logoalt Hacker News

odyssey7yesterday at 7:30 PM2 repliesview on HN

The problem is that the word “planet” refers both to cultural symbols — mythology, gods, archetypes, and the heavens — and to objects of scientific study. Those are different domains, and one of them is cultural heritage, and the other is irritating when it tries to infringe on the first one.

There’s no need for a god complex. Stop picking and choosing which planets are real. Scientists can create their own, more precise words for things. Planets are sacred. Things that clear their orbits are not.

You can’t subdue the public into giving up their gods out of difference to science — you’re just losing people.


Replies

Timon3today at 2:59 AM

Why would a change today be such a violation of a sacred concept, when Pluto was added not even a century ago? If anything, it seems like the scientists back then had a god complex, and this would be rectifying their mistake.

zzo38computeryesterday at 11:17 PM

I think not quite, although many planets have the names of the gods. They called them planets due to their motion, so it is still called that. The use of the same word in different contexts can have different usages and different (but sometimes related) meanings. "Planet" is used differently in astrology than it is in science (astronomy); this isn't a contradiction (although, like any words, can sometimes result in confusion if you do not make the meaning clearly).