Astrology has been sparking arguments for centuries, and recently, the stars (or perhaps the headlines) aligned to fan the flames once again. On September 7, two critiques landed on the same day: a high-profile newspaper dismissed zodiac signs as “2,000 years out of date,” and a social scientist declared astrology’s claims invalid after a round of experimental testing. Naturally, these comments reignited classic debates about astrology's place in today’s world.
But here’s the thing—criticisms like these often miss the core of what astrology actually is.
The Sun Hasn’t Moved—The System Just Works Differently
One of the most common arguments used to discredit astrology leans heavily on astronomy. Critics point to the Earth’s axial wobble, called precession, which has gradually shifted the positions of the stars relative to our calendar. Translation? Your zodiac sign may not match the constellation it was originally based on thousands of years ago. Scandalous, right? Well—not quite.
This line of reasoning overlooks how Western astrology actually operates. It uses what’s called the tropical zodiac, which doesn’t track the stars’ current positions at all. Instead, it slices the sky into twelve equal segments, starting from the spring equinox. Those signs you know—Aries, Taurus, Gemini—they’re essentially markers woven into the Earth’s seasons, not the distant constellations.
Meanwhile, other traditions like Vedic astrology use a sidereal zodiac, which does move with the stars and accounts for shifts like precession. Both systems are internally consistent and tied more to symbolic meaning than to physical mechanics. Criticizing astrology for inaccurate astronomy is a bit like faulting a metaphor for not being literal.
Science Wants Proof. Astrology Offers Something Else.
Then there’s the scientific angle. The second critique that made waves on September 7 centered on a test: astrologers were tasked with matching birth charts to personality profiles. The results didn’t beat random guessing, leading some to declare astrology debunked.
But here’s the catch—astrology isn’t built to function like a scientific formula. It doesn’t claim to produce repeatable, measurable outcomes. Instead, it works more like a language—one that uses symbols and archetypes to explore cycles, patterns, and psychological meaning. Saying astrology fails because it can’t pass a lab test is a bit like saying poetry is useless because you can’t graph it.
In fact, astrology has more in common with storytelling, therapy, or dream interpretation than it does with physics. It's less about predicting concrete events and more about helping people reflect, process, and make sense of their lives.
Celestial Mirrors, Not Puppet Strings
Let’s clarify something that often gets misunderstood: astrologers don’t generally believe the planets are pulling our strings from millions of miles away. Instead, astrology views celestial movements as reflective, not causal. That is, what happens in the sky lines up with what happens here—not because one causes the other, but because they’re part of the same pattern, the same story.
It’s a worldview steeped in synchronicity, something Carl Jung talked about frequently. Events are meaningful not because they can be measured in a lab, but because they resonate symbolically. For astrologers, a planetary alignment doesn’t push you into a breakup or a career change—it may simply echo themes already unfolding in your life.
The Cosmic Coincidence of Criticism
Curiously enough, many astrologers noticed that the wave of critiques on September 7 happened to coincide with a lunar eclipse in Pisces and a tough alignment between Mars and Jupiter. In astrological terms, that translates to an emotional climax (hello, eclipse) combined with friction between aggression and belief systems (Mars vs. Jupiter, anyone?).
Astrologers didn’t see this timing as a cause-and-effect relationship—they saw it as a cosmic nod, a poignant example of the very themes astrology often tracks: tension, belief, confrontation. It’s not proof. It’s poetry.
So, Is Astrology "True"?
Maybe that’s the wrong question.
If you’re looking for hard evidence, double-blind studies, and mathematical certainty, astrology probably won’t satisfy. But if you’re someone who finds comfort or insight in symbolism—or who enjoys framing your life as part of a larger cosmic story—astrology might offer something far more personal.
In the end, the value of astrology doesn’t lie in whether it’s technically “real” by scientific standards. It lies in how it helps people reflect, connect, or simply feel seen. That may not be measurable, but it’s meaningful nonetheless.
Final Thought
The debate between science and astrology probably isn’t going away anytime soon. But maybe the conversation doesn’t have to be so binary. After all, we make meaning in different ways—and some of them just happen to come with stars.
