Know more about astrologers

The truth about the truth about astrology

by Sylvia Grotsch (comments: 12)

Dear Professor Lesch,

At the beginning of 2017 I stumbled across this YouTube video of yours with the exciting title: "The Truth About Astrology":

It was already clear to me that you probably wanted to pull our astrologers' fur over our ears :-). So pressed "play" to see if I am correct with my guess and, above all, how you will do it (the one with the fur). Because I really appreciate your programs on ZDF, and I've benefited enormously from some of them.

Please take care that I cannot go into everything you say in the video. I pick out central statements from them because they show how vague and imprecise even scientists can sometimes be on the move.

"We astronomers have problems with astrology"

Yes, you are right! Astronomers have their problems with astrology. The astrologers with the astronomers too. Each side has been attacking the other for years without either taking a step towards each other. Like a grim married couple who can't leave each other even though both have long known that they don't go together.

The reason is simple. Even if astrology was once considered the “queen of the sciences”, today's astrologers can see that astrology cannot be proven with the current means of science. But something that is not scientifically tangible does not have to be nonsense. Everyone who works with astrology knows the immense value of what they do, so we can safely stop trying to vie for science.

Instead of science for its part leaving astrology alone, it repeatedly pillories it - with the same "arguments" that you also use in your video and with which you mislead the audience to lead. This is unfortunate in that you have a responsibility as a scientist. You are a familiar face and have a permanent place on German television. That alone gives you a good deal of credibility in the eyes of many viewers.

The stars don't "say" what's going to happen

First of all, they pick up on the sayings of the tabloid press and media astrology. There, so that people shop diligently or check out the advertising on breakfast television, clouds of fog like "The stars don't lie", "Your fate is in the stars" or "Do you want to know what the future has in store for you?" .

The trouble is, astrology is all sorts of things. A personal horoscope analysis works with certain basic assumptions: The constellations at the time of birth show a person's disposition, his strengths, the challenges he has to overcome. Yes, in the individual horoscope we see the path that a person should go in this life, but this path has many options.

In any case, a horoscope analysis does not oracle about a mysterious "fate", nor about what will actually happen in the future or what other positive or negative surprises may bloom. In addition, we astrologers do not work with “pioneering stars” but with planetary constellations and the zodiac.

Now, of course, the viewer of your video does not know what kind of “astrology” you are actually talking about. As I understand you, at least at the beginning you are talking about media and tabloid astrology - then, Mr. Lesch, we are right at the end of the discussion about astrology. Because this kind of astrology is nonsense and has nothing in common with what we astrologers do in our daily work. Unfortunately, you don't make that distinction, so your video gives the impression that astrology is generally humbug.

Constellations and signs of the zodiac are two different things!

But the best is yet to come. You too use the same killing argument against astrology. I wish so much that this would finally reach the scientists (and also the journalists who mess about astrology): We astrologers don't work with the constellations, we astrologers work with the ZODIAC SIGNS.

But you cheerfully mix up both terms. Sometimes you use one word, sometimes the other, without making a clear distinction. But this difference is one very important basic assumption in astrology.

Yes, Mr. Lesch, please believe me - we astrologers also know that when viewed from the earth on March 21st in the sky the constellation Pisces stands. But since we are working with the ZODIAC, which is formed by the (apparent) course of the sun around the earth, it is on March 21st. There the zodiac sign Aries. And if the sky doesn't fall on our heads, it will still be there in a thousand years. I have described in more detail here why this is so.

It is also not true when you claim that 86% of all people live with the wrong zodiac sign. Again: We astrologers do not work with the constellations, this change in the sky just described is and has never been our basis for work.

We work with the zodiac. My students learn this in the first basic course, and they quickly understand the difference between constellations and signs of the zodiac. And therefore we know that in Western astrology, an Aries always remains an Aries and a Taurus always remains a Taurus.

What I realized from your video

Nothing is so bad that it cannot be good for something. The fact that you start your video with a quote that the popular press likes to use (“The stars don't lie”) reminds you that there is a lot of botch that doesn't deserve the name astrology. This includes, among other things, the daily horoscopes for the zodiac signs, any promises of a “future look” or stuff like: “We have a solar year! Happiness will shine on you ”. If you criticize something like that, dear Mr. Lesch - I am by your side.

Hairier is the full-bodied title "The Truth About Astrology" ...

Astrology cannot be grasped with current scientific methods, that's the way it is, and I live with it very well. What astrology is and what it can do can only be found out by studying the subject on your own. It takes a few years to get halfway close to the truth of astrology, and it certainly can't be put into a short video.

When trying to prove or disprove astrology (like you do), at least one thing is important first: You have to know their conceptual bases and requirements. Otherwise it happens that you gallop with your arguments and only show that you don't really know your way around. In any case, I was flabbergasted that you, as a scientist, were the important Difference between constellations and signs of the zodiac not knowing.

One thing is consoling with all the attacks: Science once claimed that the earth was flat and that spinach had a lot of iron. Perhaps the day will come when science has other methods at its disposal to describe and understand the phenomenon of astrology more precisely. Then I would like to see another YouTube video from you :-)

This article was published on 06/12/2017 by Sylvia Grotsch and is listed in the categories: