Communication Space We will have to make a critical decision on building replacement satellites for Amos 5 and 6 within weeks * Akonis: State guarantee for the purchase of components that require a long preparation time

72 תגובות

1. A.
   I thought of something else that might explain his claim:
   If you start from a premise that says astrology claims something about determining character and events based on the position of the stars (which you and I have a hard time accepting but it used to be the prevailing thought) and is therefore a set of rules used to explain people's behavior, then there is no mental trick you can do that would allow astrology to simultaneously explain Talk and its opposite as represented by the pair of twins.

2. A.
   Again, according to what you say, in order to disprove astrology, you actually need to see one person who contradicts the predictions of astrology, and if it were that simple, everyone would say it and there would be no such field.
   The idea is that it is a general effect that exists in the background. Most Aries will be short-tempered/hot-tempered and blah blah blah but not something principled and absolute. The twins thing easily demonstrates how the predictions can be so right and so wrong at the same time, so it's a brilliant idea.
   At this point I throw up my hands. If I haven't succeeded in getting the point across thus far, I probably won't succeed any further.

   Regarding the field theory, it's really worth listening to YouTube, for all the difficulty. There is an option on YouTube to turn on subtitles. Anyway, I'll try again. Sean Carroll tells you that everything works through interaction between fields and particles. We know how the elementary particles that make up the human body behave and there is no way, after our death, that any "quality" of ours will continue because if there was such an effect, if there was any field that could absorb this "quality", it would have to interact with the elementary particles, and we would have already measured it.

   Say, ok, maybe it's the dark matter? A particle that has not yet been discovered. Sean Carroll will come and tell you that there is no chance, because except for gravity, it does not interact with normal matter and therefore it cannot be a candidate. If he had interacted in any way, we would have found out by now.

   If it's easier for you, think about bending spoons by Uri Geller. There is no field that the brain can produce that will affect the spoon because if the brain were to affect the atoms of the spoon, it would be through a field that interacts with the elementary particles that make up the brain in front of the spoon, but if such a field existed, it would have already been measured. Under the field theory, everything that happens in everyday life is known and no new physics is possible.

   That is, a soul/life after death is not possible. The only possible way is to argue that in principle and essentially, the field theory is not true, but then you will have to explain its great success.

3. It is not a matter of statistics but whether the effect is exclusive. Think again of the example of genetic influence or even a combination of identical genetics and identical environment. According to this experiment, you can dismiss any factor as influencing the character (except reincarnation? If you say that the character is according to the previous life, say). Even a million twins you test will not be a good experiment. Let's say that astrology determines 90% of character. But maybe the remaining 10% is 100 different factors. So no pair of twins will ever share the same character.
   In fact twins are in advance not suitable for almost any research because they do not allow one of the most important things in research and that is the isolation of variables. Therefore, an experiment you do can be interpreted in several ways.
   Regarding the Gemara, (I don't completely know if you know exactly what a Gemara is, so I'll explain just to be sure) the Gemara is
   Not a collection of prophecies or anything like that. The Gemara can be said to be a collection of halachic discussions (and a few stories) of many rabbis spanning between 100 and 200 years. Many times there are opposing opinions and even debates about facts and various events. So all the talk about "the Gemara says so and so" is more of an expression.
   Now, it is clear that the person who said the thing about astrology believed it to be as influential as most if not all people of his time. But what is more important is what he wanted to say and that a person always has a choice and responsibility for his character and actions. If people were alive today, they might be talking about some gene that scientists were able to say link to violence.

4. I didn't really understand why the field theory slaps life after death. Maybe you can come back and explain.
   I understood why he says that Venus cannot have an influence. But what about life after death?

5. A.
   You are wrong because as far as I understand astrology in advance talks about statistics. Otherwise it is enough to show that there is one Libra woman who does not behave as a Libra predicts. You are welcome to say that astrology's predictions are very loose, and I would agree, except that the point of Gemini is that you get so many identical parameters. Now, take as a fact in this discussion that astrology has been taken as correct and it doesn't matter what its specific predictions are at the moment and then it turns out that one twin fulfills them but, the other twin, which is the same as the first twin, does not fulfill them. So I guess Augustine had seen enough twin pairs and concluded that astrology's predictions don't come true time and time again. the end of the story.

   Regarding A. In front of Maimonides, Maimonides did not know Shawn Carroll. You know and you know now that under our most successful theories, there is no such thing as life after death. A problem for the believer, isn't it?

6. Shmulik
   Neither "decisive" nor "a very significant factor" for the argument to pass must be unique and exclusive!!
   You know what, you probably agree that a combination of genetics and environment has a "decisive" effect and a "very significant factor"
   And yet even for Siamese twins! There is a separate character even though they have been through the same things and have exactly the same DNA (also an astrological map?).
   So what does that mean? That genetics, education and environment do not have a decisive effect? No it just means there is no 100% exclusivity. It is enough for an astrologer to say that the stars determine 99.9% and the problem for him disappears. If you listen to astrologers today at least they always talk about at least two directions that can be the effect of anything (the angle of the moon or the rising of Mars etc...) sometimes even it's opposite things.
   Do you have a source for the fact that the ratio was absolute? I brought a source that shows that it is not (not a perfect source and has some problems)
   Regarding the Gemara, you are missing a much more interesting question than why this does not interfere with "A." (Just a commenter from the science website that doesn't even write his name?) The more interesting question is why Rambam didn't mind?

7. A.
   I understand that you agree that the constellation, and/or the date itself, has nothing to do with anything, right?

8. A,
   From your answer to miracles, I would like to point out that it is not the date itself that is decisive, but the date represents a series of events that take place in a trivial way. For example, August is hot so the baby will have fewer layers of clothing and this will probably sow the seeds of behaviors that may create chain reactions that later become a character. But, if he lives in Australia, it will actually be the other way around, because it's winter in August. So it has nothing to do with the date. He just folds in himself a lot of parameters that you attribute to character shapers

9. א
   Yes I did, why do you think not?
   And if you're an extra then that's it. I agree that for the argument to work, the position of the stars must be a very significant factor. It surprises you, but that's how astrology used to be treated, which is correct and decisive. So, for example, Capricorns should have a character with blah blah blah. Here are twins in Capricorn and one of them is with blah blah blah and the other is not. You people of astrology, explain the difference to me. Oh, can't? Ok, so the astrology is wrong. This is the gist of his argument. You don't need to know astronomy or astrology in depth but just understand the implications. This is why I think the argument is brilliant.

   What should be disturbing is the fact that the Gemara thinks astrology is correct.

10. Shmulik
    I didn't understand what was supposed to bother me.
    And I really do not condescend to those who believed in astrology in the past. It's just that this specific claim doesn't seem impressive to me even for the time.
    You initially said that the argument is excellent and valid for today, and if I understood correctly, you still think so. But you didn't address the claims I made at all. Mainly speculated about my motives for saying them. What do you think is wrong with what I said?

11. Miracles
    What does "in itself" mean?
    I don't think the planets have any influence.
    For the date I raised reservations for certain effects but surely they need to be verified in research. In any case, these are statistical effects that certainly do not apply to everyone. But it is clear that those who celebrate their birthday at the beginning of the school year have a higher chance. Or rather the average height of Libra and Scorpio children is higher than their Gemini and Taurus classmates. Is it possible to say something specific about this or that person? No. The one who was the highest in our elementary school celebrated his birthday precisely at the end of the year. But I'm pretty sure that at least some of the factors must have some effect on character. (I forgot one more factor and that is that people with different luck have a higher chance of going through puberty first/last)

12. A.
    I did not understand. Do you think the date of birth in itself has any effect on a person's character and/or events in a person's life?

13. A,
    You don't want to be condescending but that's exactly what happens. Astrology was seen as a factor that dictates character and events (this is exactly its ticket) and genetics was not known 2000 years ago. This is how you have to look at things to appreciate Augustine's argument. I repeat that precisely because of the simplicity of my argument and the lack of need for extensive knowledge, the argument is brilliant.

    Field Theory: Now, take Sean Carroll's idea a step further: you can accept the framework Bowe offers because it is unimaginably successful and inevitably leads to the claim that astrology is wrong. Bending spoons a la Uri Geller is impossible, because there is no field that can perform such an effect, otherwise it would have already been discovered. Life after death is impossible because we know how electrons, protons, etc. behave and there is no field that can absorb and contain the brain when we die, otherwise if there was such a thing that interacts with elementary particles, it would have already been discovered. You can think that field theory is wrong and then the phenomena described are not impossible. But it should be noted that it does not *just* have to be incorrect, we know that there are fields of energy where the theory does not grasp, rather it has to be incorrect in its essence (not all events result from the interaction of elementary particles for example), but then we have to explain her successes. It seems impossible that it's all luck. According to him, there is no experiment that has ever been conducted that contradicted the theory as far as the energy fields of everyday life are concerned. A strong argument.

    I remember you wrote about how the Gemara sublimates the predictions of astrology (not Rutzi, but Shohat is an example of sublimation). As far as I'm concerned, this is a complete mistake by the Gemara and I would have expected that on the subject of character and expectations of events, the Gemara would have zero mistakes. Why doesn't it bother you?

14. Shmulik
    The Gemini argument is based on the assumption that astrology claims to be a single, exclusive and absolute factor. Without it she has no use. According to this argument, it is also possible to "prove" that genetics have no effect on human character. I don't come to be proud of something that was written more than a thousand years ago, but it shouldn't be considered a great genius.
    the charge of. Sean sounds interesting, he attacks the problem from a different angle. The truth is that you don't even have to perform an experiment or formulate a proof. I say there is no proof of the non-existence of the Hindu gods. Doesn't mean it's a waste of time to do such research, such research can actually be interesting, maybe it will find some connection to character traits and date of birth (probably not because of Venus or the moon)

    Miracles
    There are many additional influences to the date of birth. For example, the age at which the child started kindergarten, how many adults will be around him at the beginning of his life, will his siblings be around him a lot (July, August), the first cows he will have, will he be a small class in kindergarten and in the classroom (a statistical relationship only because there are small class who grow faster and they taller than those who are older than them by a few months. But on average they are clearly shorter), did they celebrate their birthday in class or were they born in the summer (today are more sensitive to the issue and make sure that this does not happen) also when the birthday can have an effect on one's perception of oneself (loves winter/summer) Etc.. Don't be surprised with a Leo, they like summer more) and it continues until when they will enlist in the army (immediately at the end of matriculation or there will be more than six months to work before) and then of course he will be released earlier/later to the nation of friends for the yearbook. (This is about where I think it ends, I can't think of influences later than that in life) And of course there is also the influence of astrology itself. That is, every printed newspaper has an astrology section. And if a child is told that he is a Gemini and later he reads that Geminis like to talk, it can have a little effect. In the past when astrology was more and more common it was accepted as a science today the latter reason could have a much greater impact.

15. א
    I really fail to understand why his argument is nonsense. He hits astrology right where it hurts, and in such a simple way. I think you are missing the fact that the argument should be taken relative to ancient knowledge. It is clear that today the claim of twins alone will not defeat astrology, but in his time, the scientific method had not yet been invented and yet he managed to find a rebuttable example, which includes so many identical parameters. I think it's brilliant.

    I'm sorry you can't understand Sean Carroll. He is so eloquent and clear to those who understand a little English. I will try to describe his claim and I apologize for the confusion that will inevitably occur here and I declare that I am only trying to translate it and in no way do I claim to be an authority in these areas. He is the authority. He talks about quantum field theory, which, plus Einstein's theory of relativity, are the best theories we have. They make it possible to predict events with an unimaginable level of accuracy. He tells about Ken Wilson, a Nobel Prize winning physicist, who explained how to look for new, unknown forces and particles under the framework described: Ken Wilson said that new forces can only be weaker than gravity (100000 times weaker) or very, very short-lived and new particles , must be very heavy (and then you have to invest a lot of energy to discover them, see the large accelerator in Cern) or they hardly interact (think of neutrinos or dark matter, which has not yet been discovered). If there was a force stronger than gravity or acting over longer distances than the strong force, we would have already discovered it in all the experiments conducted in particle accelerators around the world and likewise with particles. If there was a particle that interacts significantly with electrons (for example), which is not part of the standard model, we would have already discovered it.

    His claim: for our daily life, under the framework described, there is no room for new physics and everything is known. The framework we have has never failed in any experiment when it comes to describing phenomena from our daily life and even if it turns out, for example, that string theory is correct, it will not change anything in our description of interactions of electrons with protons. Certainly the framework is incomplete if you're a physicist looking for what happened in the big bang, or what exactly happens in a black hole or what dark matter is, but for anything that affects everyday life, everything is known.

    We know what the brain is made of and what it is made of. We know that when a new thought is formed in the brain, it is protons, electrons and neutrons that interact together and their behavior is dictated by field theory. If we want to have a meaningful interaction with them, dark matter cannot be a good candidate for that because if it did sustain something like that, we would already see this effect in particle accelerators.

    There are consequences to this claim: if we assume that there is a new force in nature, but it must be a hundred thousand times weaker than gravity (otherwise we would have already discovered it) then the planet Venus cannot in any way affect the nature of the baby that is born because a glass that is on the doctor's counter (for example) produces More gravitational forces than the gravitational forces of Venus and certainly the new hypothetical force we proposed. If there is a hypothetical force that is very strong but very, very short-lived, it cannot help Venus to influence the character anyway. He doesn't go far enough. Hence, if you think that field theory plus gravity describes everyday reality well, then astrology cannot be categorically correct. There is no need to conduct studies that are double-blind and the like, the contradiction is enough in front of such a successful framework that has been developed (the most successful that man has ever developed in fact)

    This is by and large, while unforgivably trolling the first half of his instructive lecture.
    The man also has a very successful blog. Here are some posts on the subject, you might be more comfortable reading with Google Translate
    https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2008/02/18/telekinesis-and-quantum-field-theory/
    https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/09/23/the-laws-underlying-the-physics-of-everyday-life-are-completely-understood/
    http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2010/09/29/seriously-the-laws-underlying-the-physics-of-everyday-life-really-are-completely-understood/

16. A.
    A child was born nine months after…. So if there is any effect on the time of birth, the effect is due to the parents. A child born in winter is more exposed to other diseases than a child born in summer. The daylight hours are different between winter and summer, and of course the temperatures.
    So, there are definitely reasons for the supposed dependence between human characteristics and the period of birth. What is certain is that the position of the planets has no effect.

17. Shmulik
    I tried to see but my English is not good. If you can briefly say what he says?
    I don't know what Rambam's argument was except that it sounded like nonsense to him. Maybe he had. Do not know. The charge of the twins is simply ridiculous.
    About a grain of truth. I think it is very reminiscent of graphology. Studies done on the subject revealed something very interesting. Graphology is divided into two. One part is a general look at the script, how organized it is for example. And it is more subjective and general. The second part looks at the shape of each letter and assigns properties to each shape of each letter. This is a more accurate and detailed part and makes it possible to write a character analysis that goes down to each trait and how strong it is and it is less subjective meaning that different graphologists will give almost the same result. What is interesting is that studies of this method are worth almost nothing. It predicts traits no better than analyzing coffee stains at the bottom of a cup. But the first method does somewhat succeed in predicting specific character traits, and even that is not with a 100% correlation, which means that a very organized writer does have a better chance of a more organized person. So even from this it is difficult to create something with sufficient certainty (it is not clear how it happened in Israel that the legal system was ignorant of the fact that graphology was accepted as something with a degree of reliability). So there is a kernel of truth but very small. Astrology also has, in my opinion, a kernel of suspicion of a slightly higher chance for character traits according to the birth period of the year. Not sure if it has anything to do with modern astrology which relies on teachings from two thousand years ago.

18. A,
    Sorry to keep asking but you keep repeating and not answering. Have you seen Sean Carroll's YouTube?

    By the way, I regret the suspicion that you are debating the problematic nature of Augustine's argument because you want to claim that Maimonides' arguments are the correct ones. Is there something in my words?
    I say again and again: his argument is brilliant in its simplicity in light of the knowledge and common assumption that once existed precisely because it hardly requires extensive knowledge. What can't be praised for Christians?

19. Miracles
    When you talk about Aquarius, I think of a sponge. I don't need to say what I think about astrology anymore.

20. A.
    I will repeat the point again: astrology predicts not only character but also events. Do you think the same events happen to two people born at the same moment? And don't tell me, please, that they celebrate birthdays at the exact same time....

21. Miracles

    Would you believe that one of the heroes of my youth - George Berger from Shi'ar - was a penniless homeless drug addict who believed in God and self-righteousness?

    Here's another song for you:

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VuKE_tUrEh0

    א

    Feynman says that psychology, like astrology, is largely eye catching.

    Do you believe that there is a dash, a pinch, a sliver, of truth in astrology or any other meta-physical method such as telepathy, telekinesis, bending spoons or a stable government without Haredim?

    Prove it on TV. A million dollar Randy prize awaits you as a trailer.

22. Israel
    I'm glad you joined. I hope you read the entire discussion because it is important for me to emphasize that at no point in the discussion was the debate about whether astrology is correct or not. The experiment you propose makes more sense than saying "there are twins, they are not exactly the same, it follows that there is no influence on the stars" there are still many problems with the experiment you propose. As an example, it is based on the assumption that a person correctly evaluates his own qualities. Therefore this experiment is worth nothing without comparing it to another experiment in which you will do the same thing only with a different and objective test of the character. The problem is that it is not that simple to produce such a test (not impossible). I'm not sure that if you take 12 psychiatrists (the highest and most scientific authority per soul) and give them an hour with each one, it's not sure that you'll get better results. Therefore, an objective test must be built, which is already a job for experts. Like I said not impossible but not easy either.
    -
    Miracles
    First of all, your question is worded as if you are asking whether I believe it or not. I guess I misunderstood.
    Now, first thing at least we left the poor twins who did no harm to anyone. Not only do they not help us, they get in the way, because they have many other factors that cause similarity (you can only prove that it is not the only factor. It would be like saying about identical twins that they prove that there is no genetic influence on character, for example. Of course this is not true, they only prove that there is no exclusive effect. After all, if you ask the parents also about identical twins, they will see a difference. Because parents are a measuring device with an infinite sensitivity threshold but very bad at capturing the difference.) So taking two people who were born in the same place and time is a better idea. The problem is also more difficult, especially to get a large research group (astrology also gives importance to the hour) but even then, as you said, "does it really make sense to you that this fact has any effect on what will happen to them in life" now you are looking for "any effect" meaning we have to prove that there is no effect at all. It is enough to have a greater imagination than other people. (I wrote earlier about some hypotheses as to why there may be more similarity between them) In any case, this is already a completely different experiment/research and even a thought experiment of having slightly different twins has no effect.

23. Israel
    As someone born under the sign of Aquarius, this song is dear to me 🙂

24. א
    Have you seen Shum Carroll's YouTube?

25. How about the following experiment:

    Take 12 people who have not seen an astrological map before, and 12 astrologers will prepare a personal astrological map for each of the 12 people. (12 after the twelve tribes). Shuffle all the maps and let people pick their private maps from all 144 maps in the deck (they should know, right?), so we should get a 1/1 matchup.

    Repeat the experiment 12 times, for the statistics.

    If there is an average match of even 1/11, the matter is serious.
    But if the adjustment is only 1/12... It is necessary to return to the previous profession of selling corn.

    By the way, there is a question that has been bothering me for a long time, and maybe one of the commenters will be able to answer it:

    When the moon is in the Seventh House
    And Jupiter aligns with Mars
    Will peace then guide the planets
    And love will steer the stars

26. A.
    The twins are just an example. Take two children born at the same moment in the same place. Does it really make sense to you that this fact has any effect on what will happen to them in life, or on their character?

27. The whole story of the twins is based on you thinking that astrology claims absolute accuracy and being the only factor. It's enough that they say the stars have an influence, but not exclusively (let's say there is also room for chance). I don't think there is any astrologer who said that you can predict every event that will happen to this person only that the stars have a lot of influence. And then the twin experiment actually works in his favor because he can say "Look, these twins are actually very similar in their features even though they are not completely identical because there are other small factors that influence" (of course this is because of similar genetics and a similar upbringing environment more than just brothers who have a difference between them) I don't know What is the name of this mistake of assuming that a certain theory is more extreme than it is and then refuting it based on this assumption.
    For example, there is a mention of some of the astrology of the period (or is it only Jewish astrology) in the Gemara. They generally say that a person born "under the sign of Mars" will be a murderer or a robber because he has a penchant for blood. But the Gemara says that it is possible that he will actually be a butcher (an honorable profession), which means that he still has a free choice, and his choices affect the character that is created for him even if the planet Mars has an influence. (If you take away the astrological matter, it really sounds like Freud's "refinement" principle) (that is, everything I wanted to say was that they did not see the stars as the sole cause of everything that happened, but only as having a strong influence. And every twin "experiment" is based on an exclusive effect, meaning if they were born together then everything should be the same.

28. Nissim, Shmulik,

    You're right, I probably wasn't at the peak of concentration before, oops, my mistake.

29. Yariv/A./Shamulik
    Augustine's idea is genius! The fact that the different environment affects twins is exactly the point!!! 🙂
    According to astrology, not only the character of the person is determined, but also what will happen to him, according to the time of birth. Therefore, the impact of the environment should be almost zero.

    You have to understand, astrology is the science of the past. There was no clock or calendar. Look at the stars and see that there is a correspondence between the positions of the stars and phenomena such as floods, solar eclipses, tides, and the seasons. Their conclusion is that the stars influence the events. They had a scientific theory: it explains the past and predicts the future. The theory fails because of the third criterion: it has simply been disproved. The mistake of the ancients (in retrospect) is called "post hoc ergo propter hoc", meaning "after event A, event B happened, therefore event A is the cause of event B".

30. From a bird's eye view, in order to show that a theory is invalid, he needs one example that disproves it. The example of the twins is actually excellent in this sense because he gets for free a pair of children who were born at the exact same time, in the same place, to the same parents... many parameters are the same astrologically and yet, the children are different. It debunks astrology and is really brilliant, especially for the time.

    Have you seen Carol's YouTube? It is also brilliant, relative to the period

31. Shmulik
    There is an interesting study that showed that parents attribute much more difference between their children to the nation of controlled tests by professionals. There siblings got very similar metrics compared to the group as a whole which also makes quite a bit of sense overall. Of course there was a difference and no one person is the same as another, but the differences to parents always seem bigger than they really are.
    It doesn't sound likely to me that the "experiment" he conducted is worth anything at all in today's terms. Even today, carrying out such an experiment is a complicated thing that requires a lot of thinking (we'll start by creating uniform measures or defining a control group) if you perceive astrology as claiming to be the only factor for literally every part of the human character. If anything, the experiment should be between babies born in the same place and at the same time. Because twins, it is very likely that their character indicators are more similar to each other than to their peers. Such an experiment should compare in a number of character tests between children born on the same day (and if possible an hour because it can also be an answer) and those born in a different month. And of course without the testers being aware of when everyone was born, it is also necessary to obtain as large a study group as possible. Of course he had neither the knowledge nor the ability to do it. Any "research" with less than that will leave you with results that anyone can interpret in their own way. Astrologers do not need to prove an exclusive relationship to character is enough to show a certain tendency. What's more, you might actually find some finds. Like for example if the society divides the children according to years (there must be an arbitrary date on which a year begins) then the children of a certain "luck" will be slightly older than their peers and this may statistically affect their character. They can be (again only statistically) bigger.

32. your opinion.
    I believe that if the prevailing assumption was that there is something in the stars that affects the character, which is underneath everything you wrote, then his argument is a great argument.
    I understand that you don't have children from your answer (?) and therefore, know that you don't have to wait years until the difference in character becomes clear. Parents of twins (and I'm not a parent of twins, luckily) notice changes in character already in the first weeks. That is, there was no experience in which one child was stormy and the other was calm. When formulating an answer, consider the knowledge of 2000 years ago.

    You fail to place yourself in the knowledge of 2000 and 3000 years ago because as far as I know, none of the people who addressed this issue, talked about the experiences that someone went through as the basis of character. I mean, it wasn't in their knowledge base then. It sounds obvious to you, but once upon a time it wasn't obvious. You think so, state a reference. I therefore think your argument is flawed.

    Jumping to the present, I don't think there is a definite answer as to which is more responsible for character: genetics or environment. Therefore, what is the problem with thinking that beneath genetics and the environment there are other factors that influence character? The problem is what Sean Carroll said but such knowledge did not exist 2000 years ago.

33. Shmulik,

    Even for a person who lived 2000 years ago, I don't think there is anything genius or brilliant in this thought experiment, on the contrary, it is an example of shallow thinking. What do you think an intelligent person living in this time could not understand that every girl will have different experiences than her sister? And that these experiences will affect each one differently?

    People who lived in this period and even 3000 years ago discovered much more ingenious things that also turned out to be true, such as the round shape of the globe of our country.

34. rival,
    This claim always exists against astrology but put yourself 2000 years ago with the knowledge of the past. Once upon a time (and even today in many circles) the concept was that the stars do influence the character according to their position at the moment of birth. Then Augustine comes and says here are twins, identical in everything and certainly in the position of the stars but the nature is different. I think it's brilliant, especially relative to the knowledge of the past

35. Shmulik,

    The experiment with the two twin girls doesn't really sound like a controlled experiment, even though the experiment begins when both are theoretically identical, in a short time each one begins to experience different experiences and acquire a different character, each will have other friends who will affect her differently, they won't be there all the time either adjacent to each other and therefore each will be affected by the environment in a different way.

    The control in this experiment is very weak.

36. A,
    I didn't mean to put words in my mouth. With you, I'm sorry if they were entered. In any case, my question is that if the Christian world debated the issue for 1000 years (there were ups and downs), it's a bit strange that you had to wait until the century of Rambam to hear a different voice (I understand that you don't know all the rabbis who ever lived...)

    Did you see Sean Carroll's talk?

37. where were the rest Get the strategy clear.
    I feel like you're putting words in my mouth. Maimonides was not the first to deal with this. Only that the rest (and again maybe I'm wrong and there are rabbis who ruled it out before too. But here I'm pretty sure not.) accept it at least on some level.
    "By the way, why doesn't it make sense for a star, moon, sun to affect your character, given the knowledge that existed thousands of years ago?" I said no such thing. Only Rambam doesn't see it as logical. I also did not say that the Rambam was the first in something (except in the Jewish world and even in this I am not 100% sure if someone with a broad knowledge of Judaism knows something else, I would love to hear) I just said that in my opinion there is a difference for a certain someone. And I also qualified my words which are only my opinion. (The whole discussion started because someone mentioned the Rambam as "acceptable" and I was upset by the lack of accuracy and ignorance)

38. א
    What you decide sounds good to you is subjective. Objectively Maimonides was neither the first nor the second. He's just probably the senior Jew you know who got into it for the first time. Where were the rest before Maimonides?
    By the way, why does it not make sense for a star, moon, sun to affect your character, given the knowledge that existed thousands of years ago?
    This is why I really liked Augustine's argument about twins. Because this argument of his is brilliant in its simplicity and does not require extensive scientific knowledge. An empirical examination of a sample in which two twin girls, identical in almost everything that they were born at about the same time and again, the character is completely different. What more is needed?

    Here's what Sean Carroll thinks about astrology. It comes at about the 17th minute, but to fully understand the argument you have to hear it from the beginning
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv0mKsO2goA

39. Even if Augustine brings arguments from the "rational" field, it still sounds to me that the main objection is theological. As opponents of evolution/bang also give "rational" arguments, this does not mean that the source of the opposition is theological. (But that's just my opinion)

40. Shmulik
    ? I did not come to say that theology is rational or not. Only there is a difference between saying I think something is wrong because it doesn't make sense to me. And according to my belief in Almighty God there cannot be anything specific. In my opinion Maimonides did not believe in astrology not because he saw it as a slap in the face to belief in God but because he saw no logic in the influence of stars on humans. He specifically says that it has nothing to do with the Torah and that a wise person should understand it on his own.

41. Miracles
    Although the "Hebrew" names are Babylonian names, the board is unique and designed to meet specific needs. A lunar calendar that maintains some alignment with the sun (so that Pesach will be in the spring) and even makes sure that certain holidays do not fall on certain days (the so-called "not ad o Rosh", meaning that Rosh Hashanah does not fall on Sunday, Wednesday and Friday)

    I must point out that it sounds like you are really relieved to find out that Maimonides was not the first to rule out astrology? Before it sounded like you were really upset.
    I just want to emphasize that at no point did I claim this. I just heard such a claim and wanted to know if it was true.
    In any case, it is strange that Christian thinkers at the beginning of Christianity expressed such an opinion. Given that in the New Testament there are stories of star contracts predicting the birth of Christ.

42. א
    You did not understand correctly. He also made a very nice claim related to twins. This is a claim from the domain you called the rational. Also, the entry I sent you to is long and does not only contain details about Augustine. Also, there are probably many others who rejected astrology and they are not Christians. So it is not a straight line between Augustine and Maimonides. By the way, it is very possible that according to what they once knew, astrology was very reasonable and logical. I really don't want to come down on those who once thought that the stars influence character, only those who think so today.

    In a framed essay I would like to point out that it pleases me when you write that a theological argument is not a rational argument

43. Shmulik
    Thanks for the link it pretty much answers my question. Although there is a certain difference. If I understood correctly, the objection to Augustine's astrology is theological. If the stars determine destiny then where is God's control. And it seems that for Maimonides the reason is more a slap in the face of rationality.

    Miracles
    I know that the Hebrew months take their names from the Babylonian months (the god Tammuz, the god of spring is even mentioned in the Tanakh.)
    Regarding Shmulik's link. I'm glad he gave it.. and I'm not happy about it nor upset. I was just interested to know.

44. A.
    What do you say about Shmulik's link?

45. A.
    Check what the names of the Hebrew months mean (Tammuz, for example, is El Babylon). You will find that they originate from Bali. I didn't say exactly - some of the names of the months were changed. You are welcome to read about it on Wikipedia.

    You differentiate between astronomy and astrology, but in the past both were believed to be "scientific". Astronomy was very lame until serious researchers arrived who wanted to understand what exactly was happening.

    Maimonides opposed astrology, but another 200 years after him he believed that the sun revolves around the earth. So what was he up against? He was a very smart man, there is no debate about that.

    To me there is no essential difference between astrology and religion. Both express belief in something without an evidentiary basis.
    I believe in one method to examine the world: you think of an explanation for what you see and you check how it explains the past and how it predicts the future. Everything else is superstition. Can you give me a reason to think otherwise?

46. A,
    Read here about the fathers of Christianity who rejected astrology long before Maimonides.
    Saint Augustine, about a thousand years before him, already rejected astrology
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_views_on_astrology

47. Miracles
    A. You have a source that the Jewish tablet was copied exactly. As far as I know, it is based on it but adjusted to halachic needs. What logic is there in using a half-lunar calendar? The most practical calendar is a tropical calendar, and the Jewish calendar is only close to it and does not exactly coincide. If you are interested in a board for agricultural purposes, it is ineffective and can reach a deviation of more than half a month.
    —
    B. Astrology and astronomy are not the same and never were the same. But my point is that astronomy owes much of its knowledge to astrologers. This was what pushed humanity in the past to explore and address the mysteries. The thought that the elements of the sky have an influence on humans.
    (An interesting point. I once read about the exact calculation of the whitewash cycle in a book by a convert. It turns out that the number appears in the Gemara, of course, not in these decimal fractions as a combination of many simple fractions. Of course, it was not stated there that the calculation was made by the Babylonians)
    —
    I didn't understand why you say it doesn't matter if Rambam was first (which I'm still not sure about). Obviously this is important, as you would say "it doesn't matter what philosopher said, the main thing is that someone said it" it is of great importance to understand what the thinking was in each period in order to understand history. Therefore it is also important when new ideas appeared and by whom. (even if he is not a Jewish Jew)
    I'm sure that if Raphael attributed some idea to some rabbi and said it before some Greek, then I'm sure it would have been very important to you.
    —
    There is no connection between frost in gods and frost in astrology. The only connection is that you don't believe in either. The strategy was seen as a force of nature and not something necessarily related to any god.

48. Why is my comment blocked???

49. A.
    The Babylonians, thanks to careful observations, invented the calendar that was adopted by the Jews after the Babylonian exile. This includes the 19-year cycle, the names of the months (partially), and even Adar A and B.
    In addition, astrology and astronomy then were the same thing - a large part of the people believed that the astrological predictions were well-founded and correct.
    Regarding Socrates, my opinion is that Socrates was on the borderline of the naturalist, that is, he did not believe in external gods, but thought that everything came from within himself (perhaps he even thought about consciousness"). He phrased it as an "inner demon", but I don't think he really believed in demons. He was executed because of his lack of faith, in addition to his disapproval of "appeal to authority", a tool so common among clerics.

    Understand something - for me, there is no difference between astrology and religion, with no intention of disrespecting anyone. Both involve belief in a supernatural force, without evidential basis. That's why I think Socrates was so ahead of his time.

    I have no problem accepting the idea that Rambam was among the first, and maybe even the first, to speak out against astrology. Why is it so fundamental?

50. Search on Google: the Babylonians, agriculture, astronomy.

    There is a lot of information, here are some of the things I found in a quick search:

    "Astrology played an important part in the development of Babylonian astronomy. They had gods for all the planets and a god for the sky and the stars. Star observatories were erected as part of the temples, and religious priests would try to predict important events such as the rise and fall of kings.
    Around the 5th century BCE, the Babylonians calculated with astonishing accuracy the length of the average synodic month - 29.530614 or 29.530594 days compared to the exact time which was 29.530583 at the same time. The Babylonians also calculated the length of the tropical year as 365.234 instead of 365.2422. This level of accuracy is surprising, especially considering the imprecise measuring devices that existed at the time."

    "The beginning of the modern science of astronomy in Babylon. The Babylonians raised the level of astronomical knowledge to high levels for astrological predictions. In the first millennium BC they knew how to calculate the position of planets in the sky as well as the cycle of solar and lunar eclipses. The same is true for the ancient Egyptians, who used the stars to calculate climatic phenomena such as, for example, the expected time of flooding of the banks of the Nile. The early prediction of when the Nile would flood its banks was critical in a country whose existence was tied to the Nile by a life-or-death connection. Due to the supreme importance of knowing the position of the stars in the sky, the pyramids and temples were built that aimed at critical points in the sky, points that marked the sunrise, sunset or dawn of important stars."

51. Miracles
    I will continue to look for a source, but in any case, in-depth and accurate research on the factors of the sky is of no use in agriculture. Even for an accurate calculation of when the day gets shorter and longer, you don't need such precise knowledge and you can make do with rough estimates, and you certainly don't need information about the planets or the cycle of the moon. And navigation with the help of stars was not developed either and the Babylonians were not great seafarers as far as I know. In relation to Babylonian astrologers, they are mentioned a lot in the fortune telling legends (never as charlatans as such that their words should be taken seriously. Even if the sages usually succeed in changing fate) there is also a mention of them in the New Testament. The emigrants who came to visit Mary came from the area of ​​Babylon and knew about the birth of Jesus from her vision in the stars.
    Can you elaborate more on what Socrates said against astrology?
    And of course the Rambam was wrong sometimes. He wrote in a passage that it would be impossible to build a ship out of iron that would sail in the air (completely true, did he really write that?)

52. A.
    "All the research done by the Babylonians was done for the purpose of astrological prediction" - I would appreciate the source. I know that the Babylonians knew, for example, when the day was getting longer/shorter and it was used for agriculture.
    The Babylonians actually did not advocate a geocentric world, unlike the Jews and some of the Greeks. And if you want someone who preceded Maimonides, I would say Socrates.
    And if Maimonides really was the first, then great. Just don't forget that there are things he was wrong about….

53. Miracles
    Another question: Do you know of anyone, a philosopher or a scientist who denied any basis for astrology before Maimonides? According to what I know, he was very innovative in the matter, at least among the arbitrators and commentators. But I wasn't sure if it was the first. (Maybe any Greek philosopher. Sometimes it seems that they made sure to say all the opinions on every subject and it doesn't matter what science reveals, it turns out that there was some Greek who expressed a similar opinion :))

54. All the research done by the Babylonians was done for the purpose of astrological prediction. And the Sages knew what they knew from studying Babylonian knowledge. Obviously there were inaccuracies but there was also a very impressive knowledge compared to the means of the time. Those who studied the elements of the sky were astrologers and the goal was astrological prediction. If you want to define it, astronomy is fine. It doesn't change what I wanted to say. You can also define alchemists as chemists if they studied substances. They usually don't define it that way. But we will not get into a definition debate. So I didn't understand you and you claim that the Babylonians who studied the elements of the sky were not astrologers and did not attribute to the stars an influence on humans. If so then I tell you that you are completely wrong.

55. א
    You got confused :). The Babylonians did astronomy, not astrology. In their time, they did not know how to carry out a scientific investigation, and the sages really thought they were describing reality. This mistake was discovered by scientists who checked their opinions against reality. This is exactly the difference between an astrologer and an astronomer. This is the difference that changed the world, and freed some of us (unfortunately not all of us) from superstitions, appeal to authority and excessive self-confidence.

56. Raphael
    A quote from a letter from Yemen
    "But what you saw you longed for from the wisdom of the stars and the possessions that were and will be - remove all of this from your heart and cleanse your mind of it and wash your mind, as dirty clothes are washed from their filth. According to the fact that they are things that do not really exist, and are not true for the complete sages and even those who do not believe in the Torah, even more so for those who accept the Torah."
    In short, he says that astrology has no truth and that really wise people should know this even if they are not Jewish. But there is no intention in what I said to tell you personally to believe or not to believe in astrology. Many sages of Israel disagreed on Rambam and some expressed different approaches. Like for example an approach that astrology in general is correct but not about Israel. Or it is true but its fate can be changed (by prayer/good deeds) and some have divided whether this is forbidden or not (but as far as I know there was not one before Rambam who denied any element of truth in astrology and claimed that it is all nonsense). You can choose the approach that suits you.
    Either way, I think it is necessary to mention the tremendous contribution of astrology to the world and to science (also to Judaism. The knowledge gathered by astrologers, mainly in Babylon, was learned by Hazal and used to predict the births of the moon and later to build the permanent calendar that is not based on observing births and witnesses when it became more difficult And more after the destruction of the house.

57. א
    The Zohar was indeed written by Rashbi and discovered about a thousand years later. In my opinion, you are also wrong about Maimonides' opinion about astrology. Can you tell exactly where you get it from?

58. I thought it was "written" in the second verse by Rashbi. But you may be right, most researchers say it was written in the 13th century. I am short of saying. But even so, many commentators in the period wrote about the secret doctrine and also halakhic judges. But the field really underwent a revolution after the books of Saint Harry. So not even scholars started studying Kabbalah. But it doesn't matter because Rambam was indeed a scholar and if he wanted to he would have studied and it should be expected that he knew her. The whole upheaval was about ordinary people
    In any case, I made sure to emphasize that it is impossible to say with certainty that he objected. Only he always preferred mundane explanations to mysticism. And unlike many Israeli sages, he claimed that there is nothing in astrology. Which was unacceptable.

59. א
    Allow me to correct you. Maimonides was not accepted, but he also did not oppose the acceptance of which very little was known at the time, since the Zohar book had not yet been published.

60. And you can't every time you don't give money that you think should be given to something. Push the ultra-Orthodox to a discussion.

61. Yaron
    Rambam was not accepted and did not deal with Kabbalah or any secret teachings. The Rambam was a philosopher and opposed almost anything with an unearthly explanation. Of course, like every educated person of his time, he learned almost all the knowledge of the time. He was one of the few in his time who said that this astrology is complete nonsense in connection with Kabbalah, there is almost no doubt that he did not agree with it, but he never mentioned it in his writings. Apparently he did not dare to openly oppose her (even so his books were burned for a certain period of time)
    It's a shame to write nonsense.

62. I do not rule out religion. The fact that the ultra-Orthodox observe the website most of the time in silence shows that they are just as curious as the seculars and the innovations of science interest them - but there is no legitimacy to do this in their audience and therefore it is done with the intention of maintaining the reservations. Yeshayahu Leibovitz was religious and he is not suspected of being a non-scientist in his view. He had a double or triple professorship.
    3 billion people on the planet have a moral theory and a legal system of laws based on the Torah of Israel, at the same time as the wisdom of the sciences that originates in Greece and Europe and even in Arabia in more enlightened ages. History was full of violence with and without religion. Science is today a multinational bridge that crosses cultures. There is usually no moral theory with him.
    But like everything, a reform is required in the interpretation (not in the original, in the interpretation) and it is also required to allow secularists their way of life and atheists their way of life. No one knows who is right. Humanity learns humanism over the years, usually not internalizing. It is possible to introduce insights from humanism: women are equal to men in rights even if they are different in structure, sexual preference is a matter that is not relevant to a person's moral value system, Gentiles can be followers of the nations of the world more merciful than religious Jews. Religion places restrictions even where it is necessary in my opinion, and not only where it is not necessary. Changing partners and sanctifying the sex do not seem appropriate to me. It degenerates society, even if it brings physical pleasure.

63. Yaron
    It is true what you say - and for that exact reason they oppose military service.
    The enemy of religion is curiosity (this is the first sin in the Torah...)

64. So core studies are not opposed to being ultra-Orthodox. This is an invention of the ultra-orthodox out of fear of what openness will do. If the genius from Vilna - the great Lithuanian - thinks so - there is nothing wrong with studies.

65. It is interesting to see that there are ultra-Orthodox people who read the website. It means that science interests them too. Maybe you need to find the common ground if there is one. Even Maimonides, who was Kabbalah (Kabbalah), advocated the integration of the sciences in the study of the Torah, and also the Gaon of Vilna - the great Lithuanian, advocated the integration of the real sciences in the study of the Torah. Knowing clearly that these were the wisdom of Gentiles, they saw the wisdom of the sciences as a common denominator with their way of learning the Torah.

66. The ultra-Orthodox are not to blame for everything, but this is a culture that fights progress.

67. Why won't the state invest in communication space. In Germany, Europe and China the state invests. They want more yield to sell to the Chinese. Do you turn off the light in this country?

68. Shimon, you are just an idiot, not everyone who makes legitimate claims against the religious in the country is a Nazi, enough with this cheap demagoguery.

69. Herzl, you sound like a Nazi, they blamed the Jews for everything, and so you blame the ultra-Orthodox for everything.
    It's time to stop the hate, there are also positive things in them.
    On the day of the crash of the parking lot in Ramat Hay'il (which in your opinion must be related to ultra-Orthodox planning, etc.), the first teams to arrive were ultra-Orthodox from ZAKA and the Hatzla union.
    The contribution of the ultra-Orthodox to the state is higher in many respects.

70. proofreading.
    Gentlemen, it's time to devote even a little time to linguistic editing.

71. So it turns out there is no continuity? When the planning of Amos 6 was finished, didn't the engineers start planning Amos 7? And when the construction of Amos 6 was finished, did they not start the construction of Amos 7? So hundreds of engineers and technicians sit and idle?
    Well, I understand that the government is busy with survivals and cover-ups and religious benefits and everything else is forgotten. That explains it.

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.