For the kind of statistical significance (read: confirmation bias) that astrology relies upon, anything will work. Horoscopes could be written based not on astrological sign, but on the first letter of street name of a person's first address and apply. Search hard enough, and some sort of correlation can almost always be found.
Astrology has some value, in the same way alchemy has value: it helped start serious scientific inquiry into astronomy. Sadly, while there are now vanishingly small amounts of people who take alchemy seriously, astrology is a relatively common belief to hold, even among people who are scientifically-minded. It puts me in mind of the first 9/11 truther I knew, who was a close friend who should have known better. However, at the time she was willing to buy into it, simply because it played into her anti-GWBush sentiments. This is after I explained how the statements were false, and backed it up w/ evidence (having queried my father, who was a mining engineer and had done building implosions in his career as a blasting contractor).
Unfortunately, "smart people" can just as easily fall prey to these types of delusions, it seems to be a common human trait (like all the logical fallacies). Thinking that one is immune paradoxically makes one more susceptible to these types of errors, rather the best defense is to recognize that no, nobody is immune. Much in the same way as ignoring advertising's effect on decision-making.
> Those early formative years influence attitudes and expectations about success, academically and socially, and that can possibly stay with an individual.
Maybe there’s no measurable difference by adulthood, but I wouldn’t be surprised if there was.
Astrology has some value, in the same way alchemy has value: it helped start serious scientific inquiry into astronomy. Sadly, while there are now vanishingly small amounts of people who take alchemy seriously, astrology is a relatively common belief to hold, even among people who are scientifically-minded. It puts me in mind of the first 9/11 truther I knew, who was a close friend who should have known better. However, at the time she was willing to buy into it, simply because it played into her anti-GWBush sentiments. This is after I explained how the statements were false, and backed it up w/ evidence (having queried my father, who was a mining engineer and had done building implosions in his career as a blasting contractor).
Unfortunately, "smart people" can just as easily fall prey to these types of delusions, it seems to be a common human trait (like all the logical fallacies). Thinking that one is immune paradoxically makes one more susceptible to these types of errors, rather the best defense is to recognize that no, nobody is immune. Much in the same way as ignoring advertising's effect on decision-making.
Edit:typo