the Astronomical temple, let's engage in a cool, rational, scientific > > debate on the merits or lack thereof of astrological principles. It is > > only this way that a homeland can be found for the wandering astrologists. > *********************************************************************** > I don't think this will work. Astrology is a BELIEF which, by its > very nature, is not subject to rational debate. > > Thomas Aquinas wrote an elegant proof in the thirteenth century that > God does not and can not exist. Has it made any difference since > then? Of course not. Aquinas even got canonized. *********************************************************************** > > Finally, three pleas to keep in mind as you folks continue this > debate: 1) Don't jump on other people because they believe in > something different than you do. 2) Don't call them names under > ANY circumstances. And 3) be considerate; it feels nicer to everyone. > > Thanks. > > Harold G. Corwin, Jr. > uucp: {ut-sally,ut-ngp,noao,charm}!utastro!hgcjr > arpa: hgcjr@utastro.UTEXAS.ARPA > mabell: 512-471-7463 > Dept. of Astronomy, RLM 15.308, Univ. of Texas, Austin, TX 78712-1083 Harold hit it right on the head, and was much more eloquent about it then I was.... -- --- Rob DeMillo Madison Academic Computer Center ...seismo!uwvax!uwmacc!demillo "...That's enough, that's enough! Television's takin' its toll. Turn it off, turn it off! Give me the remote control! I've been nice! I've been good! Please don't do this to me! I've been nice, turn it off, I don't wanna hav'ta see... ...'The Brady Bunch!'"