Is the scientific approach relevant to astrology?
Abridged from articles that appeard in Correlation 12(2), 1-4 (introduction); 13(1), 11-18 (results); and 13(1) 19-52 (commentaries and rejoinders).
Abstract -- Summarises results from the first of four collaborative discourses that attempted to reach consensus on topics in astrology that, despite their importance, had seldom been debated or even recognised. This first discourse asked Is the scientific approach relevant to astrology? and was prepared by recycling each draft among astrologers and scientists until consensus was reached. The consensus was: Yes, but only to those parts testable by observation. What about causality? To test whether a person fits his chart better than a control requires no causal assumptions whatever. Why do scientists and astrologers diagree on whether astrology works? Mainly because they tend to look at different things. Scientists are mostly concerned with controlled tests whereas astrologers are mostly concerned with client satisfaction. So their views can disagree yet both can be right. (The other three discourses looked at philosophical problems; theories of astrology; and artifacts; with results summarised elsewhere on this website.)Full article including this abstract 5m 51kb Home Fast-Find Index