It can easily be
argued that astrology is one of the most misunderstood and therefore contentious
subjects there is. In this piece I shall explore the reasons for this and
then point to some evidence that suggests how astrology can find a respectable
place to stand proud and useful in a world dominated by science.
One of the major
reasons for astrology being lampooned by public figures including Stephen
Fry, Jeremy Clarkson and Richard Dawkins is the media profile of astrology,
a poor profile that does so much to shape public opinion. What do most people
know about astrology? General public perception must surely be formed by the
reading of Sun Sign columns to be found in many daily papers and magazines.
Any rational person would know that these cannot be right and that no reasonable
argument can be made for their validity. The population can’t simply be divided
into twelve tribes who share the same daily experiences; a twelfth of the
population do not successfully ask for a pay rise on the same day. The same
approximately 4.8 million residents of this country would be ill advised to
expect romance to leap into their lives the same month.
Sun Sign astrology
is easy to do. The press pay for it, the public are titillated and it keeps
many an astrologer earning. But it is shabby cladding on the front of an old
and well-constructed house. Go for a decent personal chart reading and you
will be impressed by the startling accuracy of the subject and see the real
face of astrology. But the fact will remain that what you generally see of
astrology as you move around this world of ours is the mush of pulp astrology
columns, mugs, tee-shirts and other Sun Sign-centric souvenirs. Sadly this
will reinforce any opinion you and your pals might hold that astrology must
be tripe.
Another reason for
astrology’s poor profile is the prevailing hippie/New Age ethos attached to
it. This is so strong that clients often expect their astrologer to pepper
readings with a lexicon including karma, spiritual, archetype
and inner-self …and/or dress in a certain way. This is at the very
least partially because the roots of twenty-first century astrology go back
to 1960s when exploration of all kinds of ideas and philosophies became fashionable.
All manner of wild and groovy things, including astrology, were
haphazardly picked up and put down again by the middle class mainstream as
they passed through their youths. Understandably there was a lack of rigour
to much of what was done in the field. Thus, while producing some fantastic
astrologers, generally, the Blair generation (and younger) have a smattering
of knowledge of the subject. Oh dear, as we all know a little knowledge
is a dangerous thing.
So we have this
situation. The general public is semi-exposed to an astro-gunk
funfare it can foolishy
or half-heartedly subscribe to, treat with the contempt it surely deserves
or – rarely - use as inspiration toward an exploration of the subject. In
most minds this leaves astrology tethered, like a naughty, dumb, defenceless
goat to so-called New Age ideas and ideals, some of which are excellent, many
of which are ridiculous, untenable and sometimes dangerous. We need to set
this goat free and remove its metaphorical kaftan, for it is a beautiful beast
in its own right.
But even the dehippified,
the astro-animal would still have big problems. Problems stemming from far
more dearly held and pervasive assumptions. Assumptions that many find very
hard to question. Yes, the other major reason astrology is still a leftfield
sideshow in our culture, not worthy of so many good people’s attention, is
our prevailing mindset. This mindset, our view of the world is - rightly
and usefully to a large extent - based on a commonly held implicit understanding
of science, usually based on the rationale of physics as essentially described
by Isaac Newton. This is a worldview which has created and solved many problems
over time and remains the engine of human progress. But its assumptions often
leave people’s daily perceptions about anything outside the obvious and physical
in a presumptuous and dismissive state, causing them to ignore rather than
merely question anything that does not have a rational basis, built on Newton’s
certainties.
However, much of
the cutting edge of science, which long ago went beyond Newton, is finding
that at a subatomic level, the universe is not wholly rational and remains
far from being fully explained. Therefore in the world of science,
and in the world we live in, the Newtonian world-view is only useful within
a limited sphere. Disciplines such as quantum mechanics and ideas like string
theory which concern themselves with how the universe of matter works at this
level have come to strange, tentative, exciting and evolving explanations.
Such ideas leave space for phenomena like dowsing, meditation and astrology
to have a scientific grounding and basis. They give a foundation for such
things to be taken seriously by science, and thus a legitimate footing in
our culture.
There are example
explanations of such grounding in a variety of sources. I’ve taken mine from
an astrology book (at this point you should think about the implications of
what follows and then apply it to what how astrology might work in physical
terms). In Navigating by the Stars, Edith Hathaway points out that
the hugely influential physicist Richard Feynman suggested that an electron
could be scattered backwards in time. She also quotes Bell’s Theorem which
‘shows definitively in the behaviour of subatomic wave/particles that separate
parts of the universe are interconnected in ways which are both intimate and
immediate, and move faster than the speed of light, or at superluminal levels’,
she then points out that ‘the laws governing these subatomic events are beyond
a totally rational understanding’.
Here we have a beautiful
pointer to how astrology might work. The other proof I see every time I read
a chart.
Note:
Details of the great Edith Hathaway book are in the Top Ten Books
piece on this website.
