Is Astrology rubbish? - a very good article

Hi everyone!

I wanted to share a very good article about Astrology with you. It's been written by a professor of History of Science (not an astrologer), and it gives some historical background on astrology. Also, it explains why dissing it without knowing it is not only silly, but a demonstration of ignorance.

What Exactly is Accomplished by Asserting “Astrology is Rubbish”? by Darin Hayton

This article is interesting because it's not about 'debunking the evil skepticals', but exposing certain historical misconceptions people usually disregard when throwing rocks at astrologers.

Here in my country, while we are generally open to many different spiritual practices, it is true that in more 'educated' social groups someone who seriously believe in Astrology is seen as dumb or ignorant. People are curious, but at the same time they are careful to imply that they don't take you seriously. Some people are even aggressive (specially young people, in my experience) - it seems they were a bit too brainwashed by Richard Dawkins, lol!

Not that I want to convert others - one should believe in what makes them happy. But I often am confronted with the same misconceptions presented in the article, and have to answer questions like 'what about the 13th sign???', 'X is a Gemini like me but I am not like him, how do you explain that?' or 'my horoscope told me today I'd earn money, where is it?'. *le sigh*

I feel like printing a copy of this article to all these people, lol! You don't have to love or agree with Astrology, but at least have some respect for its historical importance. It's the mother and grandmother of many of our 'rational sciences'.

I hope other will enjoy it too!

Hi Marina, I read the article and I realize that astrology may have been so threatening to people of science because like it or not, the topic still holds fascination for millions. In newspapers, I keep looking up my astrology for the day but I got disappointed because I found out that in my country, some newspapers just invent the horoscope for the day ... And I really do not find this a fair practice.

However, no matter what skeptics say, I do have a healthy respect for astrology. I know that some of our past presidents consulted astrologers who actually helped them make so e decisions. I actually see astrology as providing me choices and options o. How to deal with life's circumstances. I' m not an expert and am just learning about it now because of the Thoth tarot, I can see it's significance in this area.

poopsie said:

Hi Marina, I read the article and I realize that astrology may have been so threatening to people of science because like it or not, the topic still holds fascination for millions. In newspapers, I keep looking up my astrology for the day but I got disappointed because I found out that in my country, some newspapers just invent the horoscope for the day ... And I really do not find this a fair practice.

Click to expand...

I am graduated in Journalism and I have been told by all my teachers that ALL newspaper horoscopes are invented. Some even use a random generator to get the messages. Not fair at all. And unfortunately it makes astrology sound silly - almost scam - to people who don't know it well.

poopsie said:

However, no matter what skeptics say, I do have a healthy respect for astrology. I know that some of our past presidents consulted astrologers who actually helped them make so e decisions. I actually see astrology as providing me choices and options o. How to deal with life's circumstances. I' m not an expert and am just learning about it now because of the Thoth tarot, I can see it's significance in this area.

Click to expand...

I think astrology can help you, but not create your life for you. It's a knowledge designed to help you, not determine you, your life, your actions.

All in all, Astrology is a grandmother of many sciences. Many respected scientists from the past were astrologer and alchemists and they were not ashamed of that. When some scientists and skepticals say 'astrology is rubbish' without even studying its history and understanding its contributions, they are kind of spitting on the giants that came before them... not very nice.

There is a thought hanging around the scientific community that belief in metaphysical is clear indication of a deranged fellow whose theories cannot be taken seriously anymore from the day he or she announced their support for the metaphysical. Yet the most brilliant men in history have viewed mythology with respect and the modern world would not get the way it is right now without these brilliant men. Sir Issac Newton, Nikola Tesla, Wernher von Braun, just to name a few.

A while ago news report has US gamers cracking the puzzle in AIDS research that stumped scientists for years. No, I do not think book learning should be condemned, but you see a clear indication textbook methods requires extrapolation via imagination to get further. Logically, if the scientists accepted occult and integrated their methods with the metaphysical, would not more of these "scientific breakthroughs" have occurred? Yet humanity has relied too much on serendipity, accidental discoveries, to advance medicine and so on.

IMO, it is this adamant anti-pseudoscience arguments that hold humanity back. These things simply have to go.

Sorry for rambling.

I never cease to be surprised at how 'unscientific' is the rubbish these scientists come out with They either fail to do the basic background research and hence literally don't know what they're talking about, or worse still they do know and deliberately mis-represent. Given the number of times criticisms relating to precession or 13th signs are repeated and answered you would think that genuine scientists would by now understand those criticisms are valueless.

If they are going to criticise Astrology on scientific grounds they could at least attempt to collect some scientific evidence - design research frameworks, define terms, advance hypotheses that are testable, gather evidence, draw conclusions and have those experiments replicated. None of this is actually done, instead we get polemics - their opinions delivered as such carry no real weight at all

To be fair, actually doing that is extremely difficult, and I seriously doubt that it is possible, as Astrology is not easy to define in observable terms - Dave and I both practice Astrology but our methods are different - does disproving the value of my methods ipso facto disprove Dave's?

Also to be fair, Astrologers are often not their own best friends here. The ubiquity of those awful horoscope columns no doubt helps to sell newspapers but they have precious little to do with Astrology and, as Marina points out. are often fraudulent Yet that doesn't many professionals lending their name to those columns.

There's also many Astrologers who deliberately set out to claim a scientific basis for their Astrology, ignoring Kibeth's good point about metaphysics. I take the view that there is no mechanism or force or influence which directly links the planets with mundane events, that is the planets do not cause or influence observed events. What the do do is to mark time - the Hellenistic Astrologers called them 'Chronocrators' - Time Lords As John Frawley points out in 'The Real Astrology', Saturn transiting the MC does not cause your business to fail - what causes it to fail is bad business management and practice Saturn's transit simply marks the time when the pigeons come home to roost Ye all of us at one point or another are given to talking about the planets as though they did 'cause' things to happen.

There's also the issue of the Astrologer as 'consultant' If you go to a doctor and she advises you to stop drinking alcohol because there's a high probability that you will develop cirrhosis of the liver if you carry on as you are doing; then is the doctor's clinical judgement called into question if you stop drinking and don't contract cirrhosis? Obviously not Yet if Frawley's business person had been advised by an Astrologer that the business might fail by the time Saturn crossed the MC, unless action was taken, the link between Saturn and business failure would be broken if the advice was followed. In both cases (Doctor and Astrologer)the prediction made is conditional on things going on as they are - that no action will be taken by the patient/client If the advice is acted on then both Doctor and Astrologer can claim to have bee successful Astrologers work with clients (whether professional, or friends and family) they rarely read charts blind - Astrology requires context, if the advice helps to prevent a personal catastrophe, can it be dismissed as 'Rubbsh'?

At the end of the day science (as we understand the meaning of the word today) is the over-arching ideology of knowledge in Western societies because those who rule can control the behaviour of their societies, and is no more an informative king of knowledge than any other, be that myth, religion, or what have you. Scientisits, and those who fund scientists, such as those who rule, must diss other types of knowledge in order to gain control. If we all went around beleiving what ever we wanted how could those who rule get us to do as they wanted?

Today scientists say one thing and we all do that, tomorrow they say something else, and we all change and do that, and this has held true for all groups throughout history who have used knowledge to get people to do as they wanted. I think there is no problem believing in any form of knowledge but in order to get that knowledge into perspective it is necessary to look beyond to see why they are saying as they do..what is their motive in getting you to believe what they are saying?

When any kind of knowledge is used by man there is always an aspect of power involved, and that holds true for all kinds of knowledge, whether it is science, astrology, religion, myth, literature, art, anything.

Interesting article. Makes some good points.

My personal view on why scientists act this way is this -- astrology makes scientists uncomfortable.

Scientists like things that make sense. They like logic and order. Things that can be reduced to mathematical equations, can be tested, and can be predicted. They like theories that can be proven in a lab.

Astrology doesn't fit this system. So scientists can't figure out how astrology works. They do know, down in their hearts, that it does. But the fact that they can't explain WHY it works makes them jittery. They are not comfortable with the mysterious and the unknown. They aren't at ease with a discipline that resists their rules. It pulls the scientists out of their comfort zone.

So since they can't explain how it works, they just claim that it doesn't. They take the easy way out. If you can't explain how something works, just say it doesn't. And you get to accuse the believers of being the true wacky ones.

When scientists talk about astrology, they are operating outside of their domain. Science is the study of the physical world, but astrology belongs to the metaphysical world. Science can't explain astrology because astrology is not scientific.

On the up side, it's nice to see that Science and The Church actually have something they can agree on.

LOL @ the above.

Right you are with scientists hating being associated with the metaphysical. And when they DO try to investigate the Sun Signs they will insist on calling it a silly thing like "seasonal biology" or somewhat.

Basically the scientists feel they're confronting "Flat Earthers". Science has it the Earth is spherical with their proofs from what technology and photography tell them, but there still exists a population of people who INSIST the Earth is flat, against all scientific evidence and photos. Confrontations of the like will prove wearisome.

Thank you all for your insights!

You are right, I think the greatest problems is the scientists and skeptics do not understand the first thing about what they are criticizing. They don't bother to sit down, study the history of Astrology, the many ways you can use Astrology, the different methods and all these complexities. They throw everything into the 'newspaper horoscope scam' box and go from there.

Not scientific AT ALL.

There's another article, this one more aggressive, written by an Astrologer. It's interesting too, but less detached than the one I posted before. It's called Debunking the Debunkers, by Valerie Baughan. She received a challenging feedback from the CSICOP (Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranorma), which led to a second article Re-bunking the Debunkers.

These were written in 1998... it seems nothing really changed in the last 13 years or so. Skeptics and scientists still think that saying 'Astrology is obvious rubbish and beliving in it is a sign of dementia' is a good enough argument against it. Granted, many Astrologers still haven't found a good way to deal with the constant questioning... honestly, when I read some Astrology websites I think that Astrologers don't really help themselves. It's not through words that their work will get more respect - it's through actions. And sadly the seriousness of many Astrologer's words gets lost in the superficiality of their actions (like those magazine/newspaper horoscopes, the sign compatibility websites, the mystical yadda yadda they attach to every astrological interpretation etc.)

It is a problem of both sides, but as a student of Astrology, I wish scientists would first try to learn all that I am learning, before throwing rocks. It's not half as easy - or as foolish - as they believe it to be.

I fervently wish that people would not speak of scientists as if they all fit into the same box. That's like a scientist saying that all astrologers are crackpots.