It took me some time to order my thoughts on this. It would be easy to go for a knee jerk reaction but your reply deserves a proper answer.
Let’s see if I can do what I want.
I’m going to start by repeating myself: ignorance is dangerous.
You made me remember an article I once read where it was denounced the practice of an insurance company of using clients zodiac signs to calculate risk. It ended in court and ridicule, obviously. Or thankfully.
I personally enjoy astrology. Strangely enough, it was what triggered me in my fascination for psychology. And if the historical context for what zodiacs/totems were originally for, which was to serve as a guide for an individual’s life and moral decisions, is taken into account, then those symbols acted as such: symbols, archetypes, with good and bad traits or inclinations, to which the individual under its influence/guidance could tap or should avoid in order to make the best path they could build in life.
Balance. The choice is on the individual.
The way astrology, religion, pseudo science, science denial, etc, becomes dangerous, in my understanding, comes from the moment an individual chooses to relinquish their personal agency to instead allow something they do not understand decide over their lifes - and of others, by extension - unquestioned and unreasoned upon.
It is extremely hard to take up the sole responsibility of the outcome of one’s decisions. Religion offers that escape through the means we are painfully aware. And because making a religion out of anything is easy, it is easy to find a escape for one’s personal responsability.
I can’t imagine what decisions Reagan took under astrology guidance; just the notion is ridiculous enough make me smile. He should have been laughed out of office, for that alone. But considering a country has the representatives it chooses, the US got what they chose.
Like I always say: be free to believe whatever you want, just keep it to yourself.
Astrology also was used by Ronald Reagan, president of the United States, to help decide important issues.
I think that’s good proof it’s fucking dangerous.
It took me some time to order my thoughts on this. It would be easy to go for a knee jerk reaction but your reply deserves a proper answer.
Let’s see if I can do what I want.
I’m going to start by repeating myself: ignorance is dangerous.
You made me remember an article I once read where it was denounced the practice of an insurance company of using clients zodiac signs to calculate risk. It ended in court and ridicule, obviously. Or thankfully.
I personally enjoy astrology. Strangely enough, it was what triggered me in my fascination for psychology. And if the historical context for what zodiacs/totems were originally for, which was to serve as a guide for an individual’s life and moral decisions, is taken into account, then those symbols acted as such: symbols, archetypes, with good and bad traits or inclinations, to which the individual under its influence/guidance could tap or should avoid in order to make the best path they could build in life.
Balance. The choice is on the individual.
The way astrology, religion, pseudo science, science denial, etc, becomes dangerous, in my understanding, comes from the moment an individual chooses to relinquish their personal agency to instead allow something they do not understand decide over their lifes - and of others, by extension - unquestioned and unreasoned upon.
It is extremely hard to take up the sole responsibility of the outcome of one’s decisions. Religion offers that escape through the means we are painfully aware. And because making a religion out of anything is easy, it is easy to find a escape for one’s personal responsability.
I can’t imagine what decisions Reagan took under astrology guidance; just the notion is ridiculous enough make me smile. He should have been laughed out of office, for that alone. But considering a country has the representatives it chooses, the US got what they chose.
Like I always say: be free to believe whatever you want, just keep it to yourself.