A second look at the original problem hiding behind Astrology
Today, the world is home to over 7 billion people, each with diverse beliefs about life, the earth, and God. Some believe that life is guided by karma, where a continuous cycle of birth and rebirth occurs until all karmic actions and their effects are balanced. Others believe that life is a one-time experience, where actions are a blend of sin and virtue. Still others hold the belief in a single judgment day, where all deeds will be accounted for. There are of course other beliefs and non-beliefs as well.
People around the world have long sought to understand human behavior and predict the future through various methods. They have developed systems like numerology, astrology, and palmistry and many other methodologies. These approaches attempt to correlate a person's behavior with certain features such as birth date, star positions, and palm lines. By aggregating these behavioral correlations and analyzing them, they aim to predict someone else's behavior based on their birth dates, star positions, or palm lines. While these methods have had some success, they have also encountered numerous failures. In response to these failures, practitioners often turn to their religious and cultural knowledge, such as Vedanta, Theology etc to find explanations and justify the failures.
When we critically examine astrology, it becomes evident that it is a pseudoscience, as many predictions are riddled with errors. However, in labeling astrology as pseudoscience, we often overlook the original issue it seeks to address and fail to explore other methods of solving the actual problem which is "predicting the future". We even forget that there is an actual experience of similarities in human behavior between many individuals. At an individual level people tend to repeat the same mistakes, they behave the same way over a long period of time.
One might ask, "If weather predictions are sometimes wrong, doesn't that still qualify as science? And if it is science, how can it be correct at times and incorrect at others?" Indeed, weather forecasting is challenging and occasionally inaccurate, but meteorologists rely on the principles of science to analyze these errors and provide explanations. In my view, astrology may have initially developed through experimentation and observation, much like meteorology. However, at some point in history, it became stagnant and failed to evolve further. Practitioners began using it primarily as a way to earn a living, while others exploited it to control people, gain respect, and accumulate power and wealth.
Let's begin by understanding the core issue. People exhibit a wide range of behaviors, and while these behaviors can vary greatly, over time, it's possible to identify certain traits that define an individual's character. For example, a person might be kind hearted, wealthy, poor, healthy, principled, quick to anger, calm, funny, pleasant, inclusive, artistic, hardworking, lazy, clever, simple-minded, a leader, or fame-seeking, among other qualities. These fundamental traits differ from one person to another. By observing someone over a very long period and identifying these traits, we could categories individuals into many groups based on their unique characteristics.
We can assume that someone conducted such observations and attempted to correlate these behavioral patterns with the knowledge of astronomy and star positions available at the time, seeking answers through the philosophy of Vedanta or Theology because those were the only frameworks available in the past to analyze such complexities. These individuals likely laid the foundation for what we now know as astrology. More than that, these early individuals asserted the problem of “predicting the future” by analyzing the past.
Therefore, even if astrology is considered a pseudoscience, much like homeopathy, in my opinion the underlying problem still remains relevant. Today, we have the advantage of analyzing such issues with more advanced technologies and fundamental theories. In the past, Vedanta was the primary framework for understanding these matters. In those earlier times, people genuinely attempted to analyze these issues more thoroughly. This is evident because of the amount of literature created around astrology. When observations didn't align with their theories, they sought to explain the discrepancies by drawing on various beliefs and possibilities, often relying on both scriptures and non-scriptural sources to justify the exceptions.
However, over time, the process of observation slowed, leading to a blind adherence to tradition. This is evident because of the absence of any new significant contribution to the literature around astrology eventually resulting in astrology losing its value. Except for those who still believe in it or those who use it as a means of livelihood I don't think people take it very seriously. But the problem stays relevant because people still spend a lot of money for “predicting the future” and they are still paying for those outdated methodologies. Just look at the number of apps, practitioners and Youtube videos.
Interpreting start positioning
A fundamental issue in astrology lies in how it interprets star positioning. If we consider star positions as a set of variables with infinite combinations, a significant problem arises: how can twins, born under the same star positions, exhibit different natures? Astrology struggles to answer this question because, according to its principles, both babies should share the same characteristics. To address this, astrologers often delve into concepts like previous births and karma, relying on the philosophy of Vedanta.
Mythical moment of birth
Another critical question is how to determine the exact moment of birth? This is a complex issue, as our understanding of the birth process has evolved significantly over time. Today, we have a detailed comprehension of the entire process, from the formation of the zygote to the moment a child takes its first breath. In ancient times, birth time was typically recorded as the moment of actual childbirth, similar to how we record it today. The key point is that while this timing can be somewhat arbitrary, what matters most is the consistency of the process.
Why ?
If we consistently correlate behavior with the star pattern at the time of birth or any other specific moment, the results for each child should, in theory, be consistent. This would eliminate the need for debates about the exact moment of birth. However, another critical question remains: Is this correlation accurate? The answer is no. The correlation fails, especially when two babies are born at the same time, yet display different behaviors. This indicates that correlating behavior solely with birth date and star positions is insufficient. There are missing variables, and the approach itself may be flawed in addressing the problem. What's surprising is that few have attempted to explore alternative ways of solving this issue.
Can we use genetics & digital data with the help of AI for correlation and make predictions ?
This is a fascinating development in recent years. Our genes now reveal more about us than things like our iris, palm lines, birth date, or star sign. By studying genetics, we can begin to answer many questions about who we are. Genes might show if we're likely to have certain inherited diseases or if we have high intelligence, but they can't predict if we'll be rich or poor. Meanwhile, with the rise of AI, large language models (LLMs) have emerged from training neural networks on vast amounts of text. Surprisingly, they've gained unexpected abilities like answering questions, analyzing emotions, and creating new content, all just from learning to predict the next word in a sentence.
Many human traits develop through social interaction. Today, AI can observe and analyze these interactions. A person's behavior often depends on their current situation just like how weather or stock prices change based on many factors. The challenge is that we rarely know all the variables involved, which makes accurate predictions very hard. But what if neural networks could learn those hidden factors and start making reasonably accurate predictions ?
One key difference between astrology and fields like weather forecasting or the stock market is that astrology is still based on ancient theories and hasn't evolved much. It focuses more on following traditional methods than solving the actual problem. But isn't the core problem still relevant ? Wouldn't it be valuable if we could predict certain events in our lives even with 60% accuracy, so we could better prepare for them ?
Imagine predicting something like the future creditworthiness of a person with that level of accuracy, based on hidden factors we don't yet understand. That kind of data would be incredibly valuable to lenders. It's a wild thought, but what if AI could uncover those unknown variables? What if prediction itself is an emergent property, just like how large language models learn to predict the next word by training on massive amounts of text? Would it be possible to predict the future based on a massive amount of data about people ?
If we ever reach a point where AI can predict life events with some accuracy, the implications would be profound. Life could start to feel less like a series of random events and more like a path shaped by hidden patterns almost fate driven. That shift in perspective could change how we think about free will, choice, and personal responsibility. But that's a deeper topic, worthy of its own discussion.
If you've seriously considered these ideas. however far-fetched they may seem and see real parallels and potential for prediction, the next big question is: how do we actually do it ? What are the new set of parameters we should be looking for ? Genetics, social interactions, digital footprints, psychological patterns could all hold clues. The challenge is identifying which variables truly matter and figuring out how to relate them in a meaningful, predictive way. Do we need to correlate at all ? Maybe AI will figure out a correlation better than us who knows.