Do astrologers actually believe what they preach?

Great Debates
1

Disclaimer: I am not, and do not claim to be, an expert on astrology. I have done just enough research to determine that there’s no scientific credibility behind it whatsoever, and I’m hard-pressed to see how anyone could claim there is with a straight face.

That said, I can understand how gullible people could easily be sucked in. I think the majority of people who have their horoscopes cast or read them in the paper probably do believe what they’re reading, or at least believe that there’s some shred of meaning to it.

I can not, however, understand how a practitioner (one who casts and writes horoscopes) could believe in them. The act of writing a horoscope requires careful intentional ambiguity, an avoidance of verifiable fact, and a writing style that appeals to the vanity of the reader.

So are there astrologers that truly believe in the science behind what they do, and that truly believe that the charts they cast mean something? Or are all of the professional astrologers scam artists?

If there is a real, live astrologer on the board, I’d love to hear from you. It might help me to understand the other side of the story.

2

I don’t suppose it would be much different than a Minister preaching a sermon. Of course, in both lines of ‘work’ there would be scam artists, knowingly working the system for their own gain, and then those who have faith that the “signs” they “read” are divinely inspired and honestly believe in a force that is beyond them guiding their words and actions. I’m not trying to say in this post that any religion is right or wrong, I think it is all about what works for the individual, but I don’t see how astrology in particular varies from any other religion.

3

Consider a new astrologer giving readings to 50 people. Some of them will be very motivated to believe, and will give our astrologer positive feedback. The mildly skeptical ones, or the ones for whom our astrologer really messed up on, won’t return. So our astrologer will only hear from people convinced it is correct.

A psychologist - I forget the name, wrote in SI how as a young man he learned to read palms, and did so quite successfully at carnivals. In fact he was so successful he started to convince himself there was something to it. But then he reversed the sense of the readings, and his customers were just as happy and just as convinced he had powers. So, astrologers not as smart as him can easily fool themselves into believing. I’m not saying some aren’t con artists - just not necessarily all of them.

4

I’d also guess that most people begin studying astrology in order to get more information about their own charts. So the predisposition to believe is probably there from the start.

5

An astrologer who casts a horoscope is going to be drawing on previous source material for an interpretation- for stuff like “what does it mean if Jupiter is in Pisces?” They’re not making this stuff up from scratch.

If there’s ambiguity in that source material, or multiple opinions on what something means (which there are), there will be ambiguity in the finished horoscope, even if the astrologer isn’t trying to put it in there. Likewise, if the source material doesn’t have much in the way of verifiable facts, the finished horoscope won’t either.

6

I have known a few astrologists, me best friend was one. He completely believed in what he was doing and had a large following. Astrology, tarot cards, crystal balls, and other “tools” used by some spiritual people all have the same reason for being and the same way of working. There is no ambiguity, the information is not in the props. They have their place in this world like all other things including skeptics.

7

There’s a huge difference.

What a minister preaches in church is an article of faith. It’s unverifiable and unprovable.

Astrology claims to be science. It’s verifiable–verifiably false, that is. I absolutely guarantee you that if an astrologer draws my chart, it will either (a) contain demonstrably false information or (b) be vague enough to apply equally well to my neighbor. Or maybe both.

There’s no way to prove that God doesn’t exist.

There most emphatically is a way to prove that astrology doesn’t work and has no scientific basis.

Hi, Lekatt. This isn’t about skeptics. It’s not like ghosts, which may or may not exist. Skeptics doubt the existence or validity of something, but with astrology there is no doubt. It’s as utterly and completely bogus as you can get.

8

Here. Practiced for about ten years, taught, wrote, the usual. I will try to be informative, but I am not here so that somebody can preen their worldly skepticism at my expense. Already taken enough shit about this, thank you very much. (Not directed at you, IW, just fair warning because, sure as shootin’, somebody will want to show off how much smarter they are, been there, had that done to me, gets old in a big ass hurry…)

Does it work? Somewhat. The amazing thing is not that it works so fabulously well, but that it works at all. It shouldn’t, of course, it flies in the face of all reason that it does. But there it is.

Is it scientific? Of course not. There is no possibility of creating an experiment that would conclusively prove much of anything. Not everything is science, science is what it is, and a marvelous thing it is, too. But it isn’t the whole ball game.

As noted above, astrology is distinct from tea-reading. It is not simply a vehicle/focus for psychic capacity of the “reader”, it has certain rules, and you have to know them to deal correctly. Some people do use it as one might use tea leaves, and there’s nothing “wrong” with that, but it seems hardly worth the effort, since whatever psychic talents are, they don’t seem to require anything in particular, a chart might as well be a sand pattern, crystal ball, whatever. If you are going to rely on psychic ability, why bother with all that math.

How does it work? Haven’t the foggiest, got a bunch of crackpot theories.

How well? Not very well, sometimes, and sometimes so well its spooky. When I taught, I tried to steer clear of the “supernatural” aspects and treat it like a phenomenon that is interesting, but ill understood. As I said, it shouldn’t work at all, the fact that it does (strictly a matter of my own observation, you understand…)is one of the most interesting things I’ve seen in this life.

I have no truck, none whatsoever, with attempts to predict the future. The future does not exist as a fact, therefore its characteristics are equally non-existent. I absolutely refused to advise on decisions, that kind of karma I just don’t need.

So what good is it? Not much. Not practical. Damned interesting, and if that’s enough for you, cool. If not…whatever. Doesn’t mean shit to a tree.

9

Not to be the persnickety skeptic you wrote about in the beginning of the post, but if it only works sometimes, doesn’t that suggest to you that it may be random chance? If I say, “four years ago, something important happened to you, it involved water.” Your mind goes searching for something to fit.

Isn’t it possible that you mistook an occasional lucky shot for the presence of actual supernatural utility?
Back on topic, I knew an astrologer when I sold timeshare vacation homes years ago. I forget his name, but he had a PhD in Psychology and had created a system that supposedly allowed him to chart an organization like an individual. IE charting the US from its “birth date” to see when ups and downs in the countries good fortune will come.

I remember he was talking about it to me and wanted to show me more and I told him that I wasn’t really interested. He replied, “I can’t help you if you want to live in ignorance.” I honestly almost punched him. In any case, he really believed.

10

Absolutely.

But have you ever heard a sentence like this from a serious astrologer? (No, the two sentence sun-sign only blurbs in newspapers don’t count.) I haven’t. Even a basic natal wheel interpretation is far more detailed than that.

Good luck,** 'luci**!I don’t think I have it in me to actively help, but I’ll be over here lurking in your corner.

11

Well, that prompts the question, how do you know astrology works, at least works sometimes? What method did you use to demonstrate to your satisfaction that astrology works? When you declare that astrology is not amenable to scientific investigation, how did you determine that?

If we can’t evaluate the methods you used to reach the conclusion that astrology works at least some of the time, then what can we say about it?

Here’s the trouble. Human minds are fallible. And the easiest person to lie to is yourself. And the best way to sell a con is to believe the con yourself.

12

But suppose an astrologer prepares a chart for you, describing your personality. Would you be impressed if it was 90% accurate? Except I can do the exact same thing…generate a personality profile and 90% of people will rate the profile as highly accurate. The catch is that everyone gets the same profile.

13

Thanks for jumping in, elucidator. I appreciate it, and it takes some guts to proclaim a belief in something like astrology on this board. You don’t seem to be the “true believer” type, or the type that defends astrology as science, but I’d still like to toss you a few questions if you don’t mind.

Did you do it for a living, or was it a hobby for you?

When you were practicing, did you strongly believe in it? If not, did you share your doubts (or apathy) with your clients?

Why is the moment of birth more important than the moment of conception? This never made sense to me. It seems that the first contact between sperm and egg is a much more seminal (snerk) moment than the actual birth, which can slide a few days either way without affecting actual development of the child.

Why the separation into 12 distinct signs? It seems that children born minutes apart spanning midnight on the cusp between Taurus and whatever comes next would have much more in common that children born 30 days apart that are both Tauruses.

And, returning to the OP, were you actually writing the text of horoscopes, or taking content from someone else’s book? If the latter, then I understand how a believer can be a practitioner. If you were actually writing the text, then I don’t understand how you could do it without intent to deceive (I really don’t–that’s not written as an insult, I just can’t grok the concept).

Thanks.

14

I’d be more impressed if you handed me four, I felt one was 90% accurate and three were 10% accurate, and the 90% one the one you meant to apply to me and the others weren’t. That’s the impression I get of a properly prepared natal interpretation. Mine is right, my husband’s and my kid’s just don’t apply to me. And the same for them, the interps meant to apply to each of them and the ones that don’t.

I know there have been blind tests done where astrologers have been unable to identify famous people by their natal wheels. I don’t dispute or attempt to explain that.

15

But were you handed those charts blind?

Look at the recent stories about people’s perception of the quality of wine.

Tasters rank a $90 bottle of wine higher than a $10 bottle of win. But put a $90 label on a $10 bottle of wine and people rate it higher than the $90 bottle with a $10 label. They “know” which wine is supposed to be best, and so they rate the expensive wine higher, even when it’s really the cheap wine.

So you know which chart is yours, and so naturally you perceive it to be more accurate.

And the astrologer who prepared your chart probably didn’t prepare it blind either. If she knew you and your husband and your children she’s much more likely to be able to provide a more accurate chart than if all she knew about her subjects were their birth dates.

And so we have a simple proposal for a test of astrology. An astrologer is given the birth dates of a list of people, but told nothing else about them. The astrologer prepares charts for the people based solely on the birth date. Then the charts are given to a second party, and the second party will attempt to match the charts to the people. Can they match charts at better than chance? And the people on the list can be given the set of charts, and we can see if they are able to pick their own chart out of the set at better than chance.

16

The problem is, it will appear to work sometimes by chance. That’s why it’s important to be able to measure, document and do all of that other unsexy science-type stuff.

Then how is it possible for two skilled astrologers to look at the same “data” and come to two very different conclusions? If there was zero ambiguity, all (or a very strong majority) of practicioners would agree on the meaning of the star signs.

That’s because they saw the “e” missing on the label. :smiley:

17

Is that similar to why Kentucky Fried Chicken had to change their name to KFC…the mutated creatures they serve can’t legally be called “chicken”?

18

There is a lot of difference between the minutes apart and the 30 days apart. Your typical newspaper horoscope only uses the sun sign, which is based only on date of birth while a full horoscope takes into account a lot more. Year of birth, date, time, location and so on are included.

19

I’m not sure what you’re getting at, but that’s just an urban legend .

20

Don’t mind him; he’s had one too many glasses of win.