Find » Education » Debunking Astrology: Myth in the Mo...

Debunking Astrology: Myth in the Modern Era

By theBarefoot, published Nov 28, 2006
Published Content: 89  Total Views: 205,398  Favorited By: 534 CPs
Embed:  
Rating: 4.4 of 5
If this were the SAT, the correct answer would be “Tom Cruise is to acting as astrology is to science,” barely believable. Astrology has been dubbed a pseudo-science, but more accurately falls in the realm of religion. Astrology has its true believers that will not be dissuaded, but the objective of this article is to lay out the facts of the matter and pose a few thought-provoking questions. Astrology is bad science at best and poor religion at worst.

A brief history

Astrology began as early civilizations tried to codify the natural world. These efforts led to the first calendars in pursuit of agricultural goals. Knowing that the appearance of a certain star on the horizon was the harbinger of Spring was crucial to the farming cycle. Predicting the Nile’s annual flood was pretty handy for the ancient Egyptians.

By reversing the order of cause and effect, it is a small, illogical step from “Spring comes as Antares (alpha Scorpius) rises at midnight,” to “Antares brings Spring.” It would be as logical to say, “The Sun causes hunger,” because you get hungry every day around noon.

Astrological systems were developed independently in every culture around the globe. Each was unique to its society. Beyond the need for a calendar, the Egyptian, Persian, Chinese, and Mayan astrological systems have very little in common. Each expands into its own mythology of gods and alchemy.

Today’s western astrology inherits most of its tenants from ancient Mesopotamia (Persia) and has been refined through Greco-Roman mythology with a healthy dash of medieval alchemy thrown in for good measure. This brings us to the first point against astrology as anything more than fancy.

Debunking Astrology: Myth in the Modern Era
Debunking Astrology: Myth in the Modern Era

The classical western zodiac

Credit: www.spaceandmotion.com

Copyright: www.spaceandmotion.com (GNU free)

Resources
Comments
Comments 1 - 15 of 23
Next >>
 
OK - I no longer have to worry about the results of our star charts that painted a pretty scary scenario happening about two years from now. I'm taking the horoscope off my desktop, and I am no longer going to buy lottery tickets with the numbers on the back of fortune cookie papers. I totally laughed at your runaway experiment: http://thebarefoot.wordpress.com/2006/12/02/runaway-experiment/

Posted on 02/25/2008 at 9:02:17 AM

 
Well, you got the attention of any astrologer worth their Saturn. Fortunately, for me, I don't believe there's only one path to the truth. Nor do I presuppose there is only one truth. I also didn't create the Earth or thought, so I guess there are a lot of mysteries left to solve. Or better yet, there are a lot of mysteries left for everyone to ponder, huh? Good luck with that Pluto in Capricorn this year. ;)

Posted on 01/16/2008 at 9:01:56 AM

 
you have done the same research that I did , LET ME TELL TO ALL ASTROLOGERS OF THE WORLD ONE THING DONT BEFOOL INNOCENT PEOPLE ,DO A BETTER BUSINESS.

Posted on 10/24/2007 at 11:10:00 PM

 
Lynn: I actually did just that...had a chart done. If you're interested, here are the results: http://thebarefoot.wordpress.com/2006/12/02/runaway-experiment/

Posted on 01/14/2007 at 12:01:00 PM

 
Hi - Please see the astronomers debating astrology and science at http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?t=50974

Posted on 01/12/2007 at 4:01:00 AM

 
As a professional astrologer, I have a standing offer to skeptics. Let me do your chart for free, and then see if there's anything to it or not. Surprisingly, not one skeptic has taken me up on this offer. What have you got to lose? www.astrodynamics.net

Posted on 01/11/2007 at 11:01:00 AM

 
Now you're connecting the dots TS. The lucky lotto numbers will lead the way. ;)

Posted on 12/06/2006 at 9:12:00 PM

 
Of course, at the same time, you could substitute "religion" for astrological system in your thesis that they can't all be right. At least there haven't been too many wars that have been fought over astrological differences, although a source I would trust with my leftover soggy tacos tells me that he can prove Bush decided to invade Iraq due to a typo in a Chinese fortune cookie. The really odd thing about that story is that Bush was eating Italian food at the time. No, wait, really odd thing about that story is that the Italian food was being served at a state dinner for Tony Blair. Weird.

Posted on 12/06/2006 at 8:12:00 PM

 
Thanks cuzzin' JT. You're sitting 3 feet away and could have just said that. @@

Posted on 12/01/2006 at 12:12:00 PM

 
Barefoot, I can tell from you writing style that you must be capicorn. Here is your horoscope for today...Life gets demanding about now, so pay attention and be on your toes. Multitasking types like you rise to this challenge quite easily. In fact, all of this activity makes you feel like you're living life to its fullest.

Posted on 12/01/2006 at 9:12:00 AM

 
This is a very good article and a very interesting topic. Kudos to you randy...as usual.

Posted on 12/01/2006 at 8:12:00 AM

 
Hey, good article! You did your homework and have all the background material. You draw the reader logically to the conclusion. Good work!

Posted on 11/29/2006 at 9:11:00 PM

 
There is definitely something to astrology. I am not sure how it all comes into play in our lives, other then to say I know its not from a horoscope in the newspaper. I have had a natal chart done and it is very accurate. I believe that the day you are born is significant to your personality and the things in life that you like or dislike. Anyway, great research.

Posted on 11/29/2006 at 7:11:00 PM

 
I was trying to keep it under a 1000 words, JKC. ;)

Posted on 11/29/2006 at 3:11:00 PM

 
I always wondered what was so special about base 10 numerology. Ever notice how you never run into hexadecimal numerologists? You start out by lambasting the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy, but fail to criticize the perenially popular, yet equally arbitrary and irrational, proof of a monotheistic God from intelligent design. You proceed to cite Greco-Roman polytheism as an example of an untenable belief system. At least the Greeks and Romans didn't have a theology built upon an insoluble paradox: an omnipotent, benevolent God who nonetheless permits evil things to happen. To paraphrase a number of prominent thinkers: "We are all atheists; I simply believe in one fewer god than you do."

Posted on 11/29/2006 at 2:11:00 PM

Type in Your Comments Below - (1000 characters left)

Submit your own content on this or any topic. Get started »
Comments 1 - 15 of 23
Next >>
Advertisment