Is Astrology a Science?
68Further Reading
|
Astrology: A Cosmic Science
Price: $17.95
|
|
Quantum Astrology: Science, Spirit and Our Place in the Cycles of History
Price: $11.44
List Price: $19.95 |
|
Flensted Science Fiction Mobile
Price: $32.00
List Price: $60.00 |
|
Galileo 1300mmx160mm Dobsonian Telescope
Price: $329.99
List Price: $329.99 |
|
Moon In My Room
Price: $19.88
List Price: $29.99 |
|
A Space Viz Production - Planetary Defense
Price: $29.99
List Price: $29.99 |
|
Long Life Happy Life
Price: $0.99
List Price: $0.99 |
|
Galileo FS-80/K-800 800 x 80mm Yoke Mount Reflector Telescope
Price: $79.99
List Price: $159.95 |
ASTROLOGY – SCIENCE OR SPIRITUALITY?
Most people are familiar with astrology, the idea that the position of the sun, moon and stars can determine the make-up and personality of a person. Astrologers inform people that when, and where, they were born gives a road-map for their future personal development. The question is whether astrology can be considered to be a science, or is more akin to spirituality and faith. In this respect, I will use the strict definitions of what constitutes science, looking at the scientific method and the entire philosophy underpinning the very nature of science itself. This is not an attempt to debunk astrology, but to show that it is not a science, by any definition of the word.
In addition, I am going to restrict the definition of astrology. Most of us realise that newspaper and magazine horoscopes are a bit of fun, a long way removed from the intricately constructed and thorough birth charts researched by master practitioners. These are a fairer representation of the astrological field as developed since ancient times. Most of us read the daily horoscopes, but most of us do not take them too seriously.
Historically, astrology was the forerunner of astronomy. The Babylonians, the Zoroastrians of Persia, the Greeks and many of the great South and Central Americans civilisations made some highly accurate and sophisticated astronomical measurements, based around astrological beliefs. In this respect, the field was a ‘proto-science,’ a field from which a true science sprang, in much the same way that alchemy led to chemistry.
Whilst astrology continued in the East, in the western world, modern day astrology enjoyed a resurgence in the 1930’s, as a new fashion. Open pretty much any newspaper in the Western world and it carries a horoscope. Moving away from this, some astrologers have tried to claim that their field is a genuine scientific discipline, a claim refuted by the mainstream.
Looking at astrology in purely scientific terms, it fits none of the recognised scientific methods or criteria. Astrology has never stood up to a rigorous scientific process, and has never provided a hypothesis or theory that can be empirically tested. Astrology begins with an answer, and then attempts to find the evidence to prove it, discounting any contrary evidence. This is the opposite way to the scientific method, which begins with an observation of natural phenomena and then tries to generate and test hypotheses to determine the underlying causes.
Astrology is not falsifiable, one of the basic pillars supporting the philosophy of science. Any scientific ‘proof’ must be testable and refutable, and no scientific theory is regarded as ultimate and irrevocable truth. If evidence arises that contradicts previous findings, then the hypothesis must be modified or rejected. Social and physical scientists have conducted many statistical surveys and found no correlation between sun sign and personality.
Looking at falsifiability, the discovery of Uranus in 1781, Neptune in 1846 and Pluto in 1930 should have falsified the theory, implying that every horoscope and chart created before these dates was wrong. Astrologers moved the goalposts and incorporated the new information into their calculations, without question. Despite the evidence to the contrary, the astrologers refused to modify their theories; therefore, the field is not a science.
Scientific findings must be verifiable, in that other researchers can repeat any experiment exactly, testing the validity of the results. Astrologers often do not agree amongst themselves, so this, again, does not follow scientific protocol. Astrology requires belief, and is a spiritual pursuit rather than an empirical discipline.
So, according to every single scientific definition, astrology is not a science. Astrology belongs in the realm of faith and spirituality, not science. This is not to say that astronomy is wrong, and there is always the possibility of new evidence emerging to give empirical credence to the practice. At present, it remains outside the scientific process, and most astrologers appear to be quite happy with that.
By Sufidreamer, a fairly typical Pisces.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Agreed - I almost put a reference to Forer in there. Most astrology is BS, but I am certainly not going to debunk it completely. I do believe that there are astrologers, living in the remote places of the world, who know a lot of ancient wisdom, and I certainly would not place them in the same category as the Heat magazine astrologers! Like Sufism and the Cabal, it is a spiritual matter.
I don't totally dismiss astrology and I am a total cynic. One time, someone read my cards and told me that I was to take a trip across a river, and leave behind someone I loved. Those words came true. But for the most part I take everything as a collective, not a single instance, I know I sound crazy, but I think if people look, they will see many signs pointing the way. Good hub.
Come to think of it... I can't really see the connection of planetary movements to ones fortune. It is up to the man himself to chart his own course. Hmmm....
I would like to think so, but for me, control is really an illusion.
Thanks for stopping by, GoldenToad - good to have HubPage royalty visiting! Yup - not attacking astrology in principle, but it is not empirical in the strictest sense. Astrology is not a science, but neither can it be refuted by science, like any other spiritual belief. I had a star-chart done, once, and it did have some subtle connections. Sadly, I know many people who dictate the course of their life by what they read on some astrological website, or premium rate phone service. I have a problem with that type of exploitation, as it often targets vulnerable people. Much the same as many counsellors or unqualified therapists, really.
Needful Things - Thanks for dropping in. There is merit in that - I am a 'spiritual' person myself, but believe that a person must help themselves rather than waiting for divine intervention and miracles.
I agree with that, fully, people have to keep their eyes and mind wide open, otherwise they are letting someone else determine their path.
GoldenToad - Good to meet a likeminded person. I have seen many things that science cannot explain, and this is why I do not believe that it is the only way. One of my friends is a faith-healer and gets results. Not sure whether it is some unexplained force or placebo effect psychology, but the important thing is that he took a vow to make no money or personal profit from it. I am sure that many TV evangelists started off doing the right thing, but got sucked into the making money thing.
I have a friend, an older woman who is a gifted astrologer. Preparing charts and giving astrological guidance depends not only on the charts but also on the astrologer's intuitive gifts.
As for predictions I used to do psychic tarot readings for many years; online, with friends, at parties, in restaurants, and most often I would connect to the exact details, going on in the person's live which many true psychics can also do. However, when it came to the predictive part-often it would come to pass, but at other times it didn't. I always told my clients, the future is not written in stone, one can change the course of a situation based on what we do with a situation, how we help ourselves, or how we sabotage our good. After a 2 year hiatus, I am going to do spiritual counseling again, I think, but with a different slant-empowering the client and will try to not solely focus on predictions, it will narrow down my client base as it will be deeply spiritual, but its okay.
A Scorpio, but the Eagle expression. :)
Hi VioletSun
Good luck with the counselling - I have no idea whether such counselling is spiritual, or a case of helping people to help themselves, like a life-coach. The problem is that there are so many charlatans who are not much better than the Water4Gas scammers. Most genuine psychics and astrologers that I know detest such people, because they bring the whole field into disrepute.
A genuine spiritual counsellor, or priest for that matter, understands a little psychology, and realises the damage that can be done if used incorrectly. Not just having a go at spirituality, because I think that many psychologists are just as bad.
Yes, there are ripoffs and its a shame. We all really have the answers within, and we can learn to listen to our inner guidance, that's the best course to take.
I agree, it's not a science - and debunk away, I'd agree with you if you did.
Agreed - there is no harm in seeking external opinions, but the inner voice is the final arbitrator.
LondonGirl - Not going for the debunk, just stating that astrology is not a science. I believe in God, so using science against a spiritual belief would be a case of undermining my own position!
Hi Sufidreamer, I have to agree with you about astrology not being a science. It kind of starts out as a science when one calculates a chart and determines the placement of the planets according to longitude, latitude, and time of day or night, then it turns into mere interpretation that depends on what method you've learned.
I've studied astrology for nearly 10 years (off and on), and I was a member of a couple different astrology forums. Astrologers, and there are some great ones out there, do differ in their thoughts about nearly everything. Some believe in an equal house system and argue against those who use other house systems, others argue over orb allowance, and the debate can go on over every single aspect of interpreting a chart.
I think what most astrologers do is this: they study a method that they are most comfortable with, then they begin studying as many charts as they can get their hands on to test the interpretation methods they've learned. Over time you do begin to see a pattern of what works and what doesn't until you reach a point to where your interpretations are either very 'on' or at least very close. It's an extremely complicated process, and I don't consider myslef an astrologer, but I do know of some people who are so accurate that it's scary. :)
You did a great job here. Your writing is marvelous, and you presented a very logical view about how astrology is not a science. Bravo! :)
Hi Sufi! I'm with you that astrology is not a science, but I've always been kind fascinated in a childish way by the "magic", or spirituality, of it. I haven't got a clue about the "techniques", I don't know much if anything besides my sign, but I just find the whole concept romantic, if that makes sense. I don't know, the sun and the planets having an influence on the way things play out doesn't sound entrely farfetched, you know what I mean? :-) that's the spiritual side that I find romantic :-)
Thanks for a nice simple yet thorough explanation of the differences between astrology and science! Personally, I think astrology itself is more or less complete BS, but the people who are "good" at it often have very strong intuitive skills that make them great counselors despite their roundabout method of getting there.
That said, I am a pretty typical Taurus. :)
Thanks for stopping by, folks.
Pam: There is certainly a lot of skill involved in making birth charts and predictions. Scientists are little different - they also argue about the exact methodology and fine details. I have seen a room of distinguished professors argue like children!
Elena - Totally agree. Life would be much duller if there were no mystery. A little sprinkling of magic stardust goes a long way.
kerryg - That may be the crux of the matter. Not sure if astrology has any basis or not, although I have met some good practitioners. As you say, sometimes the psychology and placebo effect can be stronger than medicine.
An interesting read. I certainly agree that astrology is not a science, and most of its "perdictions" are so general they can fit to almost any situation - which, I believe, is exactly the purpose.
I have an old friend who is an astrology professor at a Los Angeles college. Obviously he believes it to be a real science. I don't argue the point with him.
The 60's astrology book, Linda Goodman's Sun Signs, was eerily accurate when, as my mother read, it predicted what my general likes, dislikes, personality traits, etc would be as an adult. I cannot deny this, so... maybe there's something there.
A Taurus
Thanks, ConstantWalker.
There do seem to be some traits possessed by certain signs. The Devil's Advocate position would be that because people are expected to show certain behaviours, they develop them. Not sure if I buy that, but that is just a personal observation, and certainly not scientific!
-Sufi, I did think on that as I was writing my comment, and I think that's certainly a possibility. Expanding on that - each and every child should be read a "Sun Sign chapter" (just make something up) predicting what an all around wonderful human being they will be as an adult.
My God! I'm a genius!!!
I am now going to deny your comment and steal your idea, marketing it as my own.
Good plan, though - worth a try. You should e-mail Obama straightaway!
Nah... and besides, it's already widely in affect. Expectant mothers and fathers reading to and playing music for unborn children. Even if they don't continue it after the kid is born (which many do), the child has already gotten the benefits.
Brains are beginning to wake up! I knew it would happen again... eventually.
I hope that all of the good work performed in reading to the unborn is not ruined by brain-rotting reality TV. :(
The only time I'd worry about the possible negative effects of something like astrology is when it's being used by someone in a position of great power to make decisions that affect the lives of many people.
It's interesting stuff and, as you say, new evidence could pop up at any time. Until then, it certainly couldn't qualify as science by any stretch.
Howdy, CWB.
Agree about that - I am a great believer in secularism, and this is no different.
It is always good to keep an open mind about such things, and understand that science has limits. Parapsychology is a good example of a field that is genuinely adopting the scientific method. Whilst there is little 'proof' of ESP and Telekinesis, researchers are still following the scientific method, and it is becoming a recognised 'abstract' discipline, like astro-biology.
Suf,
I believe in all sorts of paranormal stuff, but have never been on board with astrology. I do,however, believe that some people with special "gifts" might use all sorts of means to connect with the spiritual. Someday, I think we'll know more and accept more of these "gifted" individuals as a real part of our world. But Astrology as science; not so sure. But what do I know?
Madison
Hi Madison - Thanks for visiting.
Agreed - it is not a science. The paranormal is a very interesting area, and the field is prepared to subject itself to the scientific process. No positive results, as yet, but we understand little about the universe or about the human brain. Hopefully, we wil uncover a more, although a little mystery is never any harm and makes life interesting!
I believe the paranormal is far too complex to be measured scientifically. In science, you hold as many variables as you can constant to measure the effects of an event.
For example, you record temperature and pressure in nearly every chemical experiment, because we know that pressure and tempreature impact reactions. So, we standardize most reactions at "1 atmosphere at Sea Level" and "Room Temperature".
There are at least two problems with applying the scientific method to the paranormal:
1. We don't know the variables, much less how to measure them.
2. The variables we do know are outside of our control.
Meta-Physics requires a different skill set. And our western "worship" of science and our western obsession with rationality prevents that skill set from being fully developed.
My bad - I actually meant parapsychology, so will blame it on a senior moment! ESP, Telekinesis and similar fields can be broken into testable variables, and some elaborate experiments have taken place. This is becoming an increasingly recognised discipline, possibly even a genuine proto-science. Mind you, some people do not believe that psychology is scientific, so the debate will rumble onwards.
As for metaphysics....no chance. I just read one of Lebniz's metaphysical papers, about Monads. Impossible to quantify scientifically, although extremely interesting. I broadly agree on your last point - I studied science for many years, and received only a single lecture about the underlying philosophy of science. The majority of scientists know 'how' to do something but not 'why.'
Philosophy is sadly neglected in the Western World.
I agree Sufidreamer. Astrology is a joke. (no offense to the wackos that actually believe in this pseudoscience)
Although, in my desire to write a humorous comment to this hub, I did some research on Leo (my so-called sign). I was going to "barge in" on your hub comments and spout off a bunch of crap that would relate to the traits of a Leo. In doing this research I found that the traits of a Leo are quite accurate to my own. This is intriguing but not at all convincing. I suspect that if I read into the other signs I would also pick and choose traits that relate to my own.
By the way...about my plans for the humorous comment: I grew tired of trying to form a blunt opinion based on the Leo traits. I gave up.
Thanks for stopping by imadork.
Typical Leo shenanigans - barge in here, mess up my hub and then blame everybody else.
Had the same conversation with Constant Walker - Maybe there is some underlying cosmic reason for many of us acting like our starsigns. On the other hand, maybe we are expected to behave like the stereotype, and develop that way.
A Nature vs Nurture kind of thing.
You article is almost like the creation of man. People, who believe in god, believe that god made everything. People who do not believe in god believe in the science version of how the world was made. I personally think that astrology is the same. Yes I do believe astrology is real. But not in the form as money hungry people make it out to be.
Every one has a distinct personality about them. Even from the time that we can move, we show forms of our emotions, likes and dislikes. Almost like they way we are is predetermined. That predetermination is based from the elements of when we were born. Time of year, gravitational rotation of the earth, and stressors your mom goes through as she is carrying you.
I do not think that some of the great fortune tellers of the world are true. But I do have a belief that you can predict a certain amount of your future. While astrology is not a proven science, I do believe that it is part of who we are.
If I still had the personality I did when I was a baby I would be staring at some twirling thing while drooling on my chest and shitting in my pants. Thankfully, I do not presently do that although it is something to look forward to when I am a senile old fart.
six9k9 - Thanks for stopping by.
I think that I see what you are getting at
I did read an interesting theory, that it is not the time that you are born that is important, but when you are conceived. A baby meant to be born in the summer is going to need different survival attributes than one born in the winter, assuming 9 months gestation. There is some evidence to suggest that many mammals exhibit this trait, so it is not outwith the realms of possibility. I do have difficulty believing that it is related to birth - what about premature births?
imadork - I keep having senior moments, so senilty is not far off. So far, I have avoided soiling myself, although I do drool when I have drunk too much Ouzo.
Sufi, I saw on hubtivity that you disaprove of your own comments on this hub You really should be nicer to yourself. You're a great guy and I'm sure you have something intreresting to say!
Too much to drink - I keep arguing with myself. I always seem to lose the debate and end up punching myself in the head!
Sufi- In my opinion Astrology is a spiritual science. I say this because some wise saints due to there ability to transcend physical boundaries of time and space devised it. My father's astrological chart when he was born was devised to such accuracy about his joining Navy(which nobody had heard of in there near vicinity) and so many other things that it baffles many. Besides that in our community horoscope matching is done prior to marriage and to a great extent I feel correctly matched couples makes for a successful marriages(at least in our families till date that is). Thumbs up for a objective way of looking at the traditions that are still followed in some parts of the east.
Good hub. Glad you mentioned falsifiability and (by implication at least) the Criterion of Demarcation between Science and non-Science. Two things keep Astrology alive - 1. it has some attractive features - people would like it to be true. and 2. Astrologers have a vested interest in keeping it alive as it is their life blood.
CW - Thanks for dropping by. Your input is always valued.
I agree with the spirituality, but not the science. That is probably because Paraglider and myself have a 'stricter' and more technical view of the definition of science. There is definately a difference between the 'mass market' astrology and Eastern wisdom, and I am not going to criticise. The ancient Vedic astrologers developed many advanced mathematical techniques, and are worthy of great respect.
Paraglider - Thanks for visiting - The input of the Hubpage Philosopher General is always appreciated. I did skirt around the demarcation a little - a Hub may be appearing soon. In addition, I find the boundary to be a grey area. For example, I have a very liberal view, and believe that practical archaeology is very scientific in its methods. My physicist friend, on the other hand, refuses to accept psychology as scientific, and believes that biology is a quasi-science!
I am rapidly becoming one of Feyerabend's 'Scientific Anarchists!'
Hi Sufidreamer, jgrimes331 here. I read your hub and found it very interesting. However I think I may have only gotten myself more confused on the issue. I always thought Astrology to be a 'science' of sorts. Because I always believed that it had no place in Judaism and Christian religions.
Job 31:26-28 "if I have regarded the sun in its radiance or the moon moving in splendor, so that my heart was secretly enticed and my hands offered them a kiss of homage, then these also would be sins to be judged, for I would have been unfaithful to God on high." and in Second Kings, Chapter 17, verse 16-17; it tells how the Lord, through his Prophets, sent out a message across the lands of Assyria to the children of Judah and Samaria. Basically in laymen terms; to the Jews and the Muslims of that time period. The Israelites had lost there way and became idol worshippers. The name of the chapter is 'Israel Exiled Because of Sin'. This is what that verse has to say; "They forsook all the commands of the Lord their God and made for themselves two idols cast in the shape of calves, and an Asherah pole. They bowed down to all the STARRY hosts, and they worshipped Baal. They sacrificed their sons and daughters in the fire. They practiced divination and sorcery and sold themselves to fortune tellers doing evil in the eyes of the Lord, provoking God to anger."
Whether you believe this stuff or not. It does make you think that Astrology has no place in the world of spirits, spirituality or non-pagen religions. So doesn't it have to be an act of science?
Hey thanks for this opportunity. I wish you well.
Julie Grimes the Fideist
Hi Julie - thanks for visiting!
It depends upon how you define science - scientists have a very narrow definition of the word, and any field has to follow certain protocols and methods to be classed as scientific. Whilst the defining line between science and non-science is not always clear, astrology follows none of the accepted definitions.
Of course, somebody else may have a completely different definition of the word!
All the best to you, too. Look forward to reading more about fideism.
Newspaper horoscopes are worthless. (Had to say that.)
I happened to have been born in the part of June exactly halfway between the cusps, erego I'm supposedly a "true" Gemini when my personality really fits the description of a homebody Cancer. So I think astrology is useful as a way to liven up a party, but to consider it carved-in-stone "science" is BS. On the other hand, Sufi, I agree there are those who have studied (and have a deep understanding of) Eastern wisdom who can predict certain events or the *general* course of one's life. But I suspect such people are also genuinely psychic and aren't interested in monetary gain for having such a gift. That the average person can become an accurate astrologer by practicing drawing charts is like saying a teenager with a chemistry set can grasp quantum physics after a few (hopefully successful) experiments.
As for a person in power using astrology to make decisions that affect large numbers of people, that's *exactly* what happened during the Reagan administration. After the failed assassination, Nancy hired a full-time astrologer to read Ronnie's chart *every day*. He didn't make a move without this guy's okay. Trips and meetings were cancelled or rescheduled if this...person....said the aspects were unfavorable. Of course, the public knew nothing of this defacto president until Reagan was out of office, but I can't help wondering how many decisions that affected not only the American people but the world in general were really made by Nancy and her stargazer.
Hi JamaGenee - Thanks for visiting!
I like the quantum physics analogy - whilst I do not believe that it is a science, true astrology appears to be very complex, and practitioners require a lot of skill and experience. There is certainly a lot of wisdom buried deep within the spiritual side of many religions, but it is not easy to find. Like you, I am a firm believer that if people ask for large sums of money, then they usually spout rubbish.
I did not realise that about Reagan, the hero of the right. That is very scary stuff, that an unelected influence can dictate policy. No different than Rasputin or any other historical power behind the throne. A period of recent history best forgotten!
very nice hub again
Thanks, Lgali
Wonderful clearly written, clear-minded hub about a specific focus, thank you!
Blogging this on over to my the soul calendar blog where I'm working to gather lots of good articles about science and math and the like, so thank you! I see you have some more goodies I'll have to blog too.
As to astrology as a spiritual science, I'd say a definite no to that. Yes, I'm one of those annoying Leos with a heavy Scorpio influence I suppose... But the point is that Astrology as a proto-science is closer to a more accurate definition.
The way I've been observing astrology over the years is that it really ought to be classified as an art as it is subjective to interpretation. Some people are far more artful than others. You get that in any discipline, including science! :) Oh, well, my naughty two cents worth...
Thanks for the great read!
Thanks for stopping by, Denny - always nice to receive your comments.
Glad that you enjoyed he article, and thanks for the blog entry - you are more than welcome to post a link, if you want!
You are right about the artistic side - certainly in astrology and, to a certain extent, in science. Whilst areas like physics and chemistry are 'hard' sciences, psychology, social sciences and biology are always open to some interpretation. Two different scientists can look at the same data and draw completely different conclusions. Of course, how you present the findings is always an artistic process ;)
Hi Sufidreamer, I have seen lot of your comments on forum and they are really very good. So I just thought to give a look to your Hubs too. I found this one interesting. I think this is a science but we have a notion that no one can predict future and hence reject it completely. Moreover this science has still long way to go so far it's accuracy is concerned. Most of the times it is not accurate and this too becomes a reason no to believe it. It is same as other inventions and discoveries made in the field of science and technology. So long it was not brought to light no one believed in it but when it was proved to be true people started believing in it. No one thought about 200years back that we could fly but now we can same it the case here. One should not completely reject anything. Thanks for your Hub. Joining your fan club!
Thanks for dropping by, Packerpack.
Firstly, we must separate the 'newspaper' horoscopes from the more detailed ones. The horoscopes in magazines and newspapers are to vague to be of any use.
For the more 'accurate' horoscopes, I do not believe that they are scientific, in that they fit few of the criteria defining a science.
That is not to say that it is false or inaccurate - I make no such claims and have no idea! More that I believe that astrology belongs in the realms of spirituality than science. This may change as we uncover more about the universe, but for now, I do not believe that it is scientific.
I shall go and have a read of your Hubs, too!
It's a great hub Sufidreamer and I've read all the comments. I'm a professional astrologer and use the Sidereal system (vedic) which aligns more accurately with the position of planets and stars in the sky. For me astrology has always been connected to astronomy. I have allot of trouble fathoming why people say Pluto is in Capricorn when it is factually (according to NASA eg) in Sag. Visually you can see for yourself which constellation Jupiter is in, or Venus of Mars, but according to tropical it's not where it's supposed to be!!
I wrote my own short hub on Astrology a fair while ago on some of my views on the subject of horoscopes (tabloid) and astrology. But my main views I have left for another day because they are very complex. Atrology can be seen as a language for personality traits, but to define oneself by their Sun sign is ridiculous for several reasons. Firstly, it is more than likely your existing Sun sign is not your Sun sign at all. As there is a 23 degree difference between Tropical (tabloid) and Sidereal because of the precession of the equinoxes, the earth has a wobble and visually the alignments are not the same. You are likely to be reading the wrong one - of course it's not going to make sense. Secondly, you are not just your Sun sign, you are influenced by planetary forces at large. So you have to look at a much larger picture than Sun signs. That also applies to the Rising sign - geez, same problem there. My readings therefore do not focus on the Sun but the whole of the chart.
People generally are not good at understanding or knowing themselves, and only see a few traits, when in fact there is a diverse pallate of traits available. Most seem to live in a small box. We sometimes enlarge the box, but rarely do we step out of it and see what we are capable of.
The topic is very diverse, complex. I also don't want to sound like I'm defending astrology either. Each to their own. It isn't a science in the strict sense of science. I doubt it ever will end up in that category. How can you measure metaphysics with physical instruments and be satisfied? Astrology ties in the psychology which is what I mainly use it for.
I love cynics because they 'keep the bastards honest,' I'm quite cynical too. But I've always been fascinated by the stars generally so astrology, for me, is an extension.
Hi Jewels - Thanks for stopping by. It is great to have the viewpoint of a professional. Most of the genuinely talented astrologers (or Tarot readers, healers and witches) are even more upset by charlatans than anybody. They give you all a bad name.
I have seen too many unexplainable things to believe that science has the answer to everything, and I have an open mind about spiritual matters. The problem, for me, is when the 95% of cranks try to use pseudo-science to give credibility to their work, usually to prey upon the vulnerable. There is a world of difference between what you do and many of the dishonest people out there.
I liked your quote about astrology as a psychology, and I think that the best 'New Age' (I hate that term, but cannot think of anything better) practitioners are skilled at psychology and reading subconscious cues. The rest is metaphysical, and I certainly have no problem with that - I had a tarot reading once, and the reader was either a brilliant psychologist or had something special.
Just trying to keep the pseudo-scientists away - it shows that there is plenty of common ground, rather than an unbroachable fence!
Thanks for your fascinating and insightful comments!
Hey friend,
Loved this enlightening post :)
I agree with you and Constant Walker on the subject: I don't believe this fits our definition of a "science."
The astrologically ascribed personality traits and vaguely stated life processes for specific birth signs are very general and could be applied to virtually anyone, especially those who really want to believe that is describing them, as I know from personal experience. I can see how this would be tempting because believing it would help people make more sense of the mysteries of the universe, like there is some universal pattern laid out for us that we can discern from the star constellations at the time of our entrance into this world. It infers what we all want to know to be true: that there is some ultimate plan to our existence.
I'm not saying that I think astrology is completely bogus, as there are so many mysteries out there that I don't see how anyone could completely agree or disagree either way. I say I'm open to the possibility that there is some universal pattern and an underlying ultimate truth to this, although much of what we read and hear about astrology today may be largely exaggerated and hyped-up to fulfill consumer tastes and demands.
Anyway thanks for posting this, I love these topics!
missesMask :)
Well done.
Its funny how much astrology does take a hold on our civilization, though. NASA utilizes it among other arcane arts when creating "launch windows." Besides the science stuff, anyway.
But that probably has more to do with Werner Von Brahn and other NAZIs in this field.
G|M
I don't know if it could ever be a science but I do know that gravity from the moon affects human beings and other animals on the Earth. Why not gravitational sources from farther away? Maybe someone could do some experiments and see what we can learn about it. I certainly don't attach anything paranormal to the ideas, however.
Thanks G|M - I never knew about the NASA thing! You learn something every day :)
Thanks for dropping by, Ivan: That is why I tried to keep the definition of science purely technical. There are many things in this universe that science does not know - that may be one of them, and I would love to see some good experiments.
Unfortunately, there are many astrologers who use pseudo-science, which turns people against the idea.
I'm not sure how I missed this when you first published it but better late than never! I appreciated your thoughts on the subject and I think you did a great job of explaining why astrology is NOT a science. I agree, it's not a science, and much of it is not just bogus, but fraudulent.
That said, I have to say that I think the science/pseudoscience argument misses the point. It comes up because science is our most respected way of gaining knowledge about the world, and as such it has become the litmus test for respectability when it comes to any claims to knowledge of any kind. Like, yes, but is it science? If the answer is no, then we feel more comfortable rejecting whatever it is.
I think though, that many of these ancient methods (whatever you care to call them) of divination are more akin to storytelling traditions, and as such still do have value when practiced in a serious way. They do not use the reductive methods of science, they do not produce testable hyptheses, instead they connect the person coming for the reading (or chart) to the symbolic cultural world though story. Placing oneself in the context of the cosmos and having an important personal story used to be a major part of premodern culture. Oral traditions were vital. Myth was not understood as 'falsehood' but story-power, a story inflated by shared emotion and aspects of the natural world.
So I guess I better shut up before I write my own hub at your expense, but my point is, part of the reason these archaic 'sciences' look ridiculous today is that something has been lost. They are no longer seen in the cultural contexts from which they sprang. I do think that one reason the modern world has this runaway quality to it is we lack an oral tradition, a way to place ourselves correctly in relation to the world we don't understand, not just the one we do.
Hi Pam - always good to have your valuable input.
You raised an excellent point there. History and context is extremely important. Whilst modern astrology does not follow scientific protocol, ancient astrology certainly was a different animal. Many ancient cultures watched the stars, and some of the measurements that they made were fantastically accurate. As well as astrology, there was some sort of religious function attached.
I suspect that ancient astrologers were priest, scientist, historian and counsellor all rolled into one. In the modern world, there may be isolated places in India or South America where astrologers still keep to this tradition. In the modern world, we have such empty lives that we try to fill them with materialism and tacky stuff.
Pretty much with you on the myth stuff - I love Icelandic sagas and Homer, both based upon oral tradition and with a lot of historical fact mixed in there. Sadly, we make no attempt to place ourselves in a context and instead watch crappy reality shows about somebody elses life.
You are welcome to write a hub here anytime!
While the moon has effects on things like tides, and whileI'd like to see if there is any effect on animals & plants, I doubt that astrology will ever become a sciencein the true sense of that word.
Great hub that asks us to examine an intesting idea!
Thanks Ivan - always good to see you.
Must agree - I don't think that it will ever conform to scientific protocols. Certainly very interesting, and I am not going to completely debunk it, but move it into the spiritual realms.
Sufi - evening. According to my stars for the day (delivered by six different newspapers etc etc) I'm going to find love, have a row, win some money, meet an old friend (in Lisbon?), sort out some differences and spend an evening filled with romance. Wow :)
Astrology is something you believe in. Or not. It's a bit like the bible. People interpret it as they please. Plus if you go way way way back some believe that it's all based on the Kabbalah - numerology and the like. And numbers had to come before pretty much anything else ...
Great article Sufi - and another I've dragged me feet over :)
Evening Frogdropping - An evening of romance? - How did they know that I was on my way to Lisbon with chocolates, red roses and a dead animal poking stick.
Astrology is certainly very interesting, and I have been known to use the fact that I am a Pisces as an excuse for gross incompetence. Belief is the key word, but I do not like the charlatans who use it as a tool to extract vast amounts of money from people!
Thanks very much for the praise - always appreciated.
Sufi - It was pants ... but thanks for asking :) No old friends, no money etc etc.
Pisces huh? Taurus meself. Though my bull is a cross dresser. Somewhat into Aries. Digs a little Pisces. Likes to chin up with Aquarius.
You can see why I'm a puzzled little person ;)
And praise where it's due. I like to read well written articles. This was one of those.
Like my partner - I think you can contain yourself within your words. I on the other hand - blather ...
That is always the way - horoscopes promise so much, but nothing interesting happens.
Being puzzled is good - I life in a permanent state of terminal confusion, befuddled but happy. We have five cats, and we are not sure of their starsigns :)
Thanks for the kind words - I am an academic writer, so concise is good. Leave the creative stuff to you guys!
,
I don't know why, but I've always liked astrology. Plus my sign describes me very well and I'm a libra. Smart, pretty, can see through anyone, blunt and very honest to a fault.
Thanks for comenting, WR - good to see you.
Must admit, I fit all of the traits of a fairly typical Pisces - dreamer, mystic and a major pain in the arse!
I find astrology interesting, but I would not hire an astrologer thousands of dollars to determine which house I should buy. I do read the horoscopes from time to time, and it some parts of the libra description do fit me.
Agreed - some people take it to extremes. Mind that you stay away from Jewels - she will tell you that you are not actually a Libra!
A lot of smart people commenting here...wow...okay, here I go. Astrology, it intrigues the hell outta me, to say the least. I have studied the science/art/whatever for years now. Not in a freaky way though, just to cos I think they make good stories and movie screenplays to write about. God, help me. Everything I do is all for the damn movies! LOL.
But I liked your writing. I dont think I'm entirely a skeptic about astrology. The thing though is, I believe in the supernatural order of things, and if I believe that there are mysteries that behoves us humans - the stars and their billion constellations being one of them. hey, if there isn't any credibility to astrology at all, then how did the Wise men read the stars and figure out the Messiah was born...but then again, that story is for those who believe it. I happen to.
Very knowledgeable stuff there, Sufi. Good job.
Thanks for dropping by, Fiery - glad that you enjoyed the Hub.
I can understand about the movies - inspiration can come from the most unlikely of sources!
I must agree with you about mystery - there are so many things that we do not know. Indeed, there are millions of things that our minds cannot even begin to comprehend. The wise men were at that wonderful place in history where astrology and astronomy overlapped - the Zoroastrians were fine astronomers.
As for he Messiah - that really is a matter of faith - another of the many mysteries that keeps life interesting :)
Some very interesting comments to a very well written and detailed hub. My own take is that I do not believe it is a science and I doubt it will ever be recognized as such, unless they lower the threshhold for what is a science. Still, it is an old mathematical system that seems to take into account some generalizations about individual human beings. I wonder if it wuld work as well with people who live outside of Western culture?????? Chinese, Japanese and Indians and Africans, for example.
Thanks, Ivan - good to see you. I must agree - it is certainly not a science in the technical sense. Still, once you move away from the mainstream media, it is very interesting, and there is little doubt that the best practitioners need a lot of skill and knowledge.
I am pretty skeptical, but it is one of those areas where I keep an open mind. I am not sure about other cultures - I remember CountryWomen saying that it is an ancient art in India, Will have to ask Fiery about Africa - they must have some interesting ideas there.
I
Hey man! i really like this one! Its almost like you were in my head when your wrote this!
Hi Tien - Thanks for dropping by! Glad that you enjoyed the Hub. I do intend to visit yours, but I have a lot of work over the next couple of days :)
Love the last line: "By Sufidreamer, a fairly typical Pisces." Priceless ;)
Glad that you liked the humour ;)
Came across this hub when I was browsing Hub Pages instead of working... really well-written and hits the nail on the head. I have to confess that although I'm also a science graduate and have a fairly sceptical attitude to most things, I've always had a weird fascination with astrology without ever understanding why. A couple of years ago I plugged my birth details into a site called astro.com and ever since, I've checked my horoscope on it every day. It seems to fill a need.
Ah, a Pisces. Well then you will be interested to learn about the Sun Dagger http://www.angelfire.com/indie/anna_jones1/lost_da
Thanks, EmpressFelicity - It sounds like we come from exactly the same place - there is something intriguing about Astrology. I count myself as a spiritual person, but the key is that I never try to rationalise and justify belief - faith and science are different animals, although it is possible to use both!
Cheers, Storytellers - how did you know? That was an absolutely fascinating read. I hope that they manage to raise the funds to save the site - it would be a shame if it were lost to future generations :)
BDazzler says:
11 months ago
I'm going out on a limb here and risking alienating myself from my more conservative brethren. It says in Genesis that God placed the stars in heaven as a sign of the times: Genesis 1:14-19 ...
I think that means "major events" and I think that for the most part, individual horoscopes are primarily a scam.
Betrem Forer, in 1949 developed this "all purpose" astrology reading upon which most"newspaper astrology" is based:
“Some of your aspirations tend to be pretty unrealistic. At times, you are extroverted, affable, sociable,while at other times you are introverted, wary and reserved. You have found it unwise to be too frankin revealing yourself to others. You pride yourself on being an independent thinker and do not acceptothers’ opinions without satisfactory proof. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety, and becomedissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. At times you have serious doubts as towhether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. Disciplined and controlled on theoutside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside.”“Your sexual adjustment has presented some problems for you. While you have some personality weaknesses,you are generally able to compensate for them. You have a great deal of unused capacity whichyou have not turned to your advantage. You have a tendency tobe critical of yourself. You have a strongneed for other people to like you and for them to admire you.”
Forer’s subjects were each given a personality test and told they would get their results back after the tests were examined. When the results were finally returned, Forer actually gave each subject the same generic profile. On a scale of 1 - 5 (with 5 being the highest), the profile received an average accuracyrating of 4.3 from the subjects.
Sadly, the true ancient art of astrology may be lost to us.