posted July 20, 2016 10:15 AM            

A related and more general phenomenon is that of subjective validation.[1] Subjective validation occurs when two unrelated or even random events are perceived to be related because a belief, expectation, or hypothesis demands a relationship. For example, while reading it, people actively seek a correspondence between their perception of their personality and the contents of a horoscope."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect

How can we make certain that our readings, or rather the agreement to our astrological readings, are NOT result of the forer effect?

Personally I think, probably by being as specific as possible, and maybe also if we are able to do good predictive work, that might be a sign we are doing real astrology and not vague one or even cold reading.

What do you think?
How much is the Forer effect in astrology really in play?
And how can we keep it to a minimum?

posted July 20, 2016 10:29 AM            

Honestly, I think what we do here is great. Study and discuss.
I feel like the Forer effect applies much more to people who don't have a real interest to dive deeper. People who may just read a newspaper horoscope for fun. (Which I think the study was based on?)

posted July 20, 2016 10:39 AM            

I think the Forer effect is real,
and I think synchronicity is real,

posted July 20, 2016 10:41 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by DopGang:

We come here to "unlearn" that thinking and learn the "real" astrology from people such as yourself. Not to say that it is nonexistent in places such as here. But at least there's people here to steer the rest of us in the right direction. A never ending class/study.

---

I agree with you.
And I think one way to do that, is learning to not just add isolated aspects and just list them, but to somehow weave it all together, and being as specific as possible, so it is NOT vague or general anymore.

posted July 20, 2016 10:56 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by DopGang:
Yeah I read about that after it was mentioned on Big Bang Theory.

Honestly, I think what we do here is great. Study and discuss.
I feel like the Forer effect applies much more to people who don't have a real interest to dive deeper. People who may just read a newspaper horoscope for fun. (Which I think the study was based on?)

We come here to "unlearn" that thinking and learn the "real" astrology from people such as yourself. Not to say that it is nonexistent in places such as here. But at least there's people here to steer the rest of us in the right direction. A never ending class/study.

---

posted July 20, 2016 11:01 AM            

As for us, the more we engage with the charts, the better we can predict certain outcomes:

* We can look at a person's birth chart and infer things about them. Perhaps our descriptions will sound universal, but that would be our own language deficiency or weakness as astrologers, not a weakness of astrology itself. For example, telling a Mercury in Aquarius person that they are "objective" may sound like trite flattery, because that word alone is not sufficient to convey the scope of objectivity, how it may even supercede the emotionalism of water placements, etc.

* Obviously we can look at events and notice the precise timing. For instance, just to give one example: I looked up the birth chart and transits for a newscaster who committed suicide on the air. I expected Mars to be right on the ASC or MC in the event chart. It was on the ASC exactly. I forget other details but could re-create this story with charts if I had to.

* Astrology proves itself statistically, more and more all the time. We need to keep an eye on those statistics and be willing to adjust our theories accordingly. Also, we can show respect for a factual approach by keeping our theories and analyses "tight." The larger the claim, the greater the burden of proof. I hope people will not adopt certain exaggerated claims without sufficient study.

posted July 20, 2016 11:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by DopGang:
We come here to "unlearn" that thinking and learn the "real" astrology from people such as yourself. Not to say that it is nonexistent in places such as here. But at least there's people here to steer the rest of us in the right direction. A never ending class/study.

---

posted July 20, 2016 11:05 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
Voix,

I think the Forer effect is real,
and I think synchronicity is real,

and the real art/ skill is being able to tell both of them apart, while analyzing a chart or spread.

---

I tend to feel it is my responsibility as the reader to make it clear HOW I read the cards and what I believe to be at work, so as to put any "magical" notions to bed right away and to honestly show the limitations of the craft, as I see it.

posted July 20, 2016 11:08 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ceridwen:
Voix,

I think the Forer effect is real,
and I think synchronicity is real,

and the real art/ skill is being able to tell both of them apart, while analyzing a chart or spread.

---

You mentioned on another thread, about storks and leukemia. While it sounds preposterous, I think there could be a circumstance that is causing both of those to happen at the same time? Perhaps the water is conducive to leukemia while also changing the habitat in a way that brings storks (perhaps by killing off certain plants, allowing other hardier plants to flourish, affecting the local food chain, for instance.) Until everything has been examined, we can't rule anything out.

Can we?

posted July 20, 2016 11:53 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by DopGang:

What I've noticed that makes learning it difficult is needing to isolate aspects to learn their role in the whole but trying to learn them while the whole is impacting the aspects.

---

That is exactly it!

posted July 20, 2016 11:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
I tend to feel it is my responsibility as the reader to make it clear HOW I read the cards and what I believe to be at work, so as to put any "magical" notions to bed right away and to honestly show the limitations of the craft, as I see it.

I guess I try to reduce the risk of magical thinking by this disclaimer, and it appears to work relatively well.

---

posted July 20, 2016 11:54 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by DopGang:
^^^
Ugh. I have other, similar stories but trying not to stray off topic.

---

Yeah, sorry if I'm going off topic, too?

This is a kind of broad topic though...I figure, I'm safe shoving lots of stuff under the umbrella?

Ceri will forgive, me won't you, Ceri?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Voix_de_la_Mer:
I tend to feel it is my responsibility as the reader to make it clear HOW I read the cards and what I believe to be at work, so as to put any "magical" notions to bed right away and to honestly show the limitations of the craft, as I see it.

I guess I try to reduce the risk of magical thinking by this disclaimer, and it appears to work relatively well.

---

Not that anyone asked my opinion but I'm really interested in this!

Well...I think there is a web of connectedness underlying all reality, and two seemingly separate events can have invisible strings between them. Sometimes we detect or create those strings?

As some people say, there is no such thing as an accident. Everything has meaning.

But astrology doesn't work like tarot, not exactly.

Tarot is using randomized symbols to interpret ethereal realities.

Whereas astrology is focusing on particular times, dealing with the facts about those times. The astronomical and quantitative elements keep it grounded, even though it is also addressing the ethereal substructure of reality, or whatever a person wants to call it.

I can't argue which method is more precise when it comes to predictions, I guess it depends on the skill level and intuition of the person. But the astronomical backbone of astrology demands a more rigid kind of thinking overall. And if a person wants to use astrology in an open-ended, tarot-like way, they should know what they are doing and definitely tell any clients or third parties how they are stepping out of traditional boundaries.

posted July 20, 2016 12:02 PM            

"You mentioned on another thread, about storks and leukemia. While it sounds preposterous, I think there could be a circumstance that is causing both of those to happen at the same time? Perhaps the water is conducive to leukemia while also changing the habitat in a way that brings storks (perhaps by killing off certain plants, allowing other hardier plants to flourish, affecting the local food chain, for instance.) Until everything has been examined, we can't rule anything out."
BINGO

That is the answer to that enigma. Yes.

The Leucemia of children and the Storks are BOTH results of something else, and it had been the STorks had been wrongly interpreted as "cause".

What was being omitted was the fact that nearby there was a nuclear power planet which warmed the water and environment considerably (hence being a positive habitat for the STorks) and at the same time also probably being responsible for the more than average number of children getting sick with leucemia.

What I meant to say with that was simply that we have to look VERY closely if we really observed everything relating to the phenomenon, and if we did, if we interpreted the causal chain rightly.

I also think that while the Forer aspect is a real thing and can happen, especially with cold readings (and there ARE such things out there), astrology never ceases to amazes me in terms of precision.

That is why I do these event charts all the time, I guess. It astounds me just how precise they are and how much a very specific pattern is being shown and repeated, and that is NOT vague or general.

"Did they really study "the storks and leukemia"
No, actually I saw that in an old TV show (in school, some really great science show), and they used that example to show how easily scientists can be misled if they are too quick to claim certain things are the result of something else, especially if their own opinion pretty much coloured the experiment. They would see only what they want to see or anticipate to find.

And it also was an example to see how easy you can warp statistics. It is so easy to lie with numbers.

posted July 20, 2016 12:36 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:
Not that anyone asked my opinion but I'm really interested in this!

Well...I think there is a web of connectedness underlying all reality, and two seemingly separate events can have invisible strings between them. Sometimes we detect or create those strings?

As some people say, there is no such thing as an accident. Everything has meaning.

But astrology doesn't work like tarot, not exactly.

Tarot is using randomized symbols to interpret ethereal realities.

Whereas astrology is focusing on particular times, dealing with the facts about those times. The astronomical and quantitative elements keep it grounded, even though it is [b]also addressing the ethereal substructure of reality, or whatever a person wants to call it.

I can't argue which method is more precise when it comes to predictions, I guess it depends on the skill level and intuition of the person. But the astronomical backbone of astrology demands a more rigid kind of thinking overall. And if a person wants to use astrology in an open-ended, tarot-like way, they should know what they are doing and definitely tell any clients or third parties how they are stepping out of traditional boundaries.

Sorry if I'm talking too much. Better go do other things now. [/B]

---

I can only speak for myself as a reader.
My disclaimer basically states that I believe tarot to operate through synchroncity.
Beyond that I have no idea. I'm a very realistic person, so I do think something is at work that one day we will be able to measure more precisely.

A the moment, the best I can explain tarot is "meaningful coincidence".

However there will still be cases where it does not ring true.
And there will still be cases of the power of suggestion.

Currently, I don't believe there is a *foolproof* way to avoid this, but I think it can be reduced by being upfront about the limitations of tarot.

posted July 20, 2016 09:21 PM            

Here's a new one.

'Can't remember the last time I saw Saturn.

But the transiting sun is applying to a conjunction with my Saturn, transiting Saturn is exactly on my draconic Saturn, and my husband (who doesn't believe in astrology) came in tonight asking me if I wanted to see Saturn. He had set up the telescope so I could see it. We hadn't been talking about it whatsoever, and I can't remember the last time he used the telescope.

Okay, that is just weird.

posted July 20, 2016 10:30 PM            

I once went to checking predictions published in books and magazines (found at the library) to see how many psychic ones (including astrological) came true. Virtually none did, and most were way off. Is it therefore debunked?

A guy told me to do the same with the respected sources, so I did. They were also just as wrong, including one by a geophysicists who supposedly used hard science to predict a shortage of something by 2000 that would have major effects on society (not only was he wrong about that, but there was MORE of the substance discovered so we were even better off). And I stumbled across one article in which the political and economic forecasts by respected experts were made, and then contrasted with that of their chimp who randomly (as far as we know) picked up predication results. The chimp had them ALL beat, and only one was even close to the chimp! But somehow, that's not debunked in the same way.

Btw, I followed up on that article of political and economic forecasts finding old magazine articles before elections. Those bold enough to make a prediction were usually wrong.

I also read of an experiment to tests experts on things like art. They were extremely easy to fool with frauds and fakes. Does that make their expertise worthless in the same way that the more mystical predictions do?

Medical errors and misdiagnosis are one of the leading causes of deaths in the United States, and psychiatry has even bigger scandals, including actual experiments like the Rosenhan experiment. But that somehow doesn't count, because society doesn't want it to, in other words astrology is discredited because it's held to higher standards than the "respectable" professions.

posted July 21, 2016 05:15 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Faith:

Okay, that is just weird.

---

That is a case of synchronicity instead of Forer I think.

posted July 21, 2016 05:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by aquaguy91:
People deny astrology because they dont know how it works, but that doesn't mean it doesnt work.

---

I think that is a BIG issue actually, people doing the experiments who do not even have a clue how astrology works (and I suspect in some instances do not know how scientific experiments work either).

does that mean the Forer effect is NEVER in play?
No, I´ve seen it too often, in different areas of life actually.

But that doesn`t mean it renders astrology (or art or medical science) worthless; it just means we have to double check now and then and be very aware of WHAT we are doing, HOW and WHY.