Validity Of Astrology

The validity of astrology is a much debated topic around the world today and will continue to be debated for as long as it exists.

Arguments for the Validity of Astrology

Astrology has been practiced for thousands of years and was the original basis for astronomy.

Although most people think that astrology has no scientific merit, there have been countless studies that prove the heavens do have an effect on the earth.

First of all, there is the well known fact that the sun creates the seasons and the moon has an effect on the tides. Any fisherman or farmer will tell you that there is a better time in the month for fishing or a better time in the month for planting and seeding than others. One can only assume that if these two planetary elements have an effect on the earth and the objects in it, so would the other planets and stars.

Secondly, there is the twin effect. In Born That Way by William Wright, he discusses how twins who are separated at birth and whose lives are looked at 20 years later have had similar life experiences at the same time. For instance, one pair of twins might have had marriages, births of children, divorces, and career changes all at the same time in their lives.

Lastly, the Mars Effect may be the hardest evidence around that supports the validity of astrology. Gauquelin and his wife to be compiled research indicating that the location of Mars in the ascendant, lower heaven, descendant and mid-heaven of a particular sign correlated with the likelihood of success for athletes and others.  Scientists from all over threw criticism towards the theory and refuted the correlation giving the Mars Effect no scientific credibility because the participants in the study were from Gauquelin's hometown of France. He repeated the study in numerous countries and the results were the same.

Arguments Against the Validity of Astrology

Most criticism of astrology comes from scientist and more specifically astronomers. One argument is that the twelve sun signs cannot possibly encompass all human personalities, and even if they did, most horoscopes are positively worded so anyone would attribute it to themselves. Also, they are compared with fortune telling; vague and general words that are technically true for anyone. Astronomers also claim that there should be technically thirteen sun signs. Another argument refutes the accomplished studies have no real scientific value because the findings are based off of opinion, such as the Mars effect. How is success measured? Is success not opinion based? Lastly, astronomers claim that the never-ending new supply of information found out about the solar system and universe is not taken into consideration when formulating horoscopes and such. For instance, Pluto was recently downgraded to a dwarf planet. How is this going to affect astrology? The answer is it won't. Also, the fact that the constellations have changed significantly has not changed anything in astrology, but it should have.


On both sides of the debate, persons have come up with great arguments either for or against, but the fact remains that astrology is more of a religion than a science. How can a religion be proven or refuted? A person believes and that makes it real for them.

The Global Oneness Commitment. 2003. 03 October 2006. www.experie

Ourkarnataka. N.S. Manjunath. 2000. 03 October 2006. www.ourkarnatara.com/horoscope/astrology. style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt;">Manwaring, Curtis. Theory of Geocosmic Coincidence. The Lost Horoscope. 1999. 03 October 2006. www.astrology-x-files.com/phi

Schwartz, Jacob. The Scientific Coverup: Denying Astrology's Validity. The New Age Library. 03 October 2006. www.newage-directory.com/scientificcove