I was having a discussion with my partner about randomness. He is a proponent of Nassim Taleb's theory that randomness is more prevalent then people realize. People are hardwired to look for patterns and seek explanations. Much like astrologers.
My partner's philosophy is to simply accept that that there does not have to be a reason for everything. I find that his willingness to leap into the void looks a lot like faith (an irony as he considers himself to be an "apathetic agnostic").
I can't think that way. I'll fully admit that I'm drawn to astrology because it puts a comforting framework on life. I need there to be connections and patterns. Does this make astrology a crutch? Maybe. But it works for me and I've seen it work (and offer hope) to so many people time and again that I don't think it matters.
Mr. Taleb believes that astrology "...can always find a reason to fit the past event" therefore it cannot be disproved. Hence the difference between ..."science and nonsense" (science can be disproved). But why should something have to be disproved or quantified to be valid? This takes us back to faith. Most astrologers will say they can't explain how astrology works. It just does. I don't believe that this is a cop out. It is an acceptance, just like accepting that much of life is random.
So we arrive at the same spot by different roads.
Photo: Marta Bevacqua