Can you prove astrology works?

[Jamie Partridge]

Astrology forums like this one are full of vigorous debate about different methods in astrology, with people trying to prove how their brand of astrology or their prefered chart for a nation or person works better than anyone elses. But is there any proof that astrology works at all, can it be used to predict anything reliably? Normally I wouldn't be bothered justifying the use of astrology but I have been debating with skeptics and although tiring and annoying, it can be a good exercise to think about how astrology is viewed by the wider population and why we think it is worth pursuing. UK astrologer Robert Curry has joined me in a particular debate and has brought up some very interesting arguments for the vailidity of astrology. There are a few people in this forum I can think of in particular whose debating skills and love of an intellectual workout could be useful to the cause, might be nice to be on the same team for a change. If it smells like Funk, it must be astrology.

[Jamie Partridge]

Thankyou Mr. Alexander.

[Starz]

Some astrology is fuzzy and will convince no one. Some so called astrologers should give it up. Fluffstrologers with personalty and emotional analysis and vague nebulous forecasts will convince no hard skeptic.
 Astrology that predicts future events in the mundane realm or in the lives of people is the Holy Grail. Beware, some cement heads will be never  be convinced of anything.
 Prediction is superior to matching the stars with events past. Many use the shoe horn technique to make astrology fit historic events. This will not convince skeptics that can see through that game.
 Prediction of events yet to come by use of the stars is pretty convincing.

[pdw]

As a humble observer, it seems when ''works" is connected to prediction in astrology all manner of entanglement ensues. 

My personal definition of astrology working more broadly asks the question: Can I prove astrology works to reflect life meaningfully?  Well, yes I can, you and I and many are proof of that.  Are personal subjectivity and individual opinion factors in what we humans find meaningful?  Well, yes, I think they are, as with any philosophy or belief in life.  Thus, can I prove to skeptics that astrology works?  Very doubtful.             

Jamie, I couldn't help noticing that you are an astrology practitioner - with 5 planets in discerning Virgo in the meaningful 9th House - who is currently involved in particular debate, as you say.  Astrologically, this seems an apt reflection of mindful T Mercury, now in Virgo and  contacting this significant area in your chart.  Also seems like a perfect personal opportunity to observe the effects of Mercury Retrograde, coming later this week.                 

Best ahead with astrology.

[Starz]

That's a strange crowd over. Almost like a an attention deficit convention. Flying way off topic, personal attacks, are you sure these jokers are even interested in knowing the validity of astrology ?
 James' info on Polaris was interesting.

[Barbara Ybarra]

Hi Jamie:

Your new photo is nice.

How are you doing with those skeptics?

 I would love to formulate some simply constructed sentences that present the case for astrology in a logical manner to someone who has not studied it…such as:

"Events inordinately occur during planetary positions that energetically correspond to those events.  Those energetic qualities that are assigned to planets do not change. We change…while the universe unfolds.  The dispassionate study of this has all but eliminated the idea random occurrence between planetary movement and human action and interaction."

I just wrote that, so a better one might be needed, but it's a pretty cool thing to have one ready for when you run into a skeptic.

  A person with a religious bias would require a different statement or approach about the synchronicity of a Creator's universe, so that they might see that astrology is not incongruous with the worship of a God.

I think the key is remaining calm.

Barbara Ybarra

  

[Hudson Valley Astrologer]

Hi Jamie,

Sorry for your un-welcomed intrusion on your blog. I appreciate the equivalent point made about someone coming in a throwing garbage in the middle of your living room floor and calling it something else; not garbage. It puts you in a tough position from the start. Perhaps turn it around and debate publicly before a mixed audience and continue to get some press out of it.

The thing that escapes me is what the heck is motivating this guy. He obviously came ready and loaded for bear to use a hunter's expression. My guess is that he is a Carl Sagan wanna be. You can pull up Sagan's detracting statements about astrology on Youtube. I think the problem we run into with this fellow is that convincing him, or justifying astrology, would be as much a lost cause with him as it would be with Sagan. Your energy is too valuable to let it derail you and especially on vacation.

And for what? I would re-frame the experience this way: There is no such thing as bad press. So appreciate the new hits on your site. Some will stay and become customers. And simply know that Jason does not represent the majority neither as a scientist nor as an atheist.

I am surprised the Archimedes Principle wasn't raised. It took some 1500 years for this theory of displacement to register as real potential in the minds of European ship builders. For the last 500 years shipbuilding has progressed amazingly. Along the way there were some slips and regressions in the knowledge but it survived and continues to move forward in time even though by some measure our modern scientific technology still cannot match that of the ancient Greeks and Chinese whose mastery of constructing wooden vessels marvels historical scientists. But those ancient master shipbuilders would laugh at us if we told them we could float metal. They might become defensive. And they might become frustrated  if we were making inroads with the emperor to demonstrate our knowledge which they of course would argue as being impossible.

This might trigger another sort of displacement altogether. What Freud called displaced aggression, attacking a perceived weaker victim out of a defensive position. This kind of set up is bound to disappoint, unless you enjoy the arguing or in your case feel compelled to protect your livelihood.

In any event I don't think it is possible to prove astrology to someone so inclined against it accept to invite him to 'disprove it' himself for the sake of the scientific community. He did not disprove it with his commentary. Point him over the Gauquelin Effect and challenge him to do better. You don't need to prove astrology anymore than you need to prove God to an atheist.

Great work on your blog.

Tim
 

[Barbara Ybarra]

Oh.  I understand now.  I second Tim's message, except I have not his talent for offering the late-night radio show insights like the Archimedes principle.  Tim is always blowing my mind.

I wish you the best, Jamie.  I'm sure you know how to argue the value of astrology.  If you need supporters, I'm there.

Barbara Ybarra 

[Jamie Partridge]

 Prediction is superior to matching the stars with events past. Many use the shoe horn technique to make astrology fit historic events. This will not convince skeptics that can see through that game.
 Prediction of events yet to come by use of the stars is pretty convincing.

I do believe you are right there. I'm always mindful of making predictions in case I'm wrong but we do have to stick our necks out. With this debate on the skekptics website, I quoted from a prediction I made back in January saying the July Solar eclipse would signal the culmination of Roman Polanski's life. He was freed the next day. The skeptic said:

"expanding the window to a day after your prediction about Polanski when you knew that was roughly the day his extradition trial would be over? How can you prove that any of those is anything more than dumb luck, or clever enough and vague enough wording to count something as a hit when it’s obviously barely just”"

It was in fact a decision by the Swiss Justice Ministry and not a trial court decision. Just no pleasing some people!

[Jamie Partridge]

 
Jamie, I couldn't help noticing that you are an astrology practitioner - with 5 planets in discerning Virgo in the meaningful 9th House - who is currently involved in particular debate, as you say.  Astrologically, this seems an apt reflection of mindful T Mercury, now in Virgo and  contacting this significant area in your chart.  Also seems like a perfect personal opportunity to observe the effects of Mercury Retrograde, coming later this week.                  

Transiting Saturn was conjunct my Sun when the debate started six weeks ago. When Robert Curry entered the debate last week, transiting Saturn was conjunct his Sun.

The debate started the day after the July Solar eclipse conjunct my DC, same degrees as Robert's Vertex.

[Jamie Partridge]

Tim,

thanks for the compliments! I did put a blog about about this and got more comments than any other blog. I agree we do not need to prove astrology to these people and in a way it is wasted energy, but it has sharpened my thinking and I think I have improved as an astrologer as a result. As for Jason's motivation, his ex wife was an astrologer.

[Jamie Partridge]

Barbara,

remaining calm is a long term project I'm chipping away at. I do like that quote and it sounds very well thought out. I was advised by my image consultant the my previous profile pic looked like a mug shot and not too professional

[Jim Birke]

It's not whether it works that's cool. It's HOW it works.

Jim

[ODdOnLifeItself]

Jamie,

You are welcome.

It's a noble cause, but likely totally FRUITLESS.

It's not my norm to join in these types of circuses, since so much time is used up trying to explain things that one really good astrology book would make unnecessary.

That being said, it's good for the ego, as one quickly realizes that those posing behind science are high on knowledge, but desperately lacking in wisdom.

I have to agree with others here, Jamie.  Your talents are such that these "debates" are stealing from your available time to be helping others.

Your ability to see connections between real life events/circumstances and Astrology shows that you have a higher frequency of perceptive ability.  They just CAN NOT see what you can see.  It is likely that they maintain their present level, while yours grows.  In other words, the debate will likely only get more burdensome/annoying as time goes on.

I was in a YouTube debate about Astrology for some time and I can tell you that none of the arguments or debate "stance" have changed in the slightest...

Peace

OD'dOnLifeItself

[pdw]

Jamie, thank you for sharing further chart details.  For me, it's always compelling to see astrology in action.  The Saturn-Sun transit signals a test for strengths and weaknesses in our staying power, and I appreciate your healthy Virgo attitude that "although tiring and annoying, it can be a good exercise".                 

One more connection, if I may:

T Venus-T Mars conjunct your Node at MC (respective degrees, 10-11-9-6 Libra) looks like a significant 'engagement' - with passionate discussion about your profession - and Robert Curry, with N Venus at 6 Libra (I think), seems an ideal partner.  I sure am curious if Jason, your designated primary opponent, has a Mars/Aries emphasis tying into this connection.