Opponents of Astrology

The kind of astrology we are familiar with was developed at the royal court in ancient Babylon and for a long time was closely associated with the fortunes of the Mesopotamian ruler. It was practised by priests of the highest order, with any kind of criticism being unthinkable because it could imply criticism of the king or even of the gods themselves.

The process of astrology loosening its close bonds to absolute power and becoming more accessible to the broader populace was therefore also accompanied by increasing criticism and opposition. This opposition can be roughly split into three groups: the theologians, the natural scientists and the philosophers.

The theological criticism had its origins within Judaism, the oldest of the three monotheistic religions. Judaism was the most outspoken critic of astrology. During the Greek and Babylonian exile the Jews came into contact with the sources of astrological teachings. Many of their religious prophets, including Moses and Jeremiah, considered astrology to be star worship. This was seen as being in defiance of the dominant theological conviction that only permitted worship of what was considered to be the one true God - Jaweh. The Old Testament therefore contains many passages which condemn astrology.

In ancient Rome there were many prominent opponents of Astrology. Astrology was influenced by the Stoics who were strong advocates of determinism. They believed that everything follows a natural course which human beings, according to their inherent nature, must follow. According to this worldview astrology is limited to recognising the inevitable, and this led many intellectuals – including stoics – to reject it. Leading figures such as Cicero, Horace, Pliny the Elder, Seneca and Tacitus rejected standard astrological practice and questioned the connection between the heavenly bodies and events on Earth.

The opposition to astrology grew further with the spread of Christianity. The dominant theological conviction was that God was the ultimate power to which humans should willingly submit. This led to a rejection of the belief that the stars could influence fate. Those church leaders and Popes tolerant towards astrology remained in the minority. Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas became influential mediators between theology and astrology. They both rejected prognostic astrology because it was incompatible with free will while at the same time accepting astrological influences in other areas such as the physical body and even a person's character. But their argument did not lead the Church to reconsider its position towards astrology. On this subject the current Catholic catechism states: "The hidden motive of many who turn to astrology is to gain access to hidden powers. This stands in conflict with the loving reverential esteem which we owe only to God."

The reformer Martin Luther was one of astrology's most outspoken critics despite having initially had an open mind on the subject. There are several different versions of Luther's natal chart in circulation which supporters and opponents of Luther refer to when arguing their case. Luther rejected astrology and attacked it polemically after both the failure of one of his own prognoses concerning the downfall of the Papacy and of several prophesies made by his friend Melanchton.

During the Enlightenment, astrology came increasingly under fire. Not only theologists but also scientists turned their back on it. Up until that time prominent scientists, among them Johannes Kepler and Tycho Brahe, were actively involved in astrology; and not only for financial reasons as is often claimed by present day scientists. These new opponents not only saw a conflict with the issue of free will, and they claimed that science alone was capable of giving an adequate explanation of the world and ultimately the universe itself. From this time astrology was seen as unscientific and unprovable (Science and Astrology). It was claimed that the signs of the Zodiac and the houses were static and therefore irreconcilable with cosmic laws, according to which the universe is constantly evolving.

Whereas theological criticism of astrology has become relatively insignificant due to the waning influence of the Church, the scientific arguments against astrology continue to deliver ammunition to the critics of astrology. In 1975, 186 scientists – among them 18 Nobel Prize winners – placed an advertisement in the renowned American Journal "The Humanist" condemning astrology. The publication sparked interest among journalists, and BBC reporters wanted to interview some of the Nobel Prize winners concerning their own personal views regarding astrology. However, they refused to be interviewed, the reason being that they had not looked into the matter in any detail.

In 1996 astronomers at the "Council of German Planetaria" called for astrology to be banned in adult education centres. In their declaration they state that: "public educational establishments which are financed with tax payers money have an obligation to portray astrology as it really is, namely as superstition and a pseudo-religion". Such a degree of intolerance, which runs completely contrary to the spirit of the Enlightenment, is often typical of the opponents of astrology. Among the most common criticisms of astrology, based on ignorance concerning modern astrological practice, are the following:

• Astrologers work with incorrect "constellations" (in this respect see precession, tropical zodiac).

• Apparently, astrologers remain completely unaware of the discovery that the Earth orbits the Sun and not the other way around as was previously widely believed (on this point see geocentric world view).

A third group of opponents can be found among philosophers. Their arguments are based on theological and scientific considerations. One of their most important representatives is Theodor W. Adorno. He wrote in an article which is still often quoted that:

"The secret and trick of astrology is simply the way in which it combines the unrelated and isolated rational spheres of social psychology with astronomy... but it is just that unconnectedness between psychology and astronomy, human experience and the stars, that allows it to inhabit the no man's land between the two and make usurping claims regarding both sides. It's domain is the mysterious relationship between entities which are in fact unrelated."

Among the general public there are still many people who are only aware of astrology as portrayed in the tabloid press and therefore reject it.