Astrology as a Science
Contrasted, within the limits of common social perception first and foremost to all positive sciences, the astrology doesn’t stand a chance when it comes to be considered a science. Yet, there is the thriving profession of astrologer – a reality one cannot deny. This profession, they say, is sustained more by the credulity of people than by the science, sometimes grossly advertized, of astrologer. It is this very fact – the belief of the multitudes – that inspires us in thinking that there should be a physical basis of astrology indeed. For, there is a memory of the matter, no matter if live or inert, once it was created. That memory permeates the matter and determines its evolution. This must be the very reason masses believe in astrology. The rest is astrologer’s ethics, if such an ethics exists. The lack of it is, again, the reason for which astrologers are sometimes ridiculed, anyway it is the main reason for which the academies rejected astrology. For, if the belief of multitudes is a sure indication of the unity of matter, no matter of its kind, there is no way, in science today, of looking upon matter from one and the same point of view, because there is no philosophical category denying it. Such a category, denying matter, would sustain the division of matter as we perceive it, and would therefore provide the foundation of astrology as a science.
Nicolae Mazilu
Bernadette Hosfeld says:
January 2nd, 2011 at 1:11 am
When i visit a blog, chances are that I notice that most blogs are amateurish. Regarding your blog,I have to say that you have done a good job here.