My Education as an Astrologer
By ShyDavid, November 13, 1998CE
Starting in my youth, and continuing into my young
adulthood, I studied astrology a great deal. I had well
over 300 books on the subject, and some 50 audio tapes. I
wrote an astrology program (ASTR5) and distributed it
throughout the USA and internationally (this program can
still be found on many FidoNet Bulletin Board Systems). I
was a member of ISAR (International Society for
Astrological Research) and I attended UAC (United
Astrology Congress) for four years. I performed two
astrological studies: one on 65 AIDS victims, and another
on 1,069 atomic bomb events throughout the world. I
learned how to read natal charts, novian moon charts,
solar return charts, primary arc progressions, secondary
progression charts, semi-diurnal arcs, composite charts,
synastry, horary, and I even developed a new technique I
termed "ascentional returns" for making daily predictions.
I attended weekly SCAN (Southern California Astrological
Network) meetings for over a year. I spent a few days at
"Zip" Dobyn's house being entertained by her stories and
her vast library (books covered every wall in her house),
and eating her corn bread. I've flirted with Francois
Gauquelin.
Even though I became extremely proficient at reading
astrological charts, and I amazed my friends at the task
of reading their charts, I never for a moment thought, let
alone believed, that astrology is valid. It is not.
During these 12 years, I never even once found any
validity in astrology. I found, again and again and again,
that astrology only "works" because people believe it
does, not because it does. That is, I, as the astrologer,
would do a reading of a person's natal chart, or a
couple's composite chart or synastry comparison, and the
client would believe what I said, and even accept blatant
falsehoods and errors, because she or he wanted
desperately to believe astrology is valid. The point is,
astrologers can say anything, and make any kind of claim
no matter how false or absurd, and the client will work
very hard to believe the astrologer's words.
I did not come by this realization suddenly. It took me a
while to figure out the mechanism by which astrology
"works." That mechanism is the desperate need of the
client to believe astrology is the answer to their
problems. The greater the problem, the greater the
willingness of the client to believe that which is absurd.
All the astrologer need do is develop what is known as
"cold reading techniques" whereby guesses are made, and
the client's mind races to try and make that guess "fit"
her or his situation. Even when the guess is grossly
wrong, the client often believes that it is correct and
that they just do not yet understand how.
About ten years ago I finished my study of astrology. I
discovered that what one sees in the sky has nothing at
all to do with human events here on Earth. What the
astrologer sees in the chart is an impotent fabrication,
unrelated to reality.
That is not to say that all astrologers are deceiving
people; it just means that the majority of astrologers are
deceiving themselves. While it is true that many
astrologers know damn well that their trade is fraudulent,
the majority by far do not: the latter are to be faulted
for their deliberate ignorance, not their ethics.
Yes, deliberate ignorance. I cannot count the number of
times I sat with astrologers discussing the trade, where
only positive "evidence" (consisting only of anecdotal
testimonies) was discussed and the massive evidence
against astrology was dismissed out of hand (and the
subject quickly changed). The very large majority of
astrologers (out of those who believe astrology is valid,
i.e. not including the ones that know astrology is false)
have not only no interest in the evidence against
astrology, but an active abhorrence and aversion of this
evidence; they have an avoidance mechanism that steers
them clear of the facts. Having invested so much of their
time, money, and self-importance in astrology, to finally
look at the conclusive evidence that demonstrates
astrology is completely, utterly invalid, engenders far
too much cognitive dissonance for the believing
astrologer.
--
Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.
From: David Rice
Subject: My Education as an Astrologer
Rev David Michael Rice
Mariner's Ministries, Dana Point.
The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the
author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and
opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The
opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Skeptic Tank.