Miscellaneous desk
< September 19	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 20

Astrology again

I did some research and found some statements using weasel words:

Some tropical astrologers counter that the signs remember the influence of the constellations that corresponded with them two thousand years ago (Abell, George; Science and the Paranormal: Probing the Existence of the Supernatural, p. 86);

Many so-called tropical astrologers are aware of precession but choose to ignore it, arguing that somehow the 'signs remember the influence of the constellations that corresponded with them two thousand years ago (Hines, Terence; Pseudoscience and the Paranormal; quoting Abell but some has become many);

Some astrologers have adopted a position that attempts to reconcile the traditional sidereal scheme with the fact of precession by suggesting that the signs remember the influence of the constellations that corresponded to them 2000 years ago (when the traditional system was first established) (Wilson, Fred; The Logic and Methodology od Science and Pseudoscience; p. 57).

Who are these "some/many (tropical) astrologers"?-- Carnby (talk) 10:36, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see the earliest version (on archive.org) is a mimeographed 1979 yearbook of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science, where the piece is also by (I assume) George O. Abell. Unfortunately he is not contactable for comment, unless we try a medium. It may be necessary to write this off as an unknown source. On the other hand if any astrologer (including a more modern one!) can be found to have trotted out the same idea, Abell's comment becomes valid again to quote as a counterpoint, even without knowing the source of the verbatim quote. (Depending what your project is here, exactly. I assume you're revising a related article?) Card Zero (talk) 13:22, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) :Astrologers have one argument,[1], astronomers have another.[2]. The arguments are evaluated at astrology and science. 2A00:23C5:E161:9200:D824:D0C6:1E60:F0FC (talk) 13:37, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Sidereal and tropical astrology. As you can infer from the cited references, "tropical astrologers" are mainly found in India. AstroLynx (talk) 14:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting hint. I looked at some Indian astrology books and found some citations of The Fixed Stars And Constellations In Astrology, by Vivian Robson, which has the advantage of being just over 100 years old and hence fully browsable. I wonder whether it makes an equivalent statement to the quote anywhere. (Having examined it, probably not, but like any of these books, the theory being presented is muddled and hard to pin down. In this case the theory seems to be that the constellations were originally named after the influence of the signs: but also that both signs and constellations, despite now being separated, continue to have influence. Why not!) Card Zero (talk) 15:17, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) [above comment amended 15:44] The book gives some attributes to named stars and charts alleged effects of their passage through the sun signs. There is also treatment of the effects of constellations as distinct from sun signs. There is a lot of confusion among non-Hindus in their terminology. This appears to stem from the fact that India employs both "lunar" calendars and "solar" calendars (in "scare" quotes) in which the moon plays no part. However, if you read Indian New Year's days and follow the link to Vaisakhi#Date you will see the new year festival is moving forward - (proleptic) Gregorian 5 April in AD 1469 to 29 April in AD 2999. That's 24 days in 1,530 years or a whole year in ((365.2422/24) x 1530) = 23,284 years, which is roughly how long the equinox takes to move from the constellation of Aries (or any constellation) back to the same constellation. 2A00:23C5:E161:9200:54BE:4B3D:E69:3BFA (talk) 16:16, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's the other way round though, I'm seeing tropical equated with Western and sidereal with Hindu or Vedic astrology. Card Zero (talk) 16:20, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can safely assume that authors, whether Hindu or not, know what they're talking about. A glance at some Wikipedia articles reveals that some Wikipedia editors (such as AstroLynx, above) are making this mistake. What is causing it? Well, the Indian national calendar is aligned with the Gregorian, so the New Year always falls on 21 March, but the lunar calendars may be aligned with the "sidereal" as opposed to "tropical" (sun sign) calendar, so that the adheek (thirteenth) month is added when two new (or full) moons fall within one sidereal (as opposed to tropical, "sun sign") month. AstroLynx's claim that '"tropical astrologers" are mainly found in India' may mean no more than that, of the population of India who are astrologers, a goodly proportion live within the tropics. 92.28.94.86 (talk) 18:47, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here I think tropical is from Greek (wikt:τροπή) and means "turning". Or so one of the authors says. Card Zero (talk) 18:54, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's perfectly true. The Greek word tropos means "turn", and relates to the fact that when it reaches the northern tropic (Cancer) the sun turns and begins moving south, and when it reaches the southern tropic (Capricorn) it turns and begins moving north. 92.28.94.86 (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As was noted above, I indeed made an error, "tropical astrologers" who account for the precession of the equinoxes are mainly Western, "sidereal astrologers" who neglect precession are mainly Hindu/Indian. AstroLynx (talk) 19:46, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In the terms our article uses, "Sidereal astrology accounts for the Earth's axial precession and maintains the alignment between signs and constellations ... whereas tropical astrology ... does not take axial precession into consideration." So I'm afraid it's the other other way round. Confusingly, the tropical system doesn't turn. Except by staying fixed relative to the very slowly turning stars. Card Zero (talk) 21:15, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]