Despite what the title of this article suggests, we're not about to go into another skepticism journey like we did in my previous entries, "Astrology Works, But The Astrologer Certainly Isn't Perfect" and "The Eclipse is Tomorrow & Nothing Will Happen to You."
I actually think it's kinda funny that as I'm writing this series of articles, we have Mars, a rather combative planet, transiting through the sign of my ascendant. Maybe that's what's inspiring this streak of criticism and judgment within me, maybe not. Who knows?
Still, I've been promising to deliver some hot takes on Outer Planets for a while, and I'm here to deliver that. But before we even go there, I do need to give you a primer on what I think Astrology is and how it works. If you're eager to see how I handle Outer Planets in my practice, we just recently published a video exploring Uranus' re-ingress into Saturn's bounds in Taurus. That's an astrological mouthful, I know, but trust me, this is just astrology-speak for "Uranus is doing something interesting. Let's see what that's all about!"
Now that your Outer Planet cravings have been satiated with Uranus' revolutionary chrome metallic bread, let's get back to the topic at hand. Is Astrology really a science? And if not, what is it?
Science, Art, or Religion?
There are many ways astrologers approach answering the question, "What is Astrology?" I've seen it referred to as a celestial science, some think it's more of a creative pursuit, so they call it art, and some may even call it a religion due to this craft's spiritual bent. I've seen the religion argument mostly come from people outside the field, like skeptics and consumers, more than practitioners, but I do think it's a valid point and very much worth considering.
However, none of these seem to really appeal to me. Yes, Astrology has scientific components. As an astrologer (or at least as a proficient one), you must learn the basics of astronomy. Some basic math and geometry also go a long way, and especially for those who blend their astrological practice with psychology or statistics, the scientific method can be a great ally.
The problem with that, however, is that Astrology has yet to withstand the scrutiny of our modern science. And I'm of the opinion that it truly never will—not because it doesn't work, but simply because there are so many other things we must understand first, like the workings of the brain, what the hell consciousness is, and most importantly, how time even works in the first place. All of these are things that still puzzle the minds of material scientists, and until they can get a grip on these, truly, Astrology will never be called a science.
This may sound disappointing, but I believe that these things are simply not for humans to understand, or better, we're not capable of fully understanding. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try, though. I think the pursuit of this knowledge is far more noble than the acquisition of the answers. But that can potentially rule out some astrologers' dreams of having Astrology reclaim its seat at the academic table. Thankfully, I have no such dream, so I'll save myself the stress of trying to prove Astrology's validity.
But that's really at the core of why I think Astrology cannot be called a science. Our science is simply too small to integrate a knowledge system that aims to translate the ineffable realities of life (please keep that thought in your pocket—it'll come in handy later on).
The Case for Astrology as an Art
The case for Astrology as an art is a little harder to contest, however. Being a good astrologer requires a great deal of creativity. If you ever tried to interpret a horary chart (the chart of a question, rather than a person's birth), you'll quickly realize that thinking outside the box is a great skill to have. But the problem with Astrology as an art is that it also seems far too small a term to describe what Astrology actually does. As much as I've scrutinized Astrology's predictive ability, you still very much can forecast events by employing astrological methods, and I'm not sure "art" quite illustrates that ability very well.
Astrology as a Religion
Now, the most compelling case is actually the one a great number of astrologers might have an issue with. Yes, I'm talking about Astrology as a religion.
I mean, we check a lot of the boxes: Astrology provides practitioners and consumers with a worldview and a sense of purpose and direction within their lives, we have many documents that some consider to be sacred, we spend a whole lot of time talking about Gods, and the entire system of Astrology runs on the idea of prophecies. I think anyone willing to take a serious look at this craft will see its similarities to organized religious groups—all we're missing is a church, but I guess we do have Astrology Conferences...
But anyways, before I push any more buttons, despite its similarities to organized religions (and as a matter of fact, I'm very much pro-religion), this term too feels a bit reductive. Truthfully, Astrology in the modern world is a dish cooked with a pinch of Science, a teaspoon of Art, and Religion to taste.
Astrology as a Language
There's another way astrologers typically describe their practice, and I've omitted it in the list above because it's the one I feel most closely describes what Astrology is (in my opinion)—and saving the best for last always makes an article that much more interesting.
Astrology as a language is by far the hardest simile to contest.
Language, a system of conventional spoken, manual (signed), or written symbols by means of which human beings, as members of a social group and participants in its culture, express themselves. The functions of language include communication, the expression of identity, play, imaginative expression, and emotional release.
Now, remember that thought that's in your pocket.
Earlier, I'd talked about how Astrology is a system that aims to translate the ineffable qualities of life. For those of you who might be unfamiliar with what "ineffable" means, it essentially refers to something that cannot be fully understood or explained. These, at least in my worldview, would be things like the meaning of life, how time works, the nature of existence, souls, spirits, and all these fun and ethereal things. And Astrology is great at that, so much so that it at times can fool us into thinking that it ISÂ the code from which the World arose, but I'm not convinced about that.
Existence is a very complex thing, and it's foolish to think that a system of symbols used to communicate meaning, character, and one's state of mind can accurately describe all of Life. With that said, it's really easy to treat Astrology like such, but I think that's a consequence of conflating the subject matter (nature/existence) with the means of communication (Astrology). It would be like calling the painter's brush the art piece instead of the canvas that was painted by it.
This is at the core of how I practice my Astrology. I'd much rather view it as a means of communication rather than a natural law because if you spend enough time with it, you'll be faced with more paradoxes than are healthy for the human mind.
For example, how can two astrologies with entirely different methodologies and systems that are incompatible arrive at similar conclusions? Or how come astrologers had what seems to be a working model of Astrology that did not account for two major planets (and a bonus little planetoid). The list is really far greater than that, but I know your attention span is starting to scream at you, so I'll spare you my grocery list of Astrology paradoxes.
Enter the Outer Planets
Okay, now let's get to the point. What does all of this mean for the Outer Planets?
Well, now that you know that my treatment of Astrology is more focused on linguistics than mechanistic statistical analysis, I can tell you all about my crazy theories on Outer Planets. And I really want to emphasize that we're stepping into entirely theoretical territory here.
Please, do not treat my future articles like they're some channeled message from the ethers. I'm really not aiming to create the next Best Astrology Technique of the Year so I can sell you a workshop about it later. I'm simply trying to understand what these planets actually do, out of a dissatisfaction with how they're currently treated within our modern astrological milieu. And I thought I'd invite you on this journey of mine, so maybe we can figure them out together.
Understanding Astrology as a language has given me a very clear goal within my practice. I'm really interested in polishing how I translate Astrology, and a good way of exploring languages and how to use them is by studying grammatical rules and literary devices. So, this is what we'll be doing in articles to come. We'll be taking a look at how astrologers extracted meaning from the planets in the past, and we'll apply some of these same techniques to try and understand the Outer Planets in the present. And the good news is that you probably won't have to toss a lot of the things that you already know about the Outer Planets out the window. I'm really not interested in reinventing the wheel either.
Next week, we'll be taking a look at the Thema Mundi, the theoretical birth chart of the Universe. This is where all our astrological grammar comes from, so I think it's a great place to start. But if you don't want to wait a whole week for that, this weekend I came across a great video from Astrologer Samuel Reynolds on the topic of why Outer Planets don't rule signs. This will give you a little primer on what we'll be talking about next week, except we'll get a bit more experimental with it.
Until then, I hope you have a great week!
JG
コメント