Dealing with Astrologers and Associated Trolls

I have posted the following comment at Jamie Funk’s Funk Astrology. It is in earnest. I have every intention of carrying out a real debate about the underpinnings of astrology, but I will not be goaded into talking about Jamie’s specific brand of it, and I have given them a perfectly legitimate “out” so they can save face, in case they really think such an argument would hurt their “brand”.

As both Jenn and Margaret pointed out, I absolutely would have let the matter drop with nary a single mention of your names (and you’ll note, the original article sneering at the idea of using astrology to “predict”, after the fact, why Deepwater Horizon exploded, didn’t contain the name Jamie Funk anywhere on it until Jamie posted). I also didn’t think there was much to debate about — we have a difference of opinion, in that I believe astrology is bunkum, he believes it has value. It was his personal pride and conflating my sneering at astrology with sneering at his personal skills at it, that led to the escalation.

I’m not persecuting, I have no intention of carrying out an inquisition, and I’m certainly not hunting for heretics as I don’t personally hold to ANY dogma, much less a dogmatic belief in science without evidence. I mean, if you want to carry out the argument, I work well in either the mode where we discuss astrology, or we throw personal insults at each other (e.g. when Jamie called me a coward), so if you must cast me as an inquisitor rather than a warm and genuine human being with a difference of opinion, then do what you must to muster the courage to fight.

That said, after I post one last pointer to this thread and a cross-post of this comment, I have every intention of letting the matter drop, if you have no intentions of addressing my arguments in this post.

(That post, by the by, was written for this blog first, and cross-posted at my blog in case something untoward happened to it, like getting lost in a spam filter or getting reduced to merely a link. Cross-posting is not merely cut-and-pasting, but writing something intended to be posted in two places simultaneously.)

Just say “astrology must be taken on faith” and we part ways. You have my word.

Update: There are two other takes on this situation that you should probably read.
George W of Misplaced Grace – Daily Horoscope: Saturn Is In Aquarius And Yet You’re Still A Giant Dick
sinned34 of Evil is Underrated – People braver than I
You’re both on my blogroll now, and about damned time.

{advertisement}
Dealing with Astrologers and Associated Trolls
{advertisement}

5 thoughts on “Dealing with Astrologers and Associated Trolls

  1. 1

    I count myself honored to make your blogroll Jason.
    I would also take this opportunity to tell sinned 34 that I have tried to comment on his blog before to no avail, blogspot has some really confusing posting procedures.

    To Jamie and Marina- I would agree wholeheartedly with Jason’s comments above. I hope you don’t believe we are attacking you personally. I was really looking forward to a debate about astrology, I hope you make good on your claim that you are serious about this as well. Perhaps you could have waited to jump into the fray until your vacation was over instead of bunging up the thread with pointless insults.

  2. 2

    I must admit that I was once enamored of astrology. Yes, there is a great deal of mathematics involved in computing a chart. Yes, the arts of astrology and astronomy were at one time inseparable. No, I’ve seen nothing that has yet convinced me that the current art (if you want to call it that) of astrology has the ability to predict any real-world events. No, I’ve seen nothing that has yet convinced me that an astrological natal chart can provide any information about a person’s physical or psychological attributes.

    Coincidences are just that, and (as always) the plural of ‘anecdote’ is not ‘data’. I wholly agree that astrology, like the tarot, tea leaves, palmistry, etc., must be taken on faith. The reason that faith is required is that no evidence has yet been produced that would prompt the majority of the ‘faithless’ to accept the veracity of any such ideas.

  3. 3

    GW – I found the problem – commenting was restricted to Blogspot registered users only. I turned on anonymous commenting. Feel free to drop by to enlighten the masses!

    Oh, and I’ll also be adding you to my blogroll. Links!

  4. 4

    Well, selection bias and anecdotes seem to be all they have to offer at the moment, but we’ll see if my actual points in my astrology dissection post are addressed when I repost them sometime after tomorrow (they have a barbecue, I have plans to not spend all day fighting on the intertubes).

  5. 5

    Thanks for the attempt, GW. I’ll have a look and see if I can figure out what the problem is. I’m pretty new to Blogger, so I’ll try to seek out what can be done about posting errors.

    Also, allow me to third the fact that I don’t wish personal misfortune on Jamie and Marina (and I’m not a dipshit – I can totally understand how a sensitive person might take my post here as a personal attack). I’ll wager that they’re both quite nice people that I might have a fun conversation with over pints. Combine my detest for frauds with Gabe’s GIFT, and I sometimes I come up with strident comments.

    That said, if you read my post at my place, you’ll notice that I really didn’t have much of a desire to join in, but rather wanted to watch, and maybe shout some assistance from the sidelines. I guess I’m part of this now!

Comments are closed.