Mundane astrology - Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 86.** IP (talk | contribs) at 02:40, 30 March 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:40, 30 March 2012 by 86.** IP (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

An editor has nominated this article for deletion.
You are welcome to participate in the deletion discussion, which will decide whether or not to retain it.Feel free to improve the article, but do not remove this notice before the discussion is closed. For more information, see the guide to deletion.
Find sources: "Mundane astrology" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR%5B%5BWikipedia%3AArticles+for+deletion%2FMundane+astrology%5D%5DAFD

This article may be unbalanced toward certain viewpoints. Please improve the article by adding information on neglected viewpoints, or discuss the issue on the talk page. (March 2012)

This article includes a list of references, related reading, or external links, but its sources remain unclear because it lacks inline citations. Please help improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (March 2012) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Astrology

Background
Worship of heavenly bodies History of astrology Astrology and astronomy Glossary Planets Behenian Classical Zodiac Traditions, types, and systems Astrology and science Astrologers Astrological organizations
Traditions
Babylonian Chinese Hellenistic Hindu Islamic Jewish Tibetan Western
Branches
Natal Electional Horary Medical Financial Locational Psychological Meteorological
Astrological signs
Aries Taurus Gemini Cancer Leo Virgo Libra Scorpio Sagittarius Capricorn Aquarius Pisces
Symbols
Planet Metals
v t e

Mundane astrology is the application of astrology to world affairs and world events, taking its name from the Latin word mundus, meaning "the World". Mundane astrology is widely believed by astrological historians to be the most ancient branch of astrology. Astrological practices of divination and planetary interpretation have been used for millennia to answer political questions. It was, however, only with the gradual emergence of horoscopic astrology from the sixth century B.C. that astrology developed into two distinct branches, mundane astrology and natal astrology..

Mundane astrology deals with the study of events at a national level which are significant enough to affect the harmony, hopes, expectations and material conditions of the citizens. Often there is a considerable focus on the government, politics or laws of a particular nation, state, city or organization. The most prevalent approach to the study of mundane astrology is by focusing on the horoscope representing the birth of a collective entity. It is held that certain countries have astrological charts (or horoscopes) just like a person is said to in astrology. For example, the modern state of India is widely considered to have come into being at midnight on August 15, 1947, when its independence was attained from Britain. This time gives rise to a national horoscope for this country, which can be analyzed in terms of the natal potential and the impacts of transiting planets in the horoscope at any given time. The other approach is the ancient practice of predicting mundane events based on the study of astrological phenomena, such as the movement of celestial bodies through signs in the Solar System, aspects between planets or astronomical cycles. This approach makes no reference to a national horoscope.

Contemporary science considers astrology a pseudoscience. It has also been suggested that much of the continued faith in astrology could be psychologically explained as a matter of cognitive bias.

Astrology has repeatedly failed to demonstrate its effectiveness in controlled studies, according to the American Humanist Society. The group characterised those who continue to have faith in astrology as doing so "in spite of the fact that there is no verified scientific basis for their beliefs, and indeed that there is strong evidence to the contrary." One well-documented and referenced paper, for instance, which conducted a large scale scientific test, involving more than one hundred cognitive, behavioral, physical and other variables, found no support for astrological accuracy.

Astrology has been criticized for failing to provide a physical mechanism that links the movements of celestial bodies to their purported effects on human behavior. In 1975, amid increasing popular interest in astrology, The Humanist magazine presented a rebuttal of astrology in a statement put together by Bart J. Bok, Lawrence E. Jerome, and Paul Kurtz. The statement, entitled ‘Objections to Astrology’, was signed by 186 astronomers, physicists and leading scientists of the day. They said that there is no scientific foundation for the tenets of astrology and warned the public against accepting astrological advice without question. Their criticism focused on the fact that there was no mechanism whereby astrological effects might occur:

We can see how infinitesimally small are the gravitational and other effects produced by the distant planets and the far more distant stars. It is simply a mistake to imagine that the forces exerted by stars and planets at the moment of birth can in any way shape our futures.

References

Michael Baigent (1994). From the Omens of Babylon: Astrology and Ancient Mesopotamia. Arkana.
Michael Baigent, Nicholas Campion and Charles Harvey (1984). Mundane astrology. Thorsons.
Richard Dawkins (31 December 1995). "The Real Romance in the Stars". London: The Independent, December 1995.. See also "Astronomical Pseudo-Science: A Skeptic's Resource List". Astronomical Society of the Pacific.
Eysenck, H.J., and Nias, D.K.B. (1982) pp.42-48.
Bart Bok, Paul Kurtz and Lawrence Jerome, "Objections to Astrology: A Statement by 186 Leading Scientists" in The Humanist September/October, 1975.
Is Astrology relevant to consciousness and Psi?
The Humanist, volume 35, no.5 (September/October 1975); pp. 4-6. The statement is reproduced in 'The Strange Case of Astrology' by Paul Feyerabend, published in Grim (1990) pp.19-23.
"Objections to Astrology: A Statement by 186 Leading Scientists". The Humanist, September/October 1975. Archived from the original on 2009-03-18.
Bok, Bart J. (1982). "Objections to Astrology: A Statement by 186 Leading Scientists". In Patrick Grim (ed.). Philosophy of Science and the Occult. Albany: State University of New York Press. pp. 14–18. ISBN 0873955722. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

References

Further reading