Zodiacal Signs
Scientists today dismiss
the claim of astrologers that they were the first scientists. But in fairness
to the astrologers, one can describe astrology as ``scientific'' -- at
least in the sense that it sought explanations in forces that were periodic,
repetitious and invisible.
As historian Daniel J. Boorstin
points out: ``The growth of science would depend on man's willingness to
believe the improbable, to cross the dictates of common sense. With astrology
man made his first great scientific leap into a scheme for describing how
unseen forces from the greatest distance, from the very depth of the heavens,
shaped everyday trivia.''
From Babylonian times until
well into the Christian era, astrology was given a certain amount of scientific
status. ``The leading scientists took for granted the influence of the
stars on human events,'' Mr. Boorstin says. ``They disagreed only on how
the stars exerted their powers.''
And that is precisely the
question that hard-nosed scientists challenge astrologers to answer: What
is the process by which the movements of heavenly bodies can affect events
here on earth? These hard-nosed scientists are so convinced that astrology
is a pseudo-science that they do not even bother to wait for an answer.
But it was not always this
way. There always has been a certain attraction to astrology -- so much
so that even St. Augustine struggled to reconcile the Christian belief
about man's free will with the general belief about the influence of the
stars. He found comfort in the story of Jacob and Esau, the twins whose
personalities were diametrically opposed.
Nowadays, the dominant view
of astrology is that it is not a science at all. That is why astrological
predictions are relegated to the entertainment pages of the newspaper.
Nonetheless, these astrological predictions have a large following. A lot
of people will be interested in the predictions made for persons born under
their sign of the zodiac. This interest is likely to continue as long as
human beings are caught between the desire to know the good news and the
fear of knowing the bad.
A few days ago, the validity
of even the signs of the zodiac was questioned by Dr. Jaqueline Mitton
of Britain's Royal Astronomical Society. All the dates used for the zodiac
signs are wrong, she said. In other words, the dates used for thousands
of years to classify humans into personality types are all wrong.
The zodiac signs are approximately
one month off, Dr. Mitton said. She explained: The dates fixed thousands
of years ago are no longer accurate because the earth's axis has moved,
shifting the alignment of the calendar with the stars.
Dr. Mitten said that astronomers
have known about the inaccuracies in the signs of the zodiac for a long
time, but astrologers persist in sticking to their inaccurate charts.
Dr. Mitton also pointed
out that constellations cover unequal areas of the sky, and so, the sun
does not spend an equal amount of time in each consellation. She added
that the sun also spends time in a 13th constellation, Ophiucus, which
is missing from astrologers' charts.
The Agence France Presse
commented: ``As if it were not enough for your average horoscope fan to
find out that instead of being a `versatile, witty Gemini,' he or she is
really a `sensitive, crabby Cancer.'''
British astrologers have
dismissed Dr. Mitten's statements and have accused her of being unscientific.
But what else should we expect? Human beings are supposed to be rational
animals, but more often than not, they act as if they are rationalizing
animals. We would not be surprised if some astrologers use Dr. Mitten's
statements to explain why their predictions have failed.