Astrology: Science-Fiction or Fact?


For centuries, people have argued whether or not astrology is a reliable method of determining personality or predicting future events. There seem to be three positions that people hold within this argument: hard believers, skeptics, and astrology deniers. 

A significant reason that I do not like to entertain astrology-deniers is because studying astrology is supposed to help one understand themselves as well as others. I find it somewhat rude to try and debase a person’s ability to make sense of humanity and the surrounding world. Because I am an autistic person and sometimes struggle to understand people’s motivations and emotions, astrology has been a great resource for me. By looking at someone’s chart, locating their Mars sign, and taking note of what position it is in, I can understand how someone expresses anger and passion. I personally believe that is a very beautiful and intimate way to know someone. 

Skeptics on the other hand come in multiple different forms. Some explain that while they enjoy astrology and horoscopes, they only use it for fun and do not understand it to be reliable. Others say that while they know little about astrology, they are still on the fence due to past experiences with accuracy along with convincing arguments from scientists. 

No matter what one believes, there is one thing for certain. Astrology does exist, as it is used by millions of people across the world and has been used for centuries. It is estimated that the sum of astrological ideas were cultivated around 330 B.C., or around the time that Alexander the Great conquered Egypt. Astrological ideas are older than the New Testament, which is guessed to have been written circa 335-360 C.E. Whether or not someone thinks that astrology is a reliable method, it cannot be ignored that astrology is historical and is a real method that exists. The thing that people claim not to believe is whether or not it is reliable.

While I love astrology as a resource and a mechanism for understanding Earthly phenomena, I don’t necessarily consider myself a hard believer. Astrology is far more intricate than I currently understand, and at a certain point I ask myself the following question: how deep is too deep? I feel that I shouldn’t have to study the exact degrees of astrological placements, or the sextiles or trines of a planet in order to explain something. If it cannot be explained within a few layers of introspection, then maybe it simply can’t be explained by that method. 

I understand the skepticism. There is no scientific reason why astrology should work, or why it does work. One thing I have to say is that most people who deny astrological accuracy do not understand the basic inner-workings of astrology. Astrology-deniers often only know what a Sun sign is, and assume that horoscopes are the deepest level of introspection and prediction. To actually prove that it is not accurate, a person would have to study every piece of astrology, and know how to read an ephemeris. 

Although this is not a significant theory by any means, I have my own imaginative way of making sense of astrology. The quote by Carl Sagan, “We’re made of star stuff,” is widely known, and understood to mean that we are composed of particles that once made up stars all throughout the galaxy and the universe. What if bits of each of us were once shared by various stars in astrological constellations? What if there is a relationship that still exists between these shared particles? It is very unlikely that this is plausible, but if people are allowed to believe in a God that created every single piece of the universe, then I am allowed to believe that there is something more significant about the reason I am who I am.