Do you know – Astrology is Just a Faux Pas?

Astrology is not a science. It is a “pseudo-science” – a hybrid of “science” and “fiction”.

If we treat the centre of a circle to be true and its circumference to be false everything that should lie between the centre and the circumference has to be neither true nor false.

What is true of the substance lying between the centre and the circumference of a circle is true of astrology also. It is neither true nor false.

No doubt, we sometimes get quite amazing results through astrology. But it does not prepare us to believe in it.

If we keep on believing that a piece of stone may be god – it is quite a different thing. Nobody bans you from believing so. But howsoever best you may keep on thinking that it is a piece of butter you would never be able to eat it as if it is butter. It would remain a piece of stone only. You would never be able to eat it like butter.

If we look at the way astrology had been developed, it can be very easily noticed that the manner in which it had been developed itself makes it “null and void” because even though the progenitors of astrology also followed the same QED procedure as we follow in mathematics to prove the correctness of various theorems by first making some assumption and, subsequently, proving that we had made a valid assumption they also made several assumptions to evolve astrology but they never took pains to prove whether the assumptions were valid or invalid and if invalid – to what extent they were found to have been invalid.

Now look at the assumptions they made in respect of the aspects assigned by them to various patches of sky – each patch comprising the 30° wide extant of sky confined within 9° north and 9° south of the path the Sun appears to be tracing around the earth in a year, nicknamed as “zodiac houses”.


The house that measures 0° to 30° down below the eastern horizon is considered as the “first house” and the one that measures 31° to 60° further down beneath it is considered as the “second house” and so on up to the “twelfth house”.

Each house may be viewed as a continent of the earth and the extant of the sky beyond 9° north and 9° south of the eclectic maybe viewed as the ocean portion of the earth.

However, are all continents of the earth of same size?

But all houses are of same size. Question arises, “Why they should be same size?”

Even the constellations they represent are not of same size.

Do all types of people not live in all continents – some forthright, some religious, some criminals, some rich and some poor?

To understand what I mean by it, have a look at the aspects assigned by them to the following houses.

It has been stipulated that the second house rules a person’s finances, material resources, ability to earn money, characteristics of his or her family (comprising his/her close relatives such as grandfather, grandmother, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters etc.). It denotes the financial circumstances, fortune, profit or loss and financial prosperity of the person. This house shows what he/she may acquire by his/her own efforts and the degree of prosperity which he/she  would enjoy with all the possessions of extrinsic value in the form of bonds, stocks, cash and bank balance etc. It relates to his/her earning capacity, his/her ability to establish him or her in life. It does not indicate career but indicates the financial success. This is not limited to what one he/she owns in terms of tangible things but also his/her feelings and emotions, as well as his/her abilities, needs and wants. Another important influence of the second house is the one’s ability to express his thoughts and his/her vision or the power of observation. It is also one of the death inflicting houses (the other being the 7th house).

This house refers to the second sign of zodiac, the Taurus (the Vrishaba or Vrish in Hindi). The natural significator of the second house is the planet Venus and Jupiter.

The parts of the physical body governed by the 2nd house are the eyes (generally 2nd house rules the right eye and the 12th house rules the left eye), tongue, nose, teeth, cheeks, chin and all the neck and throat area.

As per Mundane or State or Political Astrology, the second house signifies national wealth, exchequer, revenue, banks, commercial affairs, trade and activities and matters which concern revenue. It governs all the matters signified by the finance, food and family welfare ministry.

Likewise, the seventh house is stipulated to rule a person’s relationships and partnerships, marriage, the characteristics of his wife (or husband), his/her legal bondages, lawsuits, quarrels, divorces and overt enemies. It also refers to all those with whom he/she enters into any contract or agreement or develops conflicts, his/her competitors in any undertaking and his/her rivals in any contest. It is also one of the death-inflicting houses just like second house. The parts of the body ruled by the seventh house are kidneys, middle and lower back and vertebra.

Is there any justification for having chosen these very aspects for these houses?

Why the aspects that had been assigned to the second house not been assigned to the seventh house and vice versa?

What should have made them believe that all houses should have not covered all the aspects of life the way all types of people live in all the continents?

As a matter of fact the aspects assigned by them to these houses could have been assigned even to any of the other houses as well – why to these particular houses only? On what criteria they would have pitched on this particular pattern only? Allotting the aspects portion of the sky wise does not stand to any logic at all.

By plain logic, all aspects could be allotted in as many as 144 – twelve times twelve – different ways.

Actually if we looked at it logistically – we should consign astrology to dust bin even on this issue, all by itself.

Worst come, they should have tried out all the 144 combinations before acceding to any particular combination.

They obviously did not think it necessary to prove why they should have chosen this particular pattern only.


To make any prediction, astrology expects you to select the houses that may cover the query of the native (the person who may be seeking some advice based on astrology) to be answered and calculate the collective impact of the planets and the constellations that may be occupying those houses on such aspects.

They collected mammoth of data on the impact presence of various planets in each house may have on the above aspects in the life of the natives of various “Ascendant Signs”.

Should the percentage of the cases studied by them, for which, the planets present in various houses had impacted various aspects of each house have been also not recorded by them according to which astrologers were supposed to make predictions for the natives of various Ascendant Signs?

Should they have not tied a tag to the data collected by them showing the percentage of the cases in which they should have impacted the aspects and the percentage of the cases in which they should have not impacted these aspects so that it could have been possible to tell the “credibility level” of each prediction made based on such data?

This was perhaps the biggest mistake committed by them in carrying out this project.

Supposing, the impact of some planet in some particular house should have been true in only 40 percent cases, it would have pegged the “confidence level” of the prediction also to the same level – 40 percent.

But because they did not tie such tags, the astrologers are not able to tell how much confidence we may repose on which prediction.

Do you think – a “confidence level” of 40 percent is good enough for you to depend on astrology?

If not, why go for it?

You may be wondering if astrology is so fictitious how’s it, it at all gives so accurate results also?

Well is that not so even when we toss a coin?

Supposing you had bet for tails don’t you think you may get “tails” also after tossing the coin?

The same is true of astrology also.

It is just a faux pas.

Actually you have so many other reasons also to reject astrology for instance, the following reasons.


You may draw an analogy between only analogous things – not between things like “what may happen in the sky” and “what may happen in our life” – that are not analogous.

It is ludicrous to think of any analogy between them.

Are you not aware, stars can’t exercise any discretion to change their routes, their direction or their orbital periods – even if they would have ever liked to change but we, the human beings, can change practically everything that pertains to our life any moment of time.

We can turn even 180° around but the stars can never turn back. They can move only in one direction – the forward direction.

Stars may never ever politicise as we, the human beings, can.

They never cheat each other as is so common down here on the earth.

We are selfish, they aren’t.

They neither cheat other stars nor bluff anyone but cheating and bluffing are almost an order of the day here on the earth.

Stars don’t have a system of going on vacations as we go in our life.

For instance, even if Jupiter would have liked to take rest for a few days – it won’t have been possible for it to take a vacation.

The stars would always come back to their starting point after completing one round around but it is not so in our case.

We never know in advance whether we shall come back home or not because we are never sure – we may meet a road-accident any day while driving back home. But it is never so in case of the planets.

Stars do not get struck up in any traffic jams like us.


The sign (the zodiacal constellation) that may have ascended into the twelfth house in the morning on the day the native may have born is known as native’s ascendant sign.

Shouldn’t the ascendant sign of a native be based on the actual constellation that may have ascended – not based on a chart that had been prepared more than two thousand years back?

No doubt, two thousand years back, Aries used to ascend between March 20 and April 20 and Taurus used to ascend between April 21 and May 21 – but not anymore. Nor is it so in case of all other zodiac constellations.

Yet all astrologers, till date, assign the ascendant signs according to the above chart only even though due to the precession of the earth over past two or two and a half thousand years, these dates have shifted by almost a month, as follows.

Aries, now, ascends into the sky between April 19 and May 13 – not between March 20 and April 20. So a person who may have born between March 20 and April 20 only should be assigned Aries sign – not one who may have born between March 20 and April 20.

The same way, a person born between May 14 and June 19 should be assigned the sign Taurus – not one who may have born between April 21 and May 21.

But surprisingly, the astrologers still assign the ascendant signs according to the old chart only.

Just think, how any prediction may be at all correct if astrologers carry out their calculations based on a wrong ascendant sign?

Rightly speaking, they should have disbanded the old chart by now. But they have been coolly sitting over it as if it does not matter at all.

The main reason why astrology has not collapsed so far is the zealousness of the people to do not commence any new project or get married on some “astrologically inauspicious date” or to do not get married to some “astrologically incompatible spouse”, that is, whose horoscope may not match their own horoscope.

So just get off the hook.

It is just a myth – nothing more than a speculation, which has equal chances of being “true” as well as “false”.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s