IS ASTROLOGY A SCIENCE? - Part 1 by Satrajit Majumdar Is astrology a science?

This is the most common question posed about astrology b y both sets of people - the non-believers and the rationalists who claim that as trology is bogus and that it exploits the fear and insecurity of people. The bel ievers of astrology and the astrologers themselves stoutly defend the stance tha t astrology is a precise science. To my mind, both are wrong and both sets of people approach this question from a predefined mind set. For nonbelievers, it is fashionable and politically correct to denounce any syst em of knowledge, which does not fit into the 19th century definition of material ism and physical science. For astrologers, the mind set is that unless Astrology is a science, it is not r espectable in today's world, and for believers, anything that is termed as scien ce can be blindly believed or accepted. The new millennium is called the age of Aquarius, and astrologers claim Aquarius is ruled by the planet Uranus. Uranus signifies new science and technology. So in the age of Aquarius, I propose to examine this question in an objective fa shion without any preconceived mindset. The first question that comes to mind at this stage is, "What is the meaning and definition of science and astrology?" According to Random House Dictionary, the definition of these two words are: Science: 1 A branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths sy stematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws. 2 Mathematical Sciences - Systematic Knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation. 3 Any of the branches of natural or physical science. Astrology: A study that assumes and attempts to interpret the influence of heavenly bodies on human affairs. As far as the definition of astrology is concerned, there is little reason for d isagreement. However, the debate and dispute begins the moment astrologers start claiming that astrology is a science. Of the three definitions of science given above, I believe that definitions '2' and '3' are not applicable to astrology a s it has evolved over the years and exists as of date. Rationalists and nonbelievers argue that heavenly bodies cannot influence human affairs. On the other hand, astrologers, particularly Vedic astrologers, start w ith the assumption that the systematic body of knowledge, is in fact inspired by the Supreme Being himself. Hence, this is the absolute truth and cannot be ques tioned. They are God's words, which were passed on through generations by oral t radition and were first documented and classified by sages like Parashar (Astrol ogy is part of Vedas and that is why it is called Vedangas).

I believe both these extreme viewpoints are wrong and we can never resolve this debate in this manner. I should now clarify why the 2nd and 3rd definitions of astrology as a natural physical science, are not valid. For this, we must unders tand the methodology of physical science. Scientific Method: A method of research in which a problem is identified, relevant data are gathere d, a hypothesis is formulated from these data and the hypothesis is empirically tested. As an astrologer myself, I believe that astrology has never strictly followed th e stages of scientific methodology, namely data gathering, hypothesis formulatio n and empirical testing. Apart from sporadic attempts at individual levels, astrology has always been clo aked in secrecy and restricted to select groups. Even today, astrologers are ver y secretive about their knowledge and methodology. Astrological principles, in b oth ancient and modern astrological texts, irrespective of belonging to Vedic or Western astrology, are full of 'hypothesis'. No serious attempts have been made to collect data or to conduct empirical tests. Data collection and empirical testing cannot be conducted by individuals alone. It has to be a project which involves sharing of data and large scale coordinate d testing to establish a hypothesis as 'truth' or 'fact', as required by the fir st definition of `science'. The spirit of sharing knowledge is also an essential ingredient of scientific me thodology. Physical science has progressed because after the renaissance, scient ists started exchanging knowledge amongst themselves. Even during the height of the cold war, ideas were freely exchanged, between scientists of the USA and USS R, though not in matters related to defense and war. However, even if we start exchanging data and start examining the validity of as trological hypothesis, astrology will still not qualify to be a mathematical or natural science. But this would not reduce astrology to a less respected science. Astrology can b e more aptly defined as a 'behavioral science', like economics, but science none the less as per definition 1 of `science', provided we are willing to adopt the scientific methodology in all its three phases. It is essential to understand t he difference between the scientific methodology adopted in the case of behavior al sciences and physical sciences. In a physical science, we deal with causes and their effects. Physical scientist s then formulate a hypothesis as a law or equation which explains in terms of ex isting state of knowledge or truth why such causes create the effects as stipula ted in the hypothesis. This can then be tested through physical experiments and data collection. In a behavioral science like economics or astrology (the position that I intend to defend), we are also dealing with causes and effects and we are making hypoth esis to state what causes can produce what effects. The theory of Nobel Laureate Dr. Amartya Sen, which connects literacy with econo mic growth is now very popular in India and other developing countries. But it i s not possible for Dr. Sen to state in precise terms how much economic growth is achieved by literacy. This is because he is dealing with a very large populatio n - the entire population of a country. Also, the existing state of knowledge in physical sciences cannot identify or isolate the forces in nature that connect

literacy with economic growth. I think the parallel with astrology is now obvious. Astrologers are dealing with the entire human race and all its activities. The existing state of knowledge in physical sciences cannot yet identify or isol ate the forces in nature by which heavenly bodies influence human activities. We are both dealing with statistical correlation and are trying to come to speci fic conclusions. But economics is a science by the first definition because it a ttempts to establish truth through scientific method as outlined earlier. Astrology has not attempted to do that earlier. But all is not lost, in the age of Aquarius, we are bound to start our inquiry into astrology using scientific m ethodology and this is one of the mission statements of Cyberastro.com. I will now share with the visitors, the result of our very first, though small, step in that direction. Since September 1997, when we first set up our web site, we have collected the exact birth details of approximately 20,000 people spread over different age groups across the globe. Internet revolution makes that poss ible. I give below the first analysis report from that database: Age Aries Taurus Gemini Cancer Leo Virgo Libra Scorpio Sagitta Capric Aquar Pisces Total 0 - 20 220 198 194 245 245 290 253 233 183 229 177 252 2719 20 - 30 30 - 40 40 - 50 50 - 60 60 - 70 Total 813 363 135 49 7 1587 759 329 127 39 7 1459 827 350 145 34 8 1558 861 403 133 49 7 1698 851 368 166 39 10 1679 928 386 165 54 8 1831 936 360 168 40 11 1768 883 370 155 52 9 1702 765 324 141 41 8 1462 792 346 162 33 5 1567 647 333 127 27 6 1317 756 318 139 43 10 1518 9818 4250 1763 500 96 19146

I showed this data to my friend Ravi Sangal, who is the President of Internation al Data Corporation (IDC) India. IDC understands data and IDC understands statis tics. He vetted the following conclusions that I have drawn from this data. In absence of any past data on the subject, 20,000 randomly chosen samples acros s the globe is a valid statistical sample to represent the global population. Hu man beings biologically are productive throughout the year. In view of the skew in our age groups in the table which shows that most Interne t savvy people are between the age group of 20-30 years, our first cautionary co nclusion is that among Internet savvy people, there are more Virgos, Librans and Scorpions in the world and less Aquarians than the average numbers which belong to the rest of the zodiac signs. An interesting conclusion in the age of Aquari us! What is the astrological significance of this conclusion? Librans, Virgos and Sc orpions are more materialistic than Aquarians, who are more spiritually oriented . Isn't that the profile of the Internet savvy people of today? Or is it going t o change in the new millennium?

However, as Ravi Sangal puts it, this is a preliminary conclusion only, further calculations are needed to determine the sample size error etc. to arrive at the final conclusion. This will remain the subject for some other time. Before I end, I will get back to our original question "Is Astrology a Science". My conclusion is "Yes, Astrology can be considered a Science", provided we astro logers follow scientific methodology and acquire scientific spirit. Only then wi ll astrology be relevant for the new millennium. We have already discussed scien tific methodology. So what is scientific spirit? Scientific spirit is objectivity and our willingne ss to discard yesterday's belief and hypothesis at a moment's notice, no matter how ancient or how sacred is that belief - if our data and empirical tests do no t validate those hypothesis any more. Astrology can become a respectable science only then.