Wednesday, April 26, 2006

It's written in the Stars

Every now and then I listen to a show on Melbourne's own 3RRR, in which a guest astrologer takes talk back calls from listeners wishing to consult her about their horoscope. Most of the time, this only slightly irritates me, but every now and then she drops a clanger which has me screaming profanities at the radio. I heard her tell one person that, as a result of where the sun rose at the time of her birth, she was looking for "someone to love, or someone to love her". Hey, call me crazy, but as long as the sun rose in the east on the day you were born, that would pretty much describe you to some degree.

Recently a fellow suffering from Multiple Sclerosis rang her, and she asked him a few questions, before giving him advice about his life. Now, quite often, the advice she gives is based more on common sense than any kind of mystical wisdom fromt he relative position of planets in the solar system. But in this case, she began to dispense advice which she was completely unqualified to give, even suggesting that his illness could be influenced by planetary alignments and the like.

This kind of quackery should have gone out along with witch hunts, to be quite honest, and an astrologer should not give medical advice to a possibly terminally ill patient outside of the Kings Chambers in a fairy Tale.

The big problem I have with astrology, is not the lack of evidence to support any relationship between peoples' personalities and behaviour and the time of year they were born. It is not that there is no possible measurable influence a planet could exert over the physical substance of a person millions of miles away, or that there should perhaps be some difference between the signs of the northern hemisphere, where the horoscopes were developed, and the southern hemisphere, where I reside. There are indeed possibilities of forces beyond the understanding of modern science, immeasurable in any way (though if their effects are undetectable, their influence must be called into question).

My major problem with the idea of star signs, is that the dates are wrong. The star sign people are assigned based on their date of birth is supposed to correspond with the position of the sun relative to one of the twelve constellations of the zodiac. Unfortunately, as the earth is constantly moving relative to the rest of the universe, the charts drawn up some thousands of years ago are days, weeks or months out of whack with reality. There is also a thirteenth house in the zodiac, which has no characteristics assigned to it. That of Ophiuchus, the Serpent Holder.

Do people born between November 30th and December 17th have no personality or behaviour? This is the time when the sun rises in the house of Ophiuchus, a lesser known constellation named by the ancients. But what of the Ophiuchans? We don't know. Here's a list of Star Signs and their actual effective dates for the early part of the 21st century. I wonder if it makes a difference to your horoscope readng habits. If you really are a Scorpio, you are in a minority, that star sign in reality only lasts for six days.

Aries- 19 April - 13 May
Taurus- 14 May - 19 June
Gemini- 20 June - 21 July
Cancer- 21 July - 19 August
Leo- 10 August - 15 September
Virgo- 16 September - 30 October
Libra- 31 October - 22 November
Scorpio- 23 November - 29 November
Ophiuchus- 30 November - 17 December
Sagittarius- 18 December - 18 January
Capricorn- 19 January - 15 February
Aquarius- 16 February - 11 March
Pisces- 12 March - 18 April

6 Comments:

Blogger _nothing_ said...

I didn't know that. That's cool. I know several Ophiuchuses.

The problem I have with astrology is that it means we live in a deterministic universe. If the position of stars and/or planets at your birth can determine the way you act and react throughout your life, it seems that free will is either negated or reduced.

May 01, 2006 10:34 PM  
Blogger The Last Scientician said...

I think it would be Ophiuchi. I think there are probably ways that time of year through daylength or temperature or even airborne factors like pollen, could affect the development of an unborn baby, but the idea that a distant planet is having any effect whatsoever is pretty hard to swallow.

I think determinism and fatalistic notions are a byproduct of hindsight. We can build in reverse the "portents" and "omens" preceding an event. I've not once seen anyone do so in the other direction with any great accuracy or reliability.

May 01, 2006 11:44 PM  
Blogger dell said...

a sagittarius huh?

i knew i wasn't REALLY a capricorn...

oh... nother question, is that little wheelchair guy always down by your word verification?

May 02, 2006 9:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You said what I think, but smarterer.

May 02, 2006 5:20 PM  
Blogger The Last Scientician said...

You know, the little wheelchair guy popped up only this afternoon. Is Blogger telling me it thinks I'm retarded?

I don't KNOW!!!!

Oh, and thanks, tex.

May 02, 2006 9:06 PM  
Blogger Simon. said...

the wheelchair guy is your new friend, click on him and he will tell you a story about some numbers you can type in the box, i used it just then, those distorted letters are last year's news.

May 06, 2006 1:24 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home