• mabeledo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    28 days ago

    You don’t have to accept its interpretive claims

    What’s the value, then? It sounds like its results are correlations between loosely interpreted measurements, i.e. two identical sets of observations may correlate to different events, depending on subjective post hoc interpretations.

    Is that what you mean when you compared this to AI? Because LLMs are stochastic parrots?

    • mermella@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      28 days ago

      I think the comparison is that both fields are often misunderstood through oversimplified descriptions. “Astrology is just Sun signs” and “LLMs are just stochastic parrots” are both reductionist summaries that leave out a lot of the interesting discussion. Whether either ultimately succeeds at what it claims is a separate question.

      As for astrology itself, I became interested through Carl Jung, who viewed astrology as a symbolic system that reflected recurring psychological patterns and wrote about it in relation to archetypes and synchronicity ( Man and his symbols .) Astrology provides a symbolic language for thinking about cycles, temperament, motivation, and meaning.