Astrology and Science

“Now, this Astrology is a foolish daughter. But dear Lord, what would happen to her mother, the highly reasonable Astronomy, if she did not have this foolish daughter. The world, after all, is much more foolish, indeed is so foolish, that this old sensible mother, Astronomy, is talked into things and lied to as a result of her daughter's foolish pranks… The mathematician's pay would be so low, that the mother would starve, if the daughter did not earn anything[19 - Kenneth G. Negus. “Kepler's Astrology (Excerpts selected and translated)”. Retrieved November 15, 2021. URL=http://cura.free.fr/docum/15kep-en.html].”

Kepler's quote about the "foolish daughter of astronomy" has been reproduced many times in his biographies and in articles blaspheming astrology. However, the meaning of the quote is not as simple as it may seem at first glance.

Johannes Kepler

Researcher Kenneth G. Negus has done a lot to restore the truth about Kepler's attitude to astrology. In his translation of excerpts from Kepler's books into English, he gave the following comment on the above excerpt from the "Tertius Interveniens":[20 - Ibid.]

“It is important to note here that Kepler is referring to a particular kind of astrology ["this astrology"] and not all of astrology.”

To be convincing, the Negus lacked only a small touch – the words of Kepler himself about different kinds of astrology.

Indeed, Kepler distinguished popular astrology from genuine, as he called it. This is what Kepler wrote in 1627 in the preface to his famous "Rudolphine Tables", tables of planetary motions (ephemerides), compiled by him on the basis of Tycho Brahe's observations and the discovered laws of planetary motion:[21 - Lives of eminent persons; consisting of Galileo, Kepler. 1833, p.51.Rev. William R. Williams. The Bible Question Decided in a Correspondence. 1852, p.51.Walter William Bryant. Kepler. Society for promoting Christian knowledge, 1920, p.54.]

“Astronomy is the daughter of Astrology, and this modern astrology again is the daughter of Astronomy, bearing something of the lineaments of her grandmother; and, as I have already said, this foolish daughter, astrology, supports her wise but needy mother, Astronomy, from the profits of a profession not generally considered creditable.”

In the original text of the "Rudolphine Tables," the word Astrologia (the one that is "the mother of astronomy") is beautifully printed, with highlighted first and last letters. As for astrology which is "the foolish daughter of astronomy", it is written simply and plainly.

Kepler's biographer Max Caspar commented on this passage from the "Rudolphine Tables" as follows:[22 - Caspar, Max; Hellman, Clarisse Doris. Kepler. Courier Dover Publications, 1993, p.349.]

“…the elderly mother (astrology) was not supposed to permit herself to complain of becoming abandoned and scorned by her thankless daughter (astronomy)”

In “Die Astrologie” Johannes Kepler wrote:[23 - Die Astrologie des Johannes Kepler. Quoted by Lewis, James R. The astrology book: the encyclopedia of heavenly influences. Visible Ink Press, 2003, p.383.]

“Philosophy, and therefore genuine astrology, is a testimony of God’s works and is therefore holy. It is by no means a frivolous thing. And I, for my part, do not wish to dishonor it.”

Kepler viewed the world as a manifestation of Divine harmony.[24 - Aiton, E.J.; Duncan, A.M.; Field, J.V. "Preface”. The Harmony of the World by Johannes Kepler. American philosophical society, 1997, p.vii.] At the heart of all his scientific work was the search for the harmony of the world – a pre-established order put into creation by the Lord God. Kepler set forth his own, very different from the generally accepted, astrology in the fourth book of his work "The Harmony of the World".[25 - Данилов, Ю.А. Гармония и астрология в трудах Кеплера [Harmony and Astrology in the Writings of Kepler]. 1995. Retrieved November 28, 2021. URL=http://filosof.historic.ru/books/item/f00/s00/z0000050/index.shtml.]

Attempts to Deprive Ptolemy of Paternity over Western Astrology

Ptolemy. Engraving by Theodor de Bry (1596)

Some restless zealots of science go so far as to try to separate even the "father of Western astrology" Claudius Ptolemy, who lived in Alexandria of Egypt in the second century, from astrology, as from something "not prestigious" and "discrediting."

For example, astronomer and critic of astrology V. Surdin, who relies only on his own doubt which "originated a long time ago," questions that Ptolemy was an astrologer.[26 - Сурдин, В. “Был ли астрологом Птолемей?” [Was Ptolemy an astrologer?]. Астрология и наука [Astrology and Science]. Фрязино, «Век 2», 2007, pp.40-42.] He thinks that Ptolemy's wording is too accurate and careful to belong to an astrologer.

But even before Surdin, some "defenders" of science tried (unsuccessfully, however) to question Ptolemy's authorship of the astrological treatise Tetrabiblos. In this way, they tried to save “his authority as a scientist.[27 - Данилов, Ю. А. "Астрологический «Тетрабиблос»” [Astrological "Tetrabiblos"]. Знание за пределами науки. Республика, 1996, p. 132.]”

Popularizer of science Julius Alexandrovich Danilov (1936-2003), who was one of the translators of Tetrabiblos from Greek, wrote:[28 - Ibid.]

“At the time of Ptolemy, the Greek words “astronomy” and “astrology” were almost synonymous, and what we now understand by astrology, Ptolemy called “prognostics,” that is, making predictions using astronomy. Practicing astrology did not cause the slightest damage to Ptolemy's reputation as a scientist and his authorship of "Tetrabiblos" was not considered a shameful secret. <…> Astrology did not lose its significance during the Renaissance, and later – at the beginning of Modern history. Tycho Brahe, [Nicolaus] Copernicus, [Johannes] Kepler, Regiomontanus, Galileo [Galilei], and [Gottfried Wilhelm] Leibniz (the list could easily be continued) were either engaged in the casting of horoscopes themselves or tried to give astrology a more solid foundation. Therefore, there was nothing reprehensible in Ptolemy's astrology in the eyes of the representatives of the science of a later time.”

Pseudo-problem from Pseudo-skeptics

Pico against Astrology

Not all scientists and thinkers of the Renaissance and Modern history saw the Divine principle in astrology that inspired Kepler. The more power the "Newtonian-Cartesian science" took over the minds, the more widespread and bold criticism of astrology became.

At first, the criticism was weak. For example, the denunciation of astrology by the famous Italian nobleman and thinker Giovanni Pico della Mirandola (1463-1494) turned out to be incoherent and inconsistent, as noted by the historian of science Lynn Thorndike.

Pico della Mirandola

Pico della Mirandola wrote his book "Disputations Against Astrology" (Disputationes adversus astrologiam divinatricem) in the last years of his life and, judging by its shortcomings, did not have time to complete it. This "long and unwelcoming book" with its "ragged presentation and reliance on so many obscure and technical sources" was published after the author's death, in 1496.[29 - Copenhaver, B. (2016) “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola”. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved November 28, 2021. URL=https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pico-della-mirandola/]

Thorndike wrote in his fundamental multivolume work "A History Of Magic And Experimental Science":[30 - Thorndike, L. “Chapter LXI Astrology At Bay, I. Pico Della Mirandola”. A History Of Magic And Experimental Science. Vol.4. Columbia University Press, 1934, pp.531-532.]

“After the first book it is difficult to discern any logical arrangement or orderly sequence in Pico's work and argument. Little reason is apparent either for the way in which the books and chapters succeed one another or for the chopping up of the text into these. Pico seems to have written as things occurred to him and not to have minded if he touched on a topic again in a later book or chapter. The work is rambling and ineffective so far as orderly presentation and cumulative argument are concerned.”

Astrology of the "Endarkenment" Era

The more scientific discoveries were made, the more mocking and cynical some scientists were about astrology. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), an American inventor, publisher, and statesman, whose portrait is depicted on a hundred dollar bill, was one of the prime examples of Modern history critics of astrology.

For nearly a quarter of a century, Franklin published the astrological Poor Richard's Almanack under the pseudonym Richard Saunders. He borrowed this name from an English astrologer and physician of the 17th century, a famous author of astrological almanacs, and the book “The Astrological Judgement and Practice of Physick” (1677).

The 1751 edition of the almanac began with an address by Saunders-Franklin to courteous readers about astrology:[31 - Saunders, Richard. Poor Richard improved: Being an Almanack and Ephemeris … for the Year of our Lord 1751. Philom. Philadelphia, Printed and Sold by B. Franklin, and D. Hall. Retrieved November 28, 2021. URL=https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Franklin/01-04-02-0029]

“Astrology is one of the most ancient Sciences, had in high Esteem of old, by the Wise and Great. Formerly, no Prince would make War or Peace, nor any General fight a Battle, in short, no important Affair was undertaken without first consulting an Astrologer, who examined the Aspects and Configurations of the heavenly Bodies, and mark’d the lucky Hour. Now the noble Art (more Shame to the Age we live in!) is dwindled into Contempt.”

But don't be fooled by the praise of these speeches. There is duplicity and hypocrisy behind it. Benjamin Franklin was one of the active activists of the Enlightenment in the United States and, like the entire intellectual elite of that time, did not take astrology seriously.[32 - Campion, N. A History of Western Astrology Volume II: The Medieval and Modern Worlds. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2009, p.172.] However, astrology was common in popular culture, astrological almanacs were in demand, and Franklin cynically used it to his advantage. The circulation of some issues of the Franklin almanac (in addition to astrological information there were everyday tips, riddles, etc.) reached ten thousand copies.

The 18th century was lost to the development of astrology. Traditions, ideas, and principles that can be traced in astrology from the 5th century BC were reduced to naught in the Age of Enlightenment. It was only in the 19th century that the revival of astrology began. For this reason, the historian of astrology Robert Hand views the 18th century (in terms of astrology) as the era of "Endarkenment".[33 - Hand, Robert. “Towards a Post-Modern Astrology”. Astrological Conference 2005. Retrieved November 28, 2021. URL=http://www.astro.com/astrology/in_postmodern_e.htm]

Why Do Pseudo-skeptics Need a Pseudo-problem?

In the 19th century, when people began to gradually get tired of the hopeless materialism of the new science, astrology began to revive and gradually regain its authority. The Theosophical movement played a significant role in this. In the 20th century, Alice Bailey's books, which described the idea of the coming Age of Aquarius, or New Age, and the astrological writings of Dane Rudhyar led astrology to become phenomenally popular in the West from the middle of the century.

Science also did not standstill. Since the 1920s, philosophers of science have tried to define what science and the scientific method are, and how to separate science from other methods of cognition. The question of defining the boundaries of science has received a special name – the demarcation problem.

Scientists were especially concerned about disciplines that called themselves scientific and enjoyed the authority of science, but in fact, did not apply scientific methods and did not give out reliable knowledge. On such disciplines, scientists began to hang the stigma of pseudoscience.

And all would be fine, but an unforeseen difficulty arose: the demarcation problem could not be solved in any way. The longer scientists tried to separate science from non-science/pseudoscience/parascience/protoscience/etc., the clearer it became that it was impossible to draw a clear line between them. Scientists had to admit that the problem of demarcation is a pseudo-problem. It means that there is no need or opportunity to single out science in a separate clear category.

However, some scientific skeptics and adherents of scientism are still trying to hang the stigma of "pseudoscience" on various disciplines, including astrology. Why are they doing it? Because it is a question of power over minds and the struggle for the authority of science, and because it is a question of politics and financing of scientific activities from the state budget. This is confirmed by the example of the Russian Commission for Combating Pseudoscience, created under the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1998.

***

Some scientific skeptics and scientists were so hasty in denouncing "pseudosciences" that they went so far as to deny individual theories, without providing any evidence for their claims at all. To describe the activities of such skeptics, a special term was coined – pseudo-skepticism.[34 - Truzzi, M. (1987) “On Pseudo-Skepticism”. Zetetic Scholar. 12/13, pp. 3—4.] In the next chapter, we will look at how one of the loudest statements of pseudo-skeptics against astrology was smashed to smithereens by the last great philosopher of science.

Feyerabend against the Witch Hunt

The New Age wave was so powerful and all-consuming in the West that scientists sounded the alarm in the mid-1970s. In 1975, The Humanist magazine published a letter signed by 186 scholars in which they criticized astrology in a typical pseudo-skeptic, authoritarian way.

Three years after the publication of this letter, the American philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend published the book “Science in a Free Society”, wherein one of the chapters he analyzed in detail the statement of 186 scientists, denouncing them in, to put it mildly, dubious methodological grounds for their criticism of astrology.[35 - Feyerabend, P. “The Strange Case of Astrology”. Science in a Free Society. London, NLB, 1978, pp.91-96.]