Psychology professors Ivan W. Kelly and Don H. Saklofske have written and published online a new major critique of Western astrology. Their fifty-six-page paper, “Contemporary Western Astrology: A Philosophical Critique 2021,” is a thorough critical examination of the concepts and assumptions underlying most astrologers in the contemporary Western world (Europe and North America). Its focus is on conceptual and philosophical issues rather than the massive empirical literature examining astrology. That literature has also found astrology wanting (for that, they refer us to another 2021 critical review of a thousand empirical studies by Dean, Mather, Nias, and Smit, available for free online at www. astrology-and-science.com).

The full paper by Kelly and Saklofske concludes:

Our present examination of astrology, as currently practiced by most Western astrologers, indicates that it not only does not have any fit with any fields of contemporary physical or social sciences, … claims by astrologers that it is an occult field or a post-materialistic science are just expressions of wishful thinking and dogmatic belief to circumvent criticism. Claims that astrology is a science or even a transcendent science rest on deeply problematic beliefs from beginning to end.

Kelly, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Saskatchewan and a longtime scientific consultant for the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, has given us permission to present here the abstract of their philosophical critique. It is an excellent summary of their examination and conclusions. The full paper is available at Ivan William Kelly, Research Gate.

Contemporary Western Astrology: A Philosophical Critique 2021

Ivan W. Kelly
Professor Emeritus, University of Saskatchewan, Canada

Don H. Saklofske

University of Western Ontario, Canada

Abstract

The focus of this paper is on contemporary natal astrology (which is centered on one’s birthdate) as construed by most Western astrologers. Astrology is not based on observation as many astrologers contend, but on conventional and arbitrary associations from mythology, the sounds of words, names, associations based on color, analogy, and metaphor. Astrology as typically practiced has no plausible non-paranormal explanation (it is not even clear by any means what even a paranormal or supernatural explanation for astrology would look like). At all levels its claims are at variance with scientific findings across social and natural science fields. Despite the conventional nature of astrological symbolism, as in all paranormal fields, the interests of followers will be kept up by the announcements of startling new positive findings, every once in a while. The reader needs to be aware that we have been here before when it comes to astrology. Such announcements also need to confront the fact that one-thousand studies have been conducted on astrological claims (a large number by astrologers anxious to find support for their beliefs) and no reliable, repeatable studies have emerged (Dean, Mather, Nias, & Smit 2021). Given the extravagant claims of astrologers (check any bookstore or astrology site) that astrology is ubiquitous, its claims should be easily uncovered. The fact that they are not easily uncovered, if at all, is evidence itself against astrology. The further fact that astrologers have to come up with increasing complex and metaphysical explanations to account for it being difficult to uncover what is supposedly obvious (i.e., astrology as described by its practitioners), is a further indicator of astrological desperation.  Our critique casts serious doubt on the foundations of Western astrology, showing that in its contemporary forms it is incapable of generating knowledge.

Kelly, Australian psychologist (and CSI Fellow) Geoffrey Dean, and Saklofske have also recently published a shorter critique of astrology in the journal Physics in Canada (“Astrology for the Physicist,” 76(1): 1–7, 2020). They write: “Arguably astrology has little to contribute to human understanding except fantasy. Yes, it is part of our past, but why should it be part of our future?” For lessons learned, they compare it to the one-time popular practice of phrenology and end: “Astrology could hardly be better suited to the scientific study of pseudoscience. In terms of longevity and ongoing popularity it has a clear edge over other questionable beliefs. For every student of pseudoscience, astrology would seem a good place to start.”