That reply was to the charge that it was either an anthropomorphic conception of the cosmos, or a spiritless universe that are the conceptual/philosophical frameworks available to someone who would try their hand at making talismans. I think it was superficial that those were the only options given. The points I gave wasn't about astrology specifically, although I did use some important axioms of astrological practice as reasons for someone's experimentation, as one can be a non-theist and still practice astrology.
I recommend reading the Philipson Interview with the researchers. If somebody wants to try statistics, let him study the subject and start applying it. The only positive scientific studies on the matter concern seasonal and sun sign astrology. Read seasonal biology. That and the Gauquelin studies can hardly be called astrology.
http://www.astrology-and-science.com/d-phil2.htm
I actually remember reading this vaguely some years back, I'll be going through again with new eyes soon. When you just came to the forum, you were speaking about a "scientific astrology". What is your position on that currently?
What is your opinion on this attempt at marrying statistics with astrology?
https://astrologyresearch.co.uk/about-capricorn-research/
That would be more akin to religion. Again some scientists say that one should not concern with the subjective, but only with those matters which are objective and capable of scientific testing. Science gets rid of the subjective entirely, that is why you test using double-blind trials and placebos.
When I say subjective, I mean it in the sense of objective reality of the inner world of a human (yeah, I know). More akin to psychology. But psychology as a scientific field isn't held in the highest repute anyway, perhaps because it's field of study is the psyche, which necessarily a subjective reality, but nevertheless a reality to every human.
I think that a study of the spiritual is taking it one step further, and I mean the approach that a hard occultist would take to the subject, not a mystical or religious person. Things such as spiritual physiology (Chakra system, Dan'tian) and actual contact with spiritual forces through the imagination/astral. Corroboration and verification amongst practitioners of their experiences, while guarding against cultish behaviour, confirmation bias and group-think. Easier said than done, but occultism isn't a mainstream endeavor and many of the practices are given along secret lines, as you mentioned.
That is certainly part of the beliefs underlying those texts. The Aristotelean/Ptolemaic cosmos is part of Hermeticism. It is a modern myth that belief in gods necessitates an acausal conceptualization of astrology (synchonicity) rather than the gods operating through celestial causes.
Whole societies live on and perpetuate themselves through myth though. If this modern myth is sufficient for some individuals to practice astrology and talismanic magic based on astrological principles, they are engaging with the subject from a non-theistic conceptual framework.
Certainly, but the literal meaning is also crucial to the understanding.
Yeah, and it's a valid and congenial way for many, as the many fundamentalist movements indicate. There exists those sects who completely ignore the literal interpretation of holy scripture, and there's a constant tension between those two camps, like the heretical movement of Gnosticism and the actions of the Wahhabi movement in the early 1800s against Sufi sacred tombs, for example. One doesn't have to engage with a faith from an anthropomorphic standpoint - here's how Paramahansa Yogananda describes God for example -
http://yogananda.com.au/gurus/yoganandaquotes03b.html