From www.astrology-and-science.com 2m 0g 34kb Home Fast-Find Index An In-Depth Philosophical Critique of Contemporary Western Astrology By Ivan W Kelly and Don H Saklofske Abstract -- The focus of this article is the philosophy of Western astrology as practised since the start of the 20th century. In non-Western countries astrology evolved under different cultures with their own metaphysics and social conditions. Their astrologies differ from Western astrology, and studies that happened to support them would likely create problems for Western astrology. Therefore we also consider in pssing the philosophies of non-Western astrologies. A birth chart starts with planets. But their interpretation is largely based not on astronomy but on the mythological attributes of gods that the Greeks linked to the planets. Because they saw Mars as the god of war, Mars in the birth chart is interpreted as if it had the attributes of the Greek god of war with keywords like Energy, Heat, and Activation. But other cultures had other ideas. Thus, the Aztecs saw the god of war as the Sun, not Mars. In Mesoamerica Mayan wars were triggered by the movements of Venus, nor Mars. Less directly, the Sun is masculine in French but feminine in German. And vice versa for the Moon. In other words Western astrology's associations did not start from empirical observations but are based on analogy, metaphor, and Greek mythology in general. Like similar practices (Tarot with special cards, palmistry with hands, graphology with handwriting, numerology with numbers,tasseography with tea leaves) astrology gives supernatural significance to ordinary objects. Which can intrigue curious minds but is open to potential disconfirmation on many fronts -- theoretically, conceptually, philosophically, and empirically. As a result, the interests of believers are instead maintained by public appeals to experience ('astrology works!') and by announcing new extravagant findings or new research programs. But we have been there many times before. Given the extravagant claims (as above so below) of astrologers, the claims should be easy to confirm. In fact over 1000 studies have been conducted since 1900 on mainline astrological ideas, roughly half by astrologers anxious to find support for their claims, but nothing commensurate with the claims and independently replicable has emerged. This awkward result is ignored by astrologers, or is dismissed out of hand ('we know astrology works!'), or is submitted to more and more complex arguments to explain why supposedly obvious astrological effects are so difficult to uncover. It is like claiming your house lights failed due to changes in one of the supposed properties of electricity rather than a dud globe. The present critique goes beyond such evasions to focus on Western astrology's philosophical foundations. By which we mean the deep-down arguments on which today's practice depends. In what follows we uncover many philosophical weaknesses missed by the astrological literature. They include astrology's competing assumptions, internal disagreements, problems revealed by time twins and by wrong charts working, and a pervasive uncritical acceptance of anything goes. They boil down to questions anyone could ask of astrologers ("what would convince you that as above so below was mistaken?"), but are never answered. The bottom line is that Western astrology, despite its long tenacious existence, is both scientifically and conceptually bankrupt. It does not give us knowledge not already known. You can skip the details by jumping to page 95 Full article is a 1.4 Mb pdf download. No registration or login is required. The pdf has 117 pages under 54 headings, 2 figures illustrating meta-analysis, and 599 references.
From www.astrology-and-science.com 2h 2g 1400kb Home Fast-Find Index |