Why Astrology Works

[sdi]

There's been a lot of discussion and debate about why astrology works (or why it can't possibly work). Ever since western astrology was revived in the middle ages, the popular opinion has tended towards the scientific. Originally, this followed Ptolemy and Aristotle in ascribing the planets an elemental character; later, this followed Newton is ascribing the planets an invisible force akin to gravity; after Einstein theorized that gravity wasn't a force after all, this ascribed the planets a wave theory akin to electromagnetism.

These are all well and good, but I've never found them convincing. But while reading Chris Brennan's Hellenistic Astrology, I came across a theory that seems much more satisfactory. Evidently, the Mesopotamians didn't believe the planets caused the effects we see here on earth any more than the arms of a clock cause it to be a particular time: rather, they're simply a sign that provides information to those who know how to read it. Where did this sign come from? From Ea,* god of water, wisdom, crafts, and mischief, who apparently made a colossal clock in the skies so that those who cared to study it—that is to say, the wise (his followers, naturally)—would always "know what time it is" and thereby possess an unfair advantage over those who did not.

* I'm no expert in Mesopotamian myth, but Ea sounds rather like Mercury to me. The association is reinforced by the fact that in Western astrology, Mercury rules astrologers; and that in Mesopotamian myth, the androgynous (that is, mercurial) Asu-Shu-Namir and those like them possess the gift of prophecy.

Comments

[tunesmyth]

That’s an amusing way to look at it. Certainly it makes sense to me that the reason we can deduce what forces will run through our lives by studying the positions of the planets is that the spatial relationships between the planets are expressions of the same divine forces that travel through us.

[tunesmyth]

Or, phrased more concisely: correlation is not causation!

[sdi]

Bingo!

As there are more and more refugees from the religion of Science, and given that their High Priesthood objects to astrology because "the stars can't possibly cause changes on the earth," I imagine that "correlation is not causation" is a good explanation to give those refugees (not least because it repurposes one of their good and useful Commandments).

[tunesmyth]

As one of said refugees, that’s probably why the phrase came to mind!

[lp9]

I like this - what a great way to think about how astrology works!

[boccaderlupo]

In "On the Mysteries," Iamblichus goes into the effects of the planets (as living embodiments of the otherwise transcendent gods), however I am sure I will botch the meaning some without the text in front of me. If memory serves, its has to do with free will in the material world; the influences of the gods as discerned through the planets are just that, influences that need to be worked out in the lower plane.

Per Sallustius: "[The stars] do not always make things happen but sometimes only indicate things..."

My personal take is that these influences are so multitudinous and complex and relies, like quantum mechanics, on the observer (in this case, a soul at the other end of the line). Given the complexity and the variegated levels of wisdom on the part of those observers, then, you can get very good astrological discernment and very bad astrological discernment (just as you can get very effective results from science or very ineffective ones, depending on the scientist). Not only do you have the variables of the planets themselves, but the entire unfolding of events in the cosmos AND the variables of the history, experiences, and insights of the person making the astrological discernment...extraordinarily complex.

Axé!

[sdi]

Thanks for the references! I still need to give the Neoplatonists some serious study time one of these days.