Sunday, May 9, 2010

On Horoscopes

An edited version from the Pub which I am one of the contributors:


Do you believe that being born in a certain place at a certain could determine your destiny for the rest of your life? Would you believe that your personality, your class, and your taste are all set from the day you were born? It is no surprise for astrologists to answer yes for the above questions. They assure us, with strong conviction, that it really matters whether we are born under the sign of Libra, Cancer, or Germini. While some may laugh these questions off as mere superstitions, astrologists have nevertheless succeeded in inducing many of us to harbour a sense of awe for the solar system, that planets and satellites are the decisive factors of what we do, that we ought to bow to necessities greater than ourselves.

In the technological civilisation of ours, our eyes should be full of wonder what science is capable of by a mere glimpse through the windows of electronics shops that offer countless choices of digital cameras, mp3 players, and mobile phones. Unfortunately, science has not triumphed. On the contrary, we derive consolation from a system devised in the second century A.D. which has not changed much ever since then, neglecting further astronomical discoveries and changes. Flipping over pages of women's and gossip magazines, particularly women's magazines, we may consult experts in astrology for a deeper sense of self-understanding and to know what may happen to us beforehand in months or weeks or even in days.

Perhaps there lies a seductive power for female readers in horoscopes. Women, conforming to their customary female curiosity for inner selves, unlike men who are only fond of physical appearance, tend to submit their thinking to the rigours of astrology rather than that of rational examination. In light of horoscopes, they are able to determine who can be their good friends or who may appease their romantic yearnings. On getting to know a stranger, rather than wasting time enquiring his background history, a simple question of his horoscope offers a woman well-grounded reasons to verify or dismiss his merits and qualities, based on an encyclopedia of astrology she bought in a commercial bookstore a while ago.

But does astrology assert absolute truth as it suggests? If it sounds right to us, it is perhaps because of its lack of precision. It may predict on which day we may encounter good luck or what kind of personality we may unknowingly possess. But it fails to tell us at what time what sort of good luck may happen to us. Moreover, what is good to someone is not necessarily good to us. Why, then, should we endorse the authority of astrology and proclaim it a supplement to a scientific branch called astronomy?

The belief in astrology also evokes a sense of fatalism, that human beings are mere slaves of cosmic energy, that the existence of free will is an illusion invented by countless philosophers and Christians, that at moments of melancholy and frustration we could only be consoled by wearing specific colours of garments or specific flavours of perfume. It has risked inspiring in us the most dangerous form of tolerance. It has justified Social Darwinism that being poor should be seen as deserved rather than as an outcome of the ills of capitalism. It condemns all our struggles for a better future, while placing us in a passive position, it only tells us to wait for things to improve naturally.

At times of suffering, we may perhaps need to enlarge our capacity to endure suffering like the Stoics did in ancient Greece and Rome. But there is an alternative solution. Just like the British philosopher Robert Rowland Smith said, "To write your own horoscope for the week, and then do your best to make it come true."

W

No comments:

Post a Comment