Shopping Cart -

Your cart is currently empty.
Continue Shopping
This website use cookies and similar technologies to improve the site and to provide customised content and advertising. By using this site, you agree to this use. To learn more, including how to change your cookie settings, please view our Cookie Policy
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
Pocketmags Digital Magazines
   You are currently viewing the European Union version of the site.
Would you like to switch to your local site?
Digital Subscriptions > Skeptical Inquirer > Nov Dec 2016 > LETTERS TO THE EDITOR


Astrology’s Bait of a Caring Cosmos

Geoffrey Dean’s SI article “Does Astrology Need to Be True? A Thirty-Year Update” (July/ August 2016) got me thinking back to the early 1980s when I learned to set up horoscopes using an ephemeris. I learned to debunk the art of reading someone’s chart soon after, but Dean’s SI article by the same title thirty years ago was a great help.

I noticed when doing a reading or having one done that astrology’s complicated richness in variables allows for just about anything in interpretation. My conclusion was that a seasoned astrologer will never be wrong if that astrologer understands that the goal of a reading is to satisfy a client through agreement. Clients of astrologers reminded me of volunteers performing for a stage hypnotist. The latter entertainer requires people on stage willing to comply with suggestions whether they enter a trance or not, trance being relative to how much peripheral awareness remains in the volunteer. The horoscope with all its angles, symbols, and signs provides a distraction, a place to focus awareness in a cosmic playground that feeds into narcissistic traits—it is all about you that the starry sky universe cares about.

Any caring person wants the universe to care for them and talk to them whether through languages of religion or science. We coax nature to yield her remedies and she often does. This may be an artifact of reciprocity, one of the most basic moral principles in any religion or ethical social system. Astrologers tap this principle as bait using slogans such as “as above, so below” and “stars incline, they do not compel.” Astrologers use the bait of a caring cosmos of stellar relationships underscored by mythological themes to invite their clients into a conversation with “the God” or “the Universe” that speaks through the astrologer. A curious client will likely find any number of useful or agreeable suggestions and insights—a few good ones are enough to justify the cost

So, what’s the harm? The harm becomes apparent when the mask of authority falls off the face of a charlatan posing as the voice of the universe. Then the client wonders what nonsense he or she may have absorbed after so many often-expensive sessions with an astrologer: Have I been acting like a Virgo with an Aquarius ascendant because my chart under one system said I was one? Did my parents in India agree to arrange my marriage to an abusive man based on an astrologer’s opinion? Turning to astrology is never neutral. It is an influence game with a host of labels and suggestions that can change behavior for better or for worse but under a constricted worldview. It is like pretending to pour the cosmos into a bottle and serving it up during a reading—something I have called metaphysical snake oil. Unlike the licensed therapist, the astrologer’s art lays the entire responsibility on the client and her relationships with the stars. Thus, the astrologer can beg us to not blame the messenger if things do not work out based on the message.

Purchase options below
Find the complete article and many more in this issue of Skeptical Inquirer - Nov Dec 2016
If you own the issue, Login to read the full article now.
Single Issue - Nov Dec 2016
Or 349 points
Annual Digital Subscription
Only € 3.16 per issue
Or 1899 points

View Issues

About Skeptical Inquirer

40TH ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION PART II ODYSSEYS SCIENTIFIC SKEPTICISM NUCLEAR POWER and the Psychology of Evaluating Risk MICHAEL MANN and the Climate Wars Superstition Masquerading as Science