The question of why astrology works has been around for probably as long as astrology itself -- which, as we know, is a very, very long time. The simple answer, generally used in ancient times, was that the celestial bodies were in fact gods, and that their motions and interactions actually caused events on Earth.
Although it has evolved into a more-modern and "scientific" form of expression, that same notion persists today in the idea of astrological or planetary "forces" or "influences." The idea is that the planets give off some actual kind of force or energy, and that force -- whatever it may be -- has a direct impact on events on Earth.
This idea of an astrological force or energy is not only espoused by many astrologers, but it is perhaps the only theory of astrology espoused by those skeptics who would "debunk" astrology. They say that because science has no evidence of any type of "force" through which astrology could function, then the entire concept of astrology is wrong.
This criticism of astrology is valid as far as it goes -- there really is no type of "astrological force" which has yet been demonstrated scientifically -- but to make this the sole basis upon which you dismiss astrology seems to me to be rather presumptuous. There are other possibilities which, to my knowledge, have never been investigated by those who dismiss astrology out of hand based on their "scientific investigations."
There is, of course, the idea of "synchronicity," first proposed in the early 20th century by Swiss psychiatrist C.G. Jung. The simple explanation of this concept, which has since been adopted by much of the astrological community, is that otherwise-unrelated events can occur together in a meaningful fashion without necessarily having a cause-and-effect relationship.
One example used by Jung to illustrate this "acausal connecting principle" was that of a clock on a wall in an office. Every day when the hands of the clock point to noon, the man in the office rises from his desk and goes to lunch. The clock does not exert any "force" or "energy" that causes the man to go to lunch. Yet if you observe the motions of the clock's hands, you can successfully predict the man's behavior.
Astrology can operate in exactly that fashion. The planets do not "cause" anything to happen. But if you observe the motions of the planets, you can successfully predict what will happen on Earth.
Dane Rudhyar, one of the most important astrological philosophers of the 20th century, elaborated extensively upon this idea in many of his works. He called it "meaningful co-incidence": that is, two events happening at the same time which can be interpreted in terms of some type of symbolic significance. The event happening on Earth gains meaning or context from an examination of the corresponding motions and interactions of the planets. Astrology can clearly be used in this manner of giving meaning to worldly events and placing them into some greater context.
Yet this still does not answer the question of "why?" Whether astrology works through actual physical forces and energies, or whether it works through symbolic interpretations and meanings.... why does it work at all?
My thought on this question has long been mathematics. The motions of the planets are nothing more than the physical expressions of highly complex mathematical equations. A planet's location at any given point in time is simply the solution of a mathematical function for that point in time.
When an astrologer says, "Mars is transiting through Scorpio," he or she is actually using shorthand for, "This mathematical function [which astrologers happen to name 'Mars'], when solved for this particular range of values [normally a range of calendar dates] yields this particular set of solutions [the series of solutions astrologers happen to name 'Scorpio']."
In other words, regardless of any overlays of mystical names, symbolic meanings, individual interpretations, etc., astrology is at its core nothing but mathematics. And everything that an astrologer says -- from "The Moon is in 20 degrees of Scorpio" to "Mars, Jupiter, and Uranus are forming a grand trine in the water signs while transiting the 2nd, 6th, and 10th houses of your natal chart" -- all astrological statements, from the most simple to the most complex, are really just shorthand "jargon" ways of describing the results of a set of mathematical functions.
According to science, of course, mathematics is the language that describes the operation of the entire universe. Indeed, the "forces" that scientists are so fond of citing -- and which they cannot discover for astrology -- are themselves nothing more than mathematical equations and functions. And although we describe these forces, such as gravity, in terms of physical cause and effect, it may well be that gravity (for example) is not causal at all, but instead synchronistic. The equation describes what is happening, and causation is actually irrelevant -- or non-existent.
Back to astrology: Why is it not possible that the astrological "equations" we have developed could not correspond to similar equations which describe patterns of human behavior? When the ancients looked at, for example, the Jupiter-Saturn cycle and associated it with the rise and fall of kings, is it not possible that the socio-cultural processes which bring about the periodic rise and fall of governments operate according to the same mathematical pattern as the astrological Jupiter-Saturn cycle? There is strong evidence, after all, that human behavior -- especially collective behavior -- is indeed cyclic and pattern-based. Perhaps the ancients who developed astrology were simply noticing and correlating these patterns.
There is indeed a field of science which attempts to describe patterns of human behavior using mathematics. I suspect most of these researchers don't realize that astrologers have essentially already done this. Astrology describes patterns of human behavior using mathematical formulae. This is why and how astrology can "work," whether with or without a causative princple.
Perhaps when the scientists doing this research perfect their art a little bit more -- and if they bother to look -- they may be surprised to find that their equations correspond to the equations astrologers have been using for millenia.
--- Ed
|