How does Astrology work?

Reality · Oct 12, 2006

Hi guys, I'm really curious about something: How does Astrology actually work? This may not seem interesting, but bear with me.

If I understand it correctly Astrology claims that the planets and moons of our solar system, and our star (the sun) and maybe some other stars as well influence human personality. I don't understand this. How can inanimate objects, heaps of matter, influence whether a person becomes for example shy or outgoing? How does that work? Apart from a tiny bit of gravitational attraction (remember the distances we're talking about are huge), I don't see how those objects could in any way interact with us.
And another point: the position of the Sun is claimed to influence human personality. But it's relative distance doesn't actually change according with it's position as seen from earth, that's just an optical illusion caused by the fact that earth is rotating. So why are some people more influenced by the Sun then others, while there's no real change in the Sun's relative position?

Thanks in advance, I hope to learn something about astrology.

sam · Oct 12, 2006

Reality said:
Hi guys, I'm really curious about something: How does Astrology actually work? This may not seem interesting, but bear with me.

If I understand it correctly Astrology claims that the planets and moons of our solar system, and our star (the sun) and maybe some other stars as well influence human personality. I don't understand this. How can inanimate objects, heaps of matter, influence whether a person becomes for example shy or outgoing? How does that work? Apart from a tiny bit of gravitational attraction (remember the distances we're talking about are huge), I don't see how those objects could in any way interact with us.
And another point: the position of the Sun is claimed to influence human personality. But it's relative distance doesn't actually change according with it's position as seen from earth, that's just an optical illusion caused by the fact that earth is rotating. So why are some people more influenced by the Sun then others, while there's no real change in the Sun's relative position?

Thanks in advance, I hope to learn something about astrology.

I kept asking myself the same things when I was studying it. How can this possible be valid? How do space rocks possibly affect human affairs? I couldn't answer myself at the time and still can't. What I found in astrology, however, was a poorly-represented and widely misunderstood science. I've seen enough in my own chart and others' to come to the conclusion that beyond any reasonable doubt, astrology is a powerful force. How it works is beyond me, but you can get a testament to its validity by asking those who practice it.

PYXIS · Oct 13, 2006

These "Space Rocks" are actually conscious beings. Conscious beings create energetic fields of intention, and interact with each other...the whole universe is conscious...and works in harmony.

Reality · Oct 13, 2006

sam said:
I kept asking myself the same things when I was studying it. How can this possible be valid? How do space rocks possibly affect human affairs? I couldn't answer myself at the time and still can't. What I found in astrology, however, was a poorly-represented and widely misunderstood science. I've seen enough in my own chart and others' to come to the conclusion that beyond any reasonable doubt, astrology is a powerful force. How it works is beyond me, but you can get a testament to its validity by asking those who practice it.

Thanks for you honest answer.
But why is astrology a science, if it's beyond logic? The idea of science is to make logical and falsifiable claims, which may then turn out true or false. Would you agree that this is not the case for astrology, and that it therefore is no science?

PYXIS said:
These "Space Rocks" are actually conscious beings. Conscious beings create energetic fields of intention, and interact with each other...the whole universe is conscious...and works in harmony.

Consider the sun: it is a heap of hydrogen and helium. This material is compressed so fusion reactions can occur. That's all it is, a machine that turns one element into another and produces light and heat in the process. There is no being or consciousness involved. Nothing can live on/in the sun, nothing but inanimate matter can be observed. If you still think the sun is a being, then that's religion not science.

Firemoon · Oct 13, 2006

If you can shift your perspective to a less mechanistic or hydrolic view, it becomes easier to see what "As above, so below..." signifies. That means that it's not about rocks in the sky that are magnetizing us to do certain things in a certain way (although some of that does go on, tides, seasons, Sun-Spot activitity, etc., etc.).

Here's how I explain it sometimes. If you and I synchronize our watches (assuming they're both working), I stay in New York City and you go to Albany, no matter how far away we get, I can look at my watch and know exactly what your watch says. Now noone would think to say that my watch is exerting strong magnetic force on your watch and forcing it to go at a certain speed. They're synchronized. They go at the same speed. They have something vital in common and therefore run at the same pace. Just so with the movements of the various astrological factors against the celestial sphere. We're synchronized. We go at the same speed. We have something vital in common and therefore run at the same pace!

How exactly it all got synchronized this way, what force or forces are responsible for it and what keeps it running so damned precisely, down to the last technical and esoteric detail remains, to my mind, a beautiful and profound mystery. But like all such beautiful and profound mysteries, if I can utilize it and come to even the beginnings of an understanding of it, I'm fulfilled.

A great deal has been written and theorized about this over the ages, from the most mechanical to the most rarified and esoteric and back.

Enjoy the quest

Firemoon

Firemoon · Oct 13, 2006

Hi "Reality"

>>>Consider the sun: it is a heap of hydrogen and helium. This material is compressed so fusion reactions can occur. That's all it is, a machine that turns one element into another and produces light and heat in the process. There is no being or consciousness involved. Nothing can live on/in the sun, nothing but inanimate matter can be observed. If you still think the sun is a being, then that's religion not science.<<<

I'm sure you'd consider Einstein a scientist. Now imagine, if you would, waking up on a warm beach and watching that 'heap of hydrogen and helium', that "light and heat ???machine???" coming up over the ocean while you consider these words:

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed."

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

"Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts."

I may be wrong, but I would suggest, "Reality", that your interest in Astrology is more than a simple, semantical foray into the subtle distinction between Religion and Science.

Firemoon

unukalhai · Oct 13, 2006

Words from two good men, both wiser than I...

Stephen Arroyo said:
One objection to astrology that is often heard from "scientists"
who actually do not want to consider it remotely possible
that astrology could be valid in any way is the idea that those
who practice astrology cannot show any "cause and effect
mechanism'' whereby the planets could exert any "influence."
Apart from the question of whether astrology should be considered
only within a limited causal framework, the best refutation
to this attempt to dismiss astrology is to explain that, as
Dr. Jacob Zighelboim, M.D., Associate Professor at the UCLA
School of Medicine stated in a lecture I recently attended,
throughout the history of science "the hardest thing to define
is mechanism." All sorts of workable scientific principles and
techniques and many kinds of medicines are employed routinely
throughout the world without there being any understanding
of how they work.

This skepticism and antagonism toward astrology is just a
somewhat more forceful expression of the hostility that materialistic
science and its short-sighted proponents and worshipers
heap upon many branches of spiritual tradition, healing arts,
philosophy, and the more ancient forms of psychology and personal
guidance. Unfortunately, this unimaginative, narrow approach
to human potential and to the central traditions of human
thought has for some time dominated the major power centers
of Western society, including the academic world which has the
ethical obligation to preserve and study intellectual and cultural
traditions and to emphasize the open-minded search for truth.

Dane Rudhyar said:
The present-day astrologer's concern about "raising"
astrology to the acceptable level of a "science" by means of
statistics and other analytical tools worshiped in our official "factories
of knowledge" (universities) will not produce a more constructive
approach to the problems faced by the astrological consultant
in relation to clients. It is more likely to make such a relationship
less effectual because, in order to be really effectual, it
must be a relationship of person to person-and science does not
deal with individual cases, but with statistical avemges. Science
does not deal with human values, but a person comes to an
astrological consultant asking for help. He always unconsciously
asks for help even if he is consciously motivated by curiosity. He
comes for help with his sense of unique individual selfhood, even
if his stated problem seems a common one; and it is with this
sense of self that the consultant must deal. For we are all our own
most basic problem; and astrology should help us meet it objectively
and serenely.

Solastro · Oct 13, 2006

Um yes.. I would have to aggree particularly with unukalhai..

But I also think some of the others have part of the truth there too.. there certainly is a mysterious element to why this whole Universe exists.. just how did we get here etc.. ah philosophy et al.. Anyway an interesting book to read is Liz Greens.. *'The Astrology of Fate'.. I find her books fascinating.. as she hooks us into the Jungian world of symbols & archetypes.. the Soul.. the Psyche.. etc etc.. & the whole strange idea of **syncronicity.. also quantumn pyshcis is leading us down a very stange path indeed.. as to the nature of so called 'reality'.. as we have understood it.. this just makes the Unverse a much more strange place than we ever imagined.. the strangeness of the quantum world etc..

Anyway just for further interest I asked the 'Sabian Oracle'.. (on this website) in the spirit of syncronicty.. ie. divination.. How does astrology work?.. my answer was *6degCap.. TEN LOGS LIE UNDER AN ARCHWAY LEADING TO DARKER WOODS.. ah suggesting that the astrological symbols are deeply connected to the realm of 'the unconscious psyche'.. aha... a good clue.. Anyway I read the following from my Sabian Symbol reference.. (interpretations by Dane Rudyer & Mark Edmund Jones) *'Illimitability of experience, as man moves from completion to ever greater fulfilment. Keeness in knowing. Thouroughness. *When positive.. high competence in the interpretation of lifes purposes or unusual persistence in employing it's ramifying potentials effectively. *When negative.. fear of experience & bondage to mystery.'

Yes there you have it.. another persepctive...

Yes it seems.. much study.. persistence & experience is the only way...

Sanem · Oct 15, 2006

Reality said:
The idea of science is to make logical and falsifiable claims, which may then turn out true or false. Would you agree that this is not the case for astrology, and that it therefore is no science?

Well, we don't know how black holes work, yet we scientificly accept that they exist

.

Or atleast we hope they do

.

Perhaps next year we'll discover that they don't

.

Oh boy, not very reliable, this science stuff, it can't even explain to us the workings of the universe...

Reality said:
If you still think the sun is a being, then that's religion not science.

Ah yes, relgion, the stuff were people who know better tell you what's what, and you believe them.

And than 100 years later scientists look back and go "by the second comming of Jezus, people back than were stupid, they actually believed astrology didn't work...".

PYXIS · Oct 15, 2006

I am by no means a religous person, however I do believe there is a god-force that flows thru our universes, a conscious entity, and that everything in the universe possesses a degree of consciousness......this is what allows our universe to flow in the harmonic manner it does....perhaps we look at the flow of the universe too scientifically, thus we fail to see the true magic of the spiritual <not the religious>aspect.

Perhaps the 'eye' of true knowledge lies in the mysterious (mystical)concept of the cosmos.

"Those who only see the stars as something above the head miss the true eye of knowledge"
Nietsche

unukalhai · Oct 16, 2006

No matter if you go to the analytical extreme of science of the nebulous extreme of religion, astrology is acknoledged...

One of the greatest scientists is quoted as embracing astrology from a scientific standpoint...

Albert Einstein said:
"Astrology is a science in itself and contains an illuminating body of knowledge. It taught me many things, and I am greatly indebted to it. Geophysical evidence reveals the power of the stars and the planets in relation to the terrestrial. In turn, astrology reinforces this power to some extent. This is why astrology is like a life-giving elixir for mankind"

... And the bible doesnt make it past the first chapter of the first book without confirming the "lights in the firmament" are for signs...

Genesis 1:14 said:
And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years

FishNChips62 · Oct 16, 2006

From: http://www.randi.org/jr/02-09-2001.html

Recently, an astrology group has been repeating on the Internet an old canard about Albert Einstein, who they claim wrote:

"Astrology is a science in itself and contains an illuminating body of knowledge. It taught me many things, and I am greatly indebted to it. Geophysical evidence reveals the power of the stars and planets in relation to the terrestrial. In turn, astrology reinforces this power to some extent. This is why astrology is like a life-giving elixir to mankind."
Former astrologer Geoffrey Dean, writing to Ivan Kelly, renowned expert and critic of astrology, said:

"Re that Einstein quote. This is a good example of astrologers quoting each other nth hand, but with nobody ever checking the original quote. In a letter in ‘Correlation’ June 1991... I chased it back to a book (in French) by the late Swiss-Canadian astrologer Werner Hirsig, ‘Manuel d'astrologie,’ where the quote appears in French in the preface, but with no source given. From there it was quoted by Solange de Mailly Nesle (1981), from which it was quoted by Tad Mann (1987) and Percy Seymour (1988), and from there ever onwards seemingly without end.... Various people including Solange, Percy and myself have checked Einstein's writings and biographies but have been unable to verify it, so Solange and Percy have deleted it from later editions of their books. His biographies contain nothing to suggest that Einstein had any interest in astrology, and its style differs from that of authentic Einstein sayings."
Dean ended by suggesting that the purported quotation should be disregarded until authenticated. Dr. Michael Shermer, head of the Skeptics Society, chimed in with:

According to Alice Calaprice, Senior Editor at Princeton University Press and an editor on the Einstein Papers project for the press for the past 20 years, this astrology quote, like so many others attributed to Einstein by people in order to gain credibility, is totally bogus. In fact, it is in her edited volume THE EXPANDED QUOTABLE EINSTEIN ... under "Attributed to Einstein," along with hundreds of others just like it, such as "If the facts don't fit the theory, change the facts" and "preparing a tax return is more complicated than relativity theory." ... Under astrology, Einstein did say: "The reader should note [Kepler's] remarks on astrology. They show that the inner enemy, conquered and rendered innocuous, was not yet completely dead."
To amplify the naive opinion of Einstein, expressing his conviction that astrology was not to be taken seriously and was now devalued, I will quote from an 1896 edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica (just donated to the JREF by James Harter) on the subject:

Astrology, the so-called science by which various nations, in various ways, have attempted to assign to the material heavens a moral influence over the earth and its inhabitants.... Even at the present day a few may be found who, from a superstitious reverence for the past, or the spirit of contradiction, pride themselves on their adherence to the belief of stellar influences. It is no longer necessary to protest against an error which is dead and buried ...
Au contraire. Every celebration or assumption of the demise of any specific form of superstition or pseudoscience, whether framed by an Einstein or the editors of an encyclopedia, is followed by a groan of dismay when that notion proves itself a Hydra....

I quote these observations of Dean, Kelly, Calaprice, and Shermer here so that the reader may recognize that when properly looked into, such mysteries readily yield to research and reason.

I am only quoting, not expressing any opinion ^_____^

Reality · Oct 17, 2006

Firemoon said:
Just so with the movements of the various astrological factors against the celestial sphere. We're synchronized. We go at the same speed. We have something vital in common and therefore run at the same pace!

1) Is that really true? To claim that two things always happen at exactly the same moment requires very strong data. Could you show me such statistics? Without them your claim is meaningless.
2) Even if such data exist you'd have to show there aren't alternative explanations. For example there could be some astronomical phenomenon that only happens in spring, so astrology would claim that this phenomenon causes people to feel happy. But in fact people feel happy because in spring the weather gets warm and dry. Synchronicity by itself doesn't proof anything.

Firemoon said:
I'm sure you'd consider Einstein a scientist. Now imagine, if you would, waking up on a warm beach and watching that 'heap of hydrogen and helium', that "light and heat ???machine???" coming up over the ocean while you consider these words:

"The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed."

etc

Why do you have a problem with my description of the sun as an element converting machine? That's all it does: convert one element into the other. Why is this a problem to you?

Your Einstein quotes are nice but they don't contain any arguments. Sure it's nice to experience certain emotions, but they don't justify unlogical claims (if that's what you meant to say with them).

Delboy said:
The science is recording the rising, culminating, setting and anti-culminating of the 'space rocks' but the art is delineating the stories they tell, whether by deities, energies, or any other symbolic meaning ascribed to them.

There's a difference between describing the symbolic meaning of objects and describing any synchronical relationship. The latter is not art but science, it's statistics. As stated above, you need good data to show that two things to happen at the same time.

Sanem said:
Well, we don't know how black holes work, yet we scientificly accept that they exist .

There's a difference between knowing something exists and understanding something. For ages we knew the sun exists, but we didn't understand how it works. If you don't believe that we know black holes exist then you should have a look at the Nasa or Esa website, we even have movies of them in sucking up a nebula.

Sanem said:
Oh boy, not very reliable, this science stuff, it can't even explain to us the workings of the universe...

That's cheap. There will always be things which we can't explain, but this doesn't mean that those things we can explain with "this science stuff"(sic.) are unreliable. Or maybe you know a more reliable way of finding information then "science stuff"?

PYXIS said:
I am by no means a religous person, however I do believe there is a god-force that flows thru our universes, a conscious entity, and that everything in the universe possesses a degree of consciousness......this is what allows our universe to flow in the harmonic manner it does....perhaps we look at the flow of the universe too scientifically, thus we fail to see the true magic of the spiritual <not the religious>aspect.

I'm sorry but believing in a god-force and a conscious universe (what's that?) sounds like a definition of religion.

unukalhai said:
No matter if you go to the analytical extreme of science of the nebulous extreme of religion, astrology is acknoledged...

One of the greatest scientists is quoted as embracing astrology from a scientific standpoint...

... And the bible doesnt make it past the first chapter of the first book without confirming the "lights in the firmament" are for signs...

You think the 'analytical extreme of science' acknowledges astrology?

I don't know what you mean with this, but strict logical positivism could be a candidate. By Popper's definition this comes down to the following: something that can't provide falsifiable hypotheses is nonsense. So saying "the universe is conscious" is pure nonsense, it doesn't allow us to deduce falsifiable hypotheses. These hypotheses must then be checked and checked again, in a way that can be repeated (something that only happens once is no proof). Once it has been checked numerous times by several different scientists the hypotheses becomes a theory, which is supported but not proven.
Could you show me how astrology fits this description? For example could you show me some hypotheses deduced from astrology which have been tested?

And could you tell me who this 'great scientist' is who embraced astrology? I would be very interested in his/her arguments for astrology.

And if the bible 'confirms' something then that really doesn't mean anything to me. It's a book written by uneducated people 2000 years ago, they didn't even know what stars are.

unukalhai · Oct 17, 2006

William Blake in The Marriage Of Heaven And Hell said:
He's a fool who wants a proof of what he can't perceive;
And he's a blockhead who tries to make such a one believe.

Max Planck said:
new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it."

This thread would be a great cantidate to be locked.

unukalhai · Oct 17, 2006

Reality said:
And if the bible 'confirms' something then that really doesn't mean anything to me. It's a book written by uneducated people 2000 years ago, they didn't even know what stars are.

I suggest you educate yourself before calling others uneducated.

Sanem · Oct 18, 2006

"Oh boy, not very reliable, this science stuff, it can't even explain to us the workings of the universe..."

Reality said:
That's cheap. There will always be things which we can't explain, but this doesn't mean that those things we can explain with "this science stuff" are unreliable...

oops, my mistake; my fault for putting up a mirror that did not reflect science's self image of perfection, how dare I...

sorry to spoil your dream, but science is unreliable, and always will be. to believe otherwise would be... well, religion

Reality · Oct 18, 2006

unukalhai said:
I suggest you educate yourself before calling others uneducated.

Pardon me but I think in say 1500BC education was quite horrible or non-existent. The authors of the Bible didn't understand the world, they had no idea at all what it looked like and how it worked. Therefore I'm not impressed if they agreed with astrology.

Sanem said:
"Oh boy, not very reliable, this science stuff, it can't even explain to us the workings of the universe..."

Quote

Originally Posted by Reality
That's cheap. There will always be things which we can't explain, but this doesn't mean that those things we can explain with "this science stuff" are unreliable...

oops, my mistake; my fault for putting up a mirror that did not reflect science's self image of perfection, how dare I...

sorry to spoil your dream, but science is unreliable, and always will be. to believe otherwise would be... well, religion

You're trolling and I didn't provoke it. In response to my arguments against astrology you tell me science is unreliable (too?). So let me repeat my earlier question, do you know a more reliable method of producing knowledge then the modern scientific method? If not then you'll have to accept the fact that science, even though it's not infallable, is the best thing we have to understand the universe.

But please get ontopic again, we were discussing how astrology works.

Howl · Oct 18, 2006

But please get ontopic again, we were discussing how astrology works

Reality, is that really a discussion you're keen on having? It doesn't appear to me that you're interested at all. Seems that you've already achieved what you were looking to achieve with this thread. I think it invites ignoring even more than it needs locking

. You can easily learn more about astrology by self study, if you have any intention to do so.

Sanem · Oct 18, 2006

Reality said:
You're trolling and I didn't provoke it. In response to my arguments against astrology you tell me science is unreliable (too?). So let me repeat my earlier question, do you know a more reliable method of producing knowledge then the modern scientific method? If not then you'll have to accept the fact that science, even though it's not infallable, is the best thing we have to understand the universe.

But please get ontopic again, we were discussing how astrology works.

You're trolling too I think. You're intention was never to learn how astrology works, but rather to prove that it doesn't. Problem is you're slightly outnumbered.

And I'm not having a discussion, I am mocking you. You come here convinced of your self-righteousness, questioning a believe I live by, yet which I test for myself every step of the way.

So I do the same to you. What makes you so sure that you're right? What gives you the autority to say that science has all the answers? It doesn't, never had, and never will. As such I do not concider it worthy enough to use as an argument, I stopped using logic in discussions long ago, logic has no place there, the only question is who can shout loudest. So I shout, and so do you.

By the way, I do am honestly thankful to you, you did teach me something about the power of Mars in Gemini.

Arian Maverick · Oct 18, 2006

By the way, I do am honestly thankful to you, you did teach me something about the power of Mars in Gemini.

Amen to that!

I'd give my own two cents to this thread, but frankly, I don't believe I need to argue the validity of astrology any more than I need to argue the validity of my existence...

And to answer (or not answer) Reality's original question: it is enough to know that astrology works.

EDIT: I thought it may be interesting to ask this quesiton of the Sabian Symbols' Oracle with an open mind:

How does astrology work?

A rabbit metamorphosed into a fairy (nature spirit).
23º Scorpio

233__(23°)
PLACID WHITE RABBIT METAMORPHOSES INTO A DANCING ELF Revelation of unexpected vital urges latent in all beings. Great creative potentialities. Capacity for self-maintenance.

___*When positive, the degree is the thorough self-conquest by which an individual subordinates his naive and animal impulses to his ideals and aspirations, and when negative, undisciplined escapism and complete distortion of attitude.

Arian Maverick

How does Astrology work?

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member