Bombay High Court Rules Astrology To Be a Science 478
neosaurus writes "In India, the Bombay High Court recently ruled astrology to be 'a time tested science more than 4000 years old.' Not only does this stretch the definition of science, it also reaffirms people's faith in pseudosciences at a broader level." At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
Comfort (Score:5, Insightful)
That isn't very reassuring.
Re: (Score:2)
Misery loves company.
It is reassuring if... (Score:3)
...you are a mad scientist sick of the stupidity of humans and weren't sure which countries to include in your plot for global destruction. Rest assured India made it as easy as the US does.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Idle (Score:4, Insightful)
Because unlike other things on Idle this has real consequences for intelligent and honest people at large. This undermines real science and makes fighting pseudoscience and superstition harder because idiots now have another country to point to and say "See, they think it's real!". It makes it harder to defend vaccines, to debunk homeopathy, and to get rid of the cancer that is religion because garbage masquerading as science now has another sanctuary in a legal code.
That's why it doesn't belong in Idle, because it has real harmful effects.
Re:Idle (Score:4, Informative)
hmm. where shall I start.
how about "grind up the claw of a bengal tiger to give yourself good fortune" to drive animal populations to endangered/extinct.
Or the "today is a great day to (activity)" which may result in taking extra risks, death, etc.
bolds don't make your post lack any less grammar than it already does.
Re:Idle (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, for one thing, it appears to be destructive to one's ability to create grammatically correct sentences.
Re:Idle (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, I was fooling around with an Indian chick, but she wanted to consult with an astrologer before things got too serious. I refused to tell her my birthdate and pay an extortion fee to some con man for his blessing of the relationship. Now I'm forever alone, and am very aware of the real harmful effects of India's perverse fascination with astrology.
Re: (Score:3)
Dot or Feather?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Feather Indians are Native Americans
Dot Indians are from India.
People who use either phrase tend to not date either type for very long.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I was fooling around with an Indian chick, but she wanted to consult with an astrologer before things got too serious
You should have agreed to it, but get it in writing and hold him responsible if things didn't work out. After all, if the Supreme Court says he's a scientist, then he should have liability, right?
In the worst case, if you didn't get laid he should pay you a hooker. And, no, his momma shouldn't be part of the settlement...
Re:Idle (Score:4, Funny)
Indians are:
Practical and prudent
Ambitious and disciplined
Patient and careful
Humorous and reserved
Pessimistic and fatalistic
Miserly and grudging
African Americans are:
Adventurous and energetic
Pioneering and courageous
Enthusiastic and confident
Dynamic and quick-witted
Selfish and quick-tempered
Impulsive and impatient
Foolhardy and daredevil
Jews are:
Patient and reliable
Warmhearted and loving
Persistent and determined
Placid and security loving
Jealous and possessive
Resentful and inflexible
Self-indulgent and greedy
All of these description are pulled from this site [astrology-online.com]. Of course, I replaced signs of the zodiac with races, religions, or ethnicities. My point is that astrology will not destroy the world, but it is a nonsensical way of categorizing and stereotyping people.
I also agree with GP, who seemed to be arguing that if we let India redefine science to include unproven horoscopes, then we have no right to argue when people want to redefine it to include things like "faith healing", "homeopathy", and other forms of bunk. The scientific method goes from "required" to "just another opinion/ivory tower bullshit".
Re: (Score:2)
A high court in an important-to-technology-business country just ruled that magic is science. That's pretty newsworthy.
Re: (Score:2)
A high court in an important-to-technology-business country just ruled that magic is science. That's pretty newsworthy.
Well, it's not magic until one of the cockamamy predictions is correct. Until then it's just like predicting the weather, but with even less accuracy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
As a Bible-thumping believer in Christ
let it be taught as a liberal arts/entertainment subject, because that's all that it is anyway (and IMHO, a fool's frivolous and superstitious waste of time and energy)
Oh, the irony...
Re:Just another sad day for India. (Score:4, Funny)
It was a truly sad day (in 2004) when India's court ruled that astrology was a science, but it wasn't the first. The article states that the Bombay High Court merely reaffirmed this ruling. So it's *another* sad day for India. They just don't know the difference between an philosophy and a science.
So science built their nuclear weapons, but astrology may play a part in launching them?
Short summary rampage (Score:2)
These one-liner summaries seem to be tickling CmdrTaco's fancy today ...
In related news... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sand and rocks are now drinks.
Re: (Score:2)
And fish is a vegetable.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wait, what does that make witches?
Re: (Score:2)
Particle Physics (Score:4, Insightful)
And up is down!
Only after exchange of a W boson [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
So was bread a few centuries ago. Amazing how words change with time.
Equivalent to Georgia Supreme Court (Score:3, Insightful)
"The Bombay High Court" ruling is about equivalent to the Georgia Supreme Court saying Creationism is a valid science discipline, or the France High Court declaring french to be the only language allowed to be spoken.
Yes it's a surprising decision, but likely to be overturned by India's "supreme court" later on. Saner heads usually prevail at the national/ union/ federal level.
RTFA (Score:5, Informative)
According to TFA,
"So far as prayer related to astrology is concerned, the Supreme Court has already considered the issue and ruled that astrology is science. The court had in 2004 also directed the universities to consider if astrology science can be added to the syllabus. The decision of the apex court is binding on this court," observed the judges.
Apparently India's Supreme Court has already made a ruling about this and the lower court is just following orders.
Re:RTFA (Score:5, Interesting)
From the article: "The PIL had urged the authorities to ban articles, advertisements, episodes and practices promoting astrology and its related subjects like vastu, reiki, feng shui, tarot, palmistry, zodiac signs and rashifal." Emphasis added.
They had recently passed a law banning certain false advertising practices for medicine and treatments (similar, I imagine, to the regulations that the FDA imposes in the US), but the law was written in such a way that it could be used to ban any psuedo-science from being advertised or sold.
The court was left with three choices. Apply the law as written and ban the above listed pseudoscience, enraging scores of superstitious Indians across the country. Declare that those subjects were science and continue to all them (what apparently they chose to do). Personally I think, the third choice, declare those practices to be outside the scope of the law, would have been the preferred one. But I can understand why, for political reasons, they ruled the way that they did.
Re: (Score:2)
RTFA!
>> "So far as prayer related to astrology is concerned, the Supreme Court has already considered the issue and ruled that astrology is science. The court had in 2004 also directed the universities to consider if astrology science can be added to the syllabus. The decision of the apex court is binding on this court," observed the judges.
Re: (Score:3)
Can't. The Sun is in the House of Taurus right now. Bad time for reading pertinent information. Sorry.
Re: (Score:2)
but likely to be overturned by India's "supreme court" later on.
I suppose you're hoping that India's Supreme Court will reverse its earlier ruling which recognizes astrology as a science worthy of being taught at universities, and with courses funded by taxpayers. http://www.scribd.com/doc/19043519/Astrology-Case-in-Supreme-Court-of-India [scribd.com]. Here's a relevant excerpt from that judgement:
"Since Astrology is partly based upon study of movement of sun, earth, planets and other celestial bodies, it is a study of science at least to some extent."
Re: (Score:3)
"Since Astrology is partly based upon study of movement of sun, earth, planets and other celestial bodies, it is a study of science at least to some extent."
Wow. That's a total failure to understand what science is.
Science isn't the things it studies. Science is the process of determining truth objectively. Apparently, India's courts have no interest at all in doing science, just in redefining it to be nonsense.
sad day for enlightenment (Score:5, Insightful)
I have met numerous people, some of them quite clever and respected, who despite being well aware of various pseudo-science tricks (say homeopathy and the like) all fell for astrology. They will claim that people born at a certain time of year share some traits... (like it's some kind of scientific measurable proof. sigh)
I have no idea why it appeals to so many, especially women for some reason. Just look at most women's magazines!
Every newspaper has a column (all of them sufficiently vague that you can't use this to prove how ridiculous the whole thing is).
I wonder what it is that makes so many of us susceptible to such blatant scientific fraud.
As for India, I am not surprised... their belief system is already quite complicated and intersects with all aspects of life, science included.
Re:sad day for enlightenment (Score:5, Interesting)
James Randi's astrology experiment remains one of my favorites. Gather information from a room full of people, prepare a reading for each one, and have them read it (in the same room, but silently). Invariably they claim that it was 85-95% accurate, far beyond what they would believe is pure chance. Then he has them pass their readings to the next person in line. Very soon they realize that the entire room was given the same paper.
As Heinlein liked to say, man is not a rational animal, rather a rationalizing one.
Re: (Score:3)
It's a shame we don't have an younger James Randi around to take on the cause. Penn and Teller are about as close as we've got.
There always seem to be new psychics and snake-oil salesmen coming along, but very few equally charismatic skeptics.
Re: (Score:3)
I saw that demonstration once. People still argued that it didn't prove that astrology wasn't true that it just proved that James Randi was good at fooling people.
Sad thing is that for one brief moment they had used logic and drawn a valid conclusion.
What they didn't understand was that Randi wasn't trying to prove a negative. He was showing them how easy it was for humans to be tricked into believing astrology was true.
It is just a shame.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder what it is that makes so many of us susceptible to such blatant scientific fraud.
Patternicity [scientificamerican.com].
Re: (Score:3)
They will claim that people born at a certain time of year share some traits... (like it's some kind of scientific measurable proof. sigh)
There are some measurable differences. Babies born during winter and their mothers have traditionally had a different diet.
Then there's the educational system which often is year-based, and whether you were born in December or January knocks you one year off in schooling.
Finally, there's a small correlation between economic status and when in the year your children are born.
But month-by-month, no, I don't think there are any big differences, except between December and January.
Re: (Score:2)
There are some measurable differences
The differences you are talking about are a) barely measureable; b) subject to hemispheric and cultural effects; and c) unrelated to the astrologically-relevant characteristics that most people are concerned with.
Yet you seem to think this is somehow relevant to the discussion of astrology as a social and cultural phenomenon, when there is no evidence that the tiny differences you are bringing up are in any way related to the claims astrologists make.
Re: (Score:3)
The differences you are talking about are a) barely measureable; b) subject to hemispheric and cultural effects; and c) unrelated to the astrologically-relevant characteristics that most people are concerned with.
Yet you seem to think this is somehow relevant to the discussion of astrology as a social and cultural phenomenon, when there is no evidence that the tiny differences you are bringing up are in any way related to the claims astrologists make.
You seem to think that you know what I seem to think. Please refrain from sputtering such nonsense.
a: Not so. There may not be any huge differences, but they're definitely measurable and statistically significant.
b: EVERY sociological variance is subject to hemispheric and cultural effects (and a boatload of other factors). "Because X affects Y, there can't be a correlation between Z and Y" is a logical fallacy.
c: Of course. And I was not claiming otherwise either. I was replying to "people born at
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that ketchup is a vegetable isn't the scary part.
For the purpose of US school lunch nutrition at least, French Fries are considered a vegetable. That is scary.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a vegetable in the same way a can of crushed tomatoes
IE, not at all. Tomatoes are a fruit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know, when I was a little kid, I used to buy into astrology too, since my mom and her family were really big into it. They came from a very superstitious background, believing in astrology, palm reading, numerology, tarot... yeah.
And when we went to the pizza place, there were always this machines (or sometimes a display case) were you could buy these little scrolls. Buy the one for your sign, and unroll it, and it'd have whatever the predictions were for your sign that month, along with charts and the
Re:homeopathy (Score:5, Funny)
Especially since the bathwater magically retains a memory of the baby it once contained.
Re-enforcing India's Supreme Court (Score:5, Informative)
RTA, Bombay High Court didn't "rule" this way. They noted that India's Supreme Court already ruled on whether Astrology is a science back in 2004 and parroted the result of it. Seems consistent to me.
Try reality (Score:5, Insightful)
Seems consistent to me.
Not if you like to be consistent with reality.
Re: (Score:3)
"The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience."
- Oliver Wendell Holmes (Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court)
in other words, if you think this can't happen in the U.S., a surprise awaits you
This is sad (Score:3)
This makes making fun of India so much easier now.
Bombay/Mumbai? (Score:3, Informative)
I thought it's called 'Mumbai' now?
from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombay_High_Court#History_.26_Premises [wikipedia.org]:
"Although the name of the city was changed from Bombay to Mumbai in 1995, the Court as an institution did not follow suit and remained as the Bombay High Court."
Wikipedia doesn't explain why that is so.
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly, accordingly to Astrology, Bombay is more auspicious than Mumbai.
Re: (Score:3)
Several institutions in Mumbai have not changed their name this includes Bombay Stock Exchange, Bombay High Court, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay etc.
BTW, Half of my Indian friends still call it Bombay.
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention Bombay Sapphire.
Re: (Score:2)
Who's next? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm taking bets on the next practice or belief system to be labeled and taught as a science. The reading of entrails, tea leaves, palms, or smoke columns? How about tech support by Tarot? (that one does have a certain ring to it, doesn't it?) Any others?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know, but I'll keep wearing my lucky underwear when analyzing particle collision tracks.
'Telepathy' admitted as evidence in court? (Score:2)
a little cultural background (Score:2, Informative)
zoroastrians, the folks who actually started astrology, at one time had the largest empire in the world, the achaemenid empire:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid_Empire [wikipedia.org]
eventually, as their empire dwindled and islam rose, they fled persia for india, where zoroastrians became a wealthy, influential and rich minority, the parsis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parsi [wikipedia.org]
if you like the music of queen and freddie mercury: his background is parsi
another thing that always struck me about parsis, the towers of silenc
Re: (Score:2)
Astrology probably predated Zoroastor, the early cities in Mesopotamia (e.g., Ur) settled around 2600 had built ziggarats which were Temples various gods. Zoroaster came along roughly 1600 years later. The Babylonians 1696 – 1654 probably had a form we'd recognize. But it can be traced back to early Babylonian culture (around 2400) after the culture that built Ur collapsed.
And that's only the Western branch. The Chinese developed their own brand. If the Zoroastrians had anything to do with Astrology,
yes, i must apologize (Score:2)
i am apparently falling into a western misperception going all the way back to the ancient greeks:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroaster#Western_perceptions [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
you know what? i just might be falling into an ancient western pattern of thinking:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoroaster#Western_perceptions [wikipedia.org]
apparently, westerners going back to the ancient greeks thought zoroaster invented astrology. and maybe the truth is as you depict it: zoroaster was just the eastern face of astrology to western eyes, and thus the connection as creator was cemented
I say BS (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Never heard of Texas, have you?
If Thor Heyerdaul can be a scientist... (Score:2)
India isn't the only one, IDists think so too (Score:2)
As "cdesign proponentsist" Behe said during the Kitzmiller v. Dover trial, any definition of "scientific theory" that would include Intelligent Design would also include Astrology.
Re: (Score:2)
And that was redundant. That will teach me to read the summary more fully next time.
Americans (Score:2)
CBS News [cbsnews.com]
The Sun is where ? (Score:2)
Pretty good for a "science" that states the sun is in capricorn when it actually is not.
Did they rule if this was valid for old astrology dates or the new aligned reality based astrology with Ophiuchus or both.
Slightly misleading summary (Score:2)
Please read the article.
A PIL (which is a Public Interest Litigation) is something any citizen can file.
An organization filed a litigation in court to ban all advertisements related to astrology, feng shui and Vastu Shastra(Ancient practice of arcitechture which supposedly brings positive energy and makes inhabitants millionares).
Court said it cannot ban them as they have been practiced in India for 4000 years.
A USA analogy?
Lets say you file an application in court saying ban all church advertisements promi
No chance for the judges (Score:3)
The judges didn't have any chance to rule otherwise; their horoscope said so....
I don't believe in astrology (Score:2)
Virgos are sceptical about such things.
paradigm: yes philosophy: yes science: no (Score:2)
So, what testable predictions has Astrology confirmed? I suspect none, so it's not a science.
until the 19th cenutry it was :-) (Score:2)
Re:Mod parent down. (Score:4, Insightful)
Since when did article postings come with gratuitous flamebait in addition to the link/info?
When it's justified by the article topic's inherent stupidity?
Re: (Score:3)
Justified or not, it shows arrogance and a lack of class. Perhaps I'm insane but I do expect better.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Justified or not, it shows arrogance and a lack of class. Perhaps I'm insane but I do expect better.
What exactly is wrong with noting that there are people elsewhere creating the same kinds of difficulties that we have to deal with here? It's a kind of commiseration. I don't see the problem here.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm insane
You said it, buddy.
Re:Necessary? (Score:4, Insightful)
At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
What happened to the /. that was fairly neutral, objective and unbiased? Perhaps it only existed in my mind. Ad hominem such as this is unnecessary, it only cheapens /. as a whole. Creationism is not being pushed anywhere as a science, to be taught, sure, but not as science. Somehow it has become the boogeyman to those that don't actually know what science is. In the marketplace of ideas their will always be struggle, and the victor will not be the one making childish remarks towards the other.
Actually, that's exactly the concern; nobody (well, very few people) object to Creationism being taught in a religions course, forces such as the Texas school board are indeed trying to mandate its inclusion right next to the observed evolution studies present in many science textbooks, and used for materials in science classes.
Re: (Score:2)
While I do agree with you regarding the article commentary, there are indeed people who are trying to get creationism(disguised as Intelligent Design) taught as science in schools. Eg. http://www.discovery.org/ [discovery.org]
A nicer list of the papers written etc. are here --> http://www.intelligentdesign.org/science.php [intelligentdesign.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
At least we can know for certain the people trying to get creationism taught as science in our schools have equally wacky friends around the globe.
What happened to the /. that was fairly neutral, objective and unbiased? Perhaps it only existed in my mind. Ad hominem such as this is unnecessary, it only cheapens /. as a whole. Creationism is not being pushed anywhere as a science, to be taught, sure, but not as science. Somehow it has become the boogeyman to those that don't actually know what science is. In the marketplace of ideas their will always be struggle, and the victor will not be the one making childish remarks towards the other.
Sorry buddy, but I happen to live in Texas, where the board of education is most definitely trying to have creationism taught as science. They don't believe in evolution, and want to teach I.D. as a scientific alternative to evolution. Read for yourself [teachthemscience.org]. Pay particular attention to Mercer, McElroy, Lowe, Leo, Dunbar, and Bradley, who are some of the worst offenders. They are completely unqualified to render any sort of judgement on these issues, as their own statements show that they have no understandi
Re: (Score:2)
That's the kind of thing losers say.
It's just confirmation bias (Score:3)
Actually I would say reasonably intelligent people could be fooled by Confirmation Bias. http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html [skepdic.com]
Almost everyone is susceptible to Confirmation Bias and intelligent people tend to rationalize even more.
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny how when us southerner "nutjobs" say something about what we believe, so many of you come back with "They are so intolerant", yet it is ok for YOU to lump all southerners in together as nutjobs.
Hypocricy knows no bounds...
How did he lump *all* southerners in as nutjobs? Do you have reading comprehension issues or what? I'm a southerner too, but I don't find anything offensive about that statement. Also, believing with actual evidence is different than just believing.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, only racist rebels down there though, right? Not like us dandy Yankees.
No, but you and others responding like this sure are helping to lend credence to the stereotypes about our education levels down here. He is correct that those who want to teach creationism as science tend to be southerners though. Nowhere in there does he say anything about *all* southerners thinking that way. See the difference?
Re: (Score:2)
They are not just in the southern states.
No, but that's certainly where you'll find them in the highest concentrations.
Re: (Score:2)
No, they're rather spread out. Where southerners concentrate you get interesting places like Athens, Savannah, or Austin.
Re: (Score:2)
There are more scientists in India than anywhere else in the world !!!
I'm sure there are, when astrologers are included
Re: (Score:2)
Douchebag commentary, douchebag.
Commentary seemed pretty spot-on. Don't know what your problem is.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
It is that very macro Evolution that is responsible for the creation of your ancestors, the Trolls.
Re: (Score:3)
Scientists didn't "change the name" [skepticalscience.com]. Global Warming and Climate Change are two different things. One causes the other. Both are happening, and have been talked about consistently in the scientific literature for decades.
The fact that deniers can't figure this out says nothing about science, and everything about deniers.
Re:Wacky Friends (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, there's a good chance that people who hear music that isn't really there actually *are* crazy.
Re: (Score:2)
People who dance appear to be crazy by people who can't hear the music.
(FYI, that statement goes both ways)
Ah, good use of the Chewbacca defense. That comment makes no sense and has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
The ageless wisdom of George Lucas works better here: "Who is more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"
Re: (Score:2)
We trusted Reagan with nuclear weapons.