From the Editor

by Glenn R. Case, MAAM Editor

I apologize if anyone got left out of the Membership Directory.

We get the list from National as to who to include.  You can get left off a couple of different ways:  either you requested (intentionally or not) that you did not want to be listed in any directories or for some reason your dues were not recorded as paid in time.  If your entry is missing or incorrect, let me know and I will include the corrections in future issues of the MAAM.   We are still looking into having the Directory on-line.  It may be appropriate to publish the next directory next February or March rather than in June.

The other thing I wanted to comment on is our Forum speaker for August.  He spoke to us previously about incorporating his astrological work with his practice of psychiatry.  It was one of our best attended Forums.  To make a long story short, many people flat do not believe in astrology.   That is their right.  Still and all, we should not lose sight of the scientific method.  It dictates that when something is observed in nature, the scientist first verifies that the observation is repeatable and replicable.  He or she then attempts to formulate an explanation for it.  Then to test that explanation with other experiments in the attempt to formulate a theory.

 Unfortunately, there is an aspect of pseudo-science that has not, to my knowledge, been explored in publications such as the Skeptical Inquirer.   Briefly it goes as follows:  If something appears to not fit into accepted scientific discipline, then every attempt is made to discredit it.  As a corollary,  scientists are in many cases elevated to the rank of priests who can speak  “from the chair”  with little justification.

As an example, the fact that some astronomer with a Ph.D.   says that astrology is so much balderdash actually means little or nothing.  What does this person know about astrology?   The fact that he or she knows about astronomy is not at issue.

What I look for from Dr. Gibson is evidence that astrology can materially help in the practice of psychiatry.  Can astrology help sick people to become well?  Are the observations statistically significant?  Has this work been peer reviewed by other psychiatrists?    Is there some hypothesis that can  be proven or disproven  by further experimental work?      That I think is how his presentation must be viewed.