Astrology the unique piece of the jig-saw that doesn't seem to fit.
- Why isn’t astrology part of the mainstream?
- Why are so many, otherwise rational people so irrational in condemning it?
Over 500 years astrology moved from being central to the academic system to being outcast from mainstream thinking. How did this happen? The answer lies in the history of astrology and how slow astrologers have been to adapt to the crises caused by advances in our knowledge and philosophy.
- The Causes of the Decline:
- Three major astronomical discoveries challenged the very basis of astrology:
- Precession: As a result of the discovery of precession of the Equinoxes by Hipparchus around 130 BC, western astrologers opted to work within a tropical zodiac based on the solar system instead of a sidereal zodiac based on stellar positions. This tropical zodiac is a mathematical construct used to position the planets on the ecliptic. Some believe that using the Earth's orbit within the Solar System as a coordinate system is more appropriate than positioning the planets relative to the distant stars. Without knowing whether the distance or size is a factor in the mechanism, this remains speculative. What is without question is that both mapping techniques are accurate and valid even though they use the same terms for different signs. It is rather like comparing an Imperial Gallon with a smaller US Gallon - same terms for different measures, but both systems work.
- Copernican System: As people grew to believe in a heliocentric cosmology with the Sun at the centre (16th to 19th century), they started to question a geocentric system like astrology. Stephen Hawking claims "When it was discovered that the Earth was not the centre of the universe, astrology became impossible". [Lecture in India 2001] This might have been a popular criticism of astrology by astronomers in the 18th century but is it was not correct then as it is not correct now. It would be like asserting that a map of your locality is only viable if it is oriented around your nearest regional centre.
This new Heliocentric model was a revolutionary and shocking revelation for astronomers, philosophers, religious authorities and many whose minds could not imagine anything other than a flat-earth as the centre of the Universe. At the time, the reaction to this truth was mainly ridicule, anger, fear, resistence and prejudice rather than investigation and rational enquiry. It was only after the sceptics died that a new generation were able to grasp a Sun centred cosmos. The two leading proponents of the Copernican System, Galileo and Copernicus practiced astrology and saw no incompatibility in the two systems.
Strangely, this development had no effect on the calculations of the birth chart. Being able to account for retrograde motion astronomically made no difference to astrological interpretation. Astrology benefitted from superior calculations and epemerides (Planetary tables). Some astrologers now use heliocentric charts to analyze world-wide events like the pattern of seismic activity. However, natal astrology requires a horoscope based around the location of the individual. This requires a celestial map with a terrestrial centre. Until we are born on the Sun (or in the Galactic Centre), a geocentric natal horoscope placing the individual in the centre of his or her universe, makes perfect sense.
- Discovery of the Outer Planets: The greatest shake up of astrology came with the discovery of Uranus. The system worked neatly with seven ‘planets’ for thousands of years. Now, it had to be reworked and at a time of the Age of Reason where astrology was seen as magickal predictive art for the benefit of credulous monarchs that no longer fitted a democratic and scientific world. Astrology, which had up until then enjoyed a crucial role in education, was dropped. Over time astrologers discovered that Uranus was connected with science and technology and the sign of Aquarius. Rather than undermine astrology, the discoveries of Neptune and Pluto have greatly added to our understanding of the zodiac. In my opinion, the zodiac is still missing pieces of the jig-saw puzzle.
- Astrology has long been seen as subversive in the eyes of the Church. The Church has had a history of unease about the power of astrology and at different times declared it as heresy. There were Papal Bulls against astrology in 1586, 1681 and the recent Pope John Paul II condemned reading of horoscopes.
- Prediction at odds with a world of free-will: Nowadays, most practicing astrologers allow for individual free-will and try to identify potential and opportunities. Only a small part of astrology (mundane or financial) lends itself to prediction. However, the tradition that the ‘stars determine fate’ was totally out of sync with the changing consciousness during the Age of Enlightenment. Today many people still expect astrology to be predictive and see it as a failure that astrologers do not make predictions.
- 18th century astrology did not fit into the evolving academic curriculum, which was divided into the Arts and Theology (Humanities) and Science. Science was emerging as discipline of precision, predictabilty and mechanisation.
- The Legacy of this Decline
- Academic outcast: Being out of the academic loop for over two centuries and without funding, astrology is increasingly judged from a position of ignorance and prejudice. Like 'chinese-whispers' information has become warped over time. This information is often taught in schools by astronomers whose main source of information are astronomy books, which recycle old myths. Stephen Hawking's suggestion that astrology failed in a heliocentric system is a typical ancient myth.
- Media: This bias extends to the media who either publish sensational Sun-sign astrology or dismissive articles. Even sceptics accept that newspapers will distort the conclusions of their findings and then the hoax will circulate unchallenged. The BBC is regulated so that reporting astrology has to be either entertainment or present a ‘balance’ of views. This means that there is no scope for broadcasting a television series that will explain what astrologers do and what astrology really is.
- Bias masquerading as scepticism can even infect top scientists and otherwise respectable scientific journals, who prefer a flawed test debunking astrology to a real test verifying astrology. [More ...]
Why it is no longer acceptable to say astrology is rubbish on a scientific basis.
Robert Currey
www.twitter.com/RobertCurrey
|
 |
 Main Astrology News Page. Information, stories, theories and facts.
Index to past articles Over 50 articles relating to astrology.
|
