When astrology was considered science…
|March 9, 2016||Posted by News under Astronomy, Culture, News|
There were a variety of specializations within the field of astrology, from the very respectable basics of using heavenly observations to make general predictions about the weather, finances, etc., to the more controversial practice of casting a chart based on the moment a question was posed and then providing an answer according to celestial aspects.[ii] And Catherine was hardly the only monarch employing astrology or astrologers in decision-making. The severe and devout Philip II of Spain consulted them, even upon the creation of his tomb. And who has not heard of John Dee in connection with England’s Elizabeth I? It was not until the opening years of the 17th century, with the proliferation of the telescope and overthrow of the earth-centered universe, that astrology began to seriously lose followers.[iii]So, rather than making her seem foolish, Catherine’s fascination with the observable movements of the heavens and her belief that they influenced human fate would have reinforced her image as a woman of science. This was a reputation she enjoyed from the moment she set foot in France as the bride-to-be of the then Dauphin, when her pronounced interest in geography, physics and astronomy set her apart from the court’s other ladies. Although Catherine may not be remembered for her scientific bent now, during her lifetime she was clearly celebrated for it by her contemporaries, including the poet Ronsard.[iv]More.
Astrology was a perfectly reasonable determinist theory of life.
It just didn’t happen to be correct.
See also: Why are people surprised by liberal religious interest in astrology?
Darwinism now in same sort of mess that “floored” astrology – Fuller
Follow UD News at Twitter!