Guest guest Posted September 10, 2005 Report Share Posted September 10, 2005 Dear Members, There are both pros and cons of analysing charts of celebrities and commoners. A few members have already mentioned the cons of celebrities analysis. I find them very valid indeed. I just want to highlight a pro here : objective assessment of astrological technique(s) used. For example, let us assume that a celebrity's birth data is accurate and is out in the public domain ( of course ensuring this accuracy is one of the big con itself ). Let us use Sania Mirza as an example since this topic was partially triggered by the analysis of her chart. Suppose Astrologer A uses technique A to analyse her chart and Astrologer B uses technique B. And both astrologers do not know anything about her. Using technique A, astrologer A says she is ugly looking, not a spiritual person, and definitely not a sports person. Using technique B, astrologer B says the complete opposite. For the general public and other astrologers who know who she is due the very fact that she is a public figure, it is very clear which technique is accurate and which is not. Even if someone have not heard of her, there are relatively easy ways to find out. But for commoner charts whose privacy are expected to be protected, how can someone, who does not have any way to find out who these commoners are, judge the techniques used objectively ? Imagine the same scenario, astrologer A may claim that using techique A, he/she have a personal collection of 10,000 chart of commoners sportpersons to prove it. Using technique B is totally wrong in these 10,000 charts. But due to privacy issues, the actual identities of these persons cannot be revealed. Astrologer B claims the contrary with his/her own 10,000 charts using technique B. So which technique to believe ? A fierce rivalry may be created among followers of astrologer A and B. Also, any incompetent astrologer can write a book using 10,000 fictitious charts to prove his/her technique(s). But using privacy concerns as an excuse, there is no way for anyone to verify his/her techniques. Of course, I am not implying every single astrologer on planet Earth is doing that and I am not trying to downplay the importance of collecting a database of charts to improve one's learning and knowledge. In conclusion, there is no magic solution to this Celebrities vs Commoners issue. It is just something astrologers and non-astrologers have to live with. Perhaps this is one of many factors that prevents astrology from being proven as a science, that is if you believe astrology is a science in the first place. Best Wishes, Pushya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted September 10, 2005 Report Share Posted September 10, 2005 Dear Pushya You are right. Thats why all the research scholars usually use the celebrties data e.g Guru Jee Sanjay Rath. Thanks for sharing your thoughts you are right to some extent. Thanks Amer Abbas vedic astrology, "pushya" <pushya@g...> wrote: > Dear Members, > > There are both pros and cons of analysing charts of celebrities and > commoners. > > A few members have already mentioned the cons of celebrities > analysis. I find them very valid indeed. > > I just want to highlight a pro here : objective assessment of > astrological technique(s) used. > > For example, let us assume that a celebrity's birth data is accurate > and is out in the public domain ( of course ensuring this accuracy is > one of the big con itself ). > > Let us use Sania Mirza as an example since this topic was partially > triggered by the analysis of her chart. > > Suppose Astrologer A uses technique A to analyse her chart and > Astrologer B uses technique B. And both astrologers do not know > anything about her. > > Using technique A, astrologer A says she is ugly looking, not a > spiritual person, and definitely not a sports person. > > Using technique B, astrologer B says the complete opposite. > > For the general public and other astrologers who know who she is due > the very fact that she is a public figure, it is very clear which > technique is accurate and which is not. Even if someone have not > heard of her, there are relatively easy ways to find out. > > But for commoner charts whose privacy are expected to be protected, > how can someone, who does not have any way to find out who these > commoners are, judge the techniques used objectively ? > > Imagine the same scenario, astrologer A may claim that using techique > A, he/she have a personal collection of 10,000 chart of commoners > sportpersons to prove it. Using technique B is totally wrong in these > 10,000 charts. But due to privacy issues, the actual identities of > these persons cannot be revealed. > > Astrologer B claims the contrary with his/her own 10,000 charts using > technique B. > > So which technique to believe ? A fierce rivalry may be created among > followers of astrologer A and B. > > Also, any incompetent astrologer can write a book using 10,000 > fictitious charts to prove his/her technique(s). But using privacy > concerns as an excuse, there is no way for anyone to verify his/her > techniques. > > Of course, I am not implying every single astrologer on planet Earth > is doing that and I am not trying to downplay the importance of > collecting a database of charts to improve one's learning and > knowledge. > > In conclusion, there is no magic solution to this Celebrities vs > Commoners issue. It is just something astrologers and non-astrologers > have to live with. > > Perhaps this is one of many factors that prevents astrology from > being proven as a science, that is if you believe astrology is a > science in the first place. > > Best Wishes, > Pushya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.