percentages of natural selection! was Vineet ji...

If this is true, that 80% is destined, deity governed and in other

words, natural selection=based then the warnings given by sages in

classics about not teaching astrology to many or spriritually

undeveloped students would not have been sounded. If they knew what

they were talking about in this matter, it would mean that the

technical part of astrology (10% by your estimation) would have to

be a lot more important than 10%.

Percentages like this have been bandied about by many astrologers.

One famous contemporary giant quoted a value of 82% for the success

rate of predictions without indicating if this was based on a study

or empirical observation of actual prediction by many jyotishis,

etc. This kind of 'number/percentage'-dropping can be misleading

unless accompanied by supporting data (1600 jyotishis were followed

and 82% of their predictions regarding marriage were found to come

to pass... etc).

Please do not take it personally but just as a cautionary note that

should raise questions. If jyotish is science its technical part

should have a more than 10% contribution. And if it is 80% something

else, then why do we continue to call it science, exact or even

inexact?

RR

<reposting because the first post, more colourful admittedly, got

moderated out and never showed up ;-)>

, Balaji Narasimhan

<sherlockbalaji> wrote:

> Vineet ji,

>

> Astrology is an inexact science--in my humble opinion, it is 10%

> science, 10% art, and 80% the grace of God.