Why do (some) astrologers ask for the exact time of birth?

[Steven Howard]

Often when trying to design tests for astrology (as seen, for example, in this thread) we find that the astrologer wants an exact time of birth, often down to the minute. Obviously this is problematic for a number of reasons, mainly that there's no commonly accepted definition of the exact minute that a person is born, nor any reason to suppose that the person recording the birth will note that exact time on the birth certificate. But I digress.

What I'm wondering is, why? I mean, these people are using methods that they claim to be centuries, if not millennia, old. Much older, anyway, than the use of minutes and seconds to tell time, which as far as I can tell didn't really take off until the mechanical clock became widespread in the 16th Century. If you need the time of birth down to the minute for an accurate reading, how did people get the idea that astrology worked before the hour was even divided into minutes? Or, you know, before the hour was even a standard length of time (as opposed to "approximately 1/12 of the time from sunrise to sunset")?

And anyway, isn't astrology supposed to be based on the position of stars and planets and so forth? I wonder what would happen if you were to ask one of these astrologers who insist that they can't give an accurate reading without an exact time of birth to go outside one night, find a star or a planet that has some meaning in their system, then look at it again a minute later and see if its position in the sky has changed.

And even if the exact time of birth were somehow significant, why would it be necessary in a test where you're preparing a whole bunch of horoscopes blind and asking people to pick their own out of the list? Consider three horoscopes, all for people born in the same city*. Andy was born October 30, 1980, at 9:20 am. Bob was born five minutes later that same day. Charles was born March 1, 1989, at 10:15pm. Are they really saying that if you showed Bob two horoscopes, one written for Andy and the other for Charles, that he wouldn't think Andy's matched his own life and personality considerably more than Charles's did? (Yeah, sure, that's what I'd say, but I don't believe in astrology.)

I mean (he said, disingenuously) it can't just be that they're making excuses in advance for when they fail the test, can it? "Oh, well, without the exact time of birth, the reading won't be accurate."

*Which brings up another point. If they need the time of birth down to the second, why do they only need to know what city you were born in? Shouldn't they be asking for the exact street address, or latitude and longitude or something?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I agree.

I think it's mostly required as part of the confidence game (the more technical trappings, the easier it is to think there is something scientific about it). In fact, the term I hear lots of modern-day astrologers using is "noesis" which itself is the claim that there is such a thing as the science of metaphysical and magical things.

Also, as you note, absolutely nobody can be certain of their time of birth to an accuracy of one minute, so this gives them a potential excuse for mistakes in every reading.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

They ask because it adds another layer of perceived credibility to what they are doing ..


P.S.
I see Joe more or less said the same thing as I was composing..


One might point out to an astrologer, that there is a stronger gravitational attraction between the attending gynecologist and the baby than there is `between the baby, and any planet .. Therefore, the gynecologists weight should be factored into the charts, if they are to be accurate .. How about everyone in the room ? How about large pieces of furniture ?

" What's your sign ? "

" Virgo, with large metal armoire rising ... "

 

[The Fallen Serpent]

This discussion inspires in me an urge to show up for an astrology reading with charts and pictures. This timestamped picture notes the moment my crown breached. This timestamped picture notes the moment my feet left my mother. This timestamped picture notes when the cord was severed. These charts and diagrams provide an accurate location inluding the elevation of my position within the hospital. Now give me an accurate reading

Seriously though I do not have that information, but I imagine there are a few who are born today who will.

 

[Dave Rogers]

"Here's the video; there are the time stamps; you work it out."

Dave

 

[Aepervius]

I always thought they were asking minutes as an easy cop-out if they were wrong "what ? You are not introvert and timid but extrovert and courageous ? Well maybe your time of birth was wrong : see extrovert is 14:11 but introvert is 14:12".

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Wrong thread

 

[paximperium]

Can I have your name, Date of birth and social security number along with your credit card number please?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

I always thought they were asking minutes as an easy cop-out if they were wrong "what ? You are not introvert and timid but extrovert and courageous ? Well maybe your time of birth was wrong : see extrovert is 14:11 but introvert is 14:12".

ISTR from following long astrology threads on sci.skeptic on Usenet that some astroquacks actually do such "rectification" to figure out your "actual" birth time from your horoscope.

It seems, as you say, to be a no loose proposition.

 

[fromdownunder]

Since the stars are supposed to have some sort of physical affect on us, then wouldn't they physically affect a foetus as well? That would make the time of conception more vital than the time of birth.

And what of babies born at the exact time daylight savings comes into effect? They start coming out one minute, and get slapped on the toushe and wake up an hour later (or heaven forbid an hour earlier at the end of daylight saving)

And we did have an astrolger here a couple of years ago who demanded an exact location of birth, although not down to "which floor of the hospital" detail.

Norm

 

[Cactus Wren]

My own theory is that they're trying to make excuses for why twins, born in the same place and only a few minutes apart, can have competely different lives.

 

[FramerDave]

Since the stars are supposed to have some sort of physical affect on us, then wouldn't they physically affect a foetus as well? That would make the time of conception more vital than the time of birth.

And what of babies born at the exact time daylight savings comes into effect? They start coming out one minute, and get slapped on the toushe and wake up an hour later (or heaven forbid an hour earlier at the end of daylight saving)

And we did have an astrolger here a couple of years ago who demanded an exact location of birth, although not down to "which floor of the hospital" detail.

Norm

Which brings us back to a previous point. How in the world can astrologers claim that theirs is a science (I use that word with tongue firmly in cheek) that has been around and giving accurate results for many hundreds of years? Is it realisitic to think that a person born in 1857, for example, would know the latitude and longitude of their place of birth?

 

[Steven Howard]

I hadn't thought of the "making it seem more scientific" angle, but I can see how getting the exact time and carrying out detailed calculations could make it feel like the results are more accurate, and more personalized.

ETA: Also, I didn't remember the earlier astrologer who wanted the exact place of birth, or possibly I never saw that thread (those threads?) in the first place. But it's consistent with wanting the exact time, and obviously gives the same illusion of precision to the results.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

My own theory is that they're trying to make excuses for why twins, born in the same place and only a few minutes apart, can have competely different lives.

And the research shows that "time twins" (unrelated people born at the same time and in close proximity) have no similarities beyond what you would expect if there was nothing to astrology.

 

[Thing]

ISTR from following long astrology threads on sci.skeptic on Usenet that some astroquacks actually do such "rectification" to figure out your "actual" birth time from your horoscope.

It seems, as you say, to be a no loose proposition.

Yes indeed, astrologer Wendy Stacey, who's doing a PhD on the subject(!) has an irony free article on this trick here.

Frequently, when exploring someone’s past experiences and events whilst using directions, you get answers which could indicate the angle degrees to be a year or two out from the chart you have calculated. It is not uncommon to hear a client say that nothing happened at age of 10, but they moved house at age eight because their father got a promotion, or that nothing happened at age 27, but they got married at age 25. These types of responses may lead you to re-adjust the birth time by eight minutes or at least use a little caution when working with the angles.

 

[Dogdoctor]

Hey well they are astrologers, not rocket scientists, geee... give em a break. They allready think some magical force from the stars and planets affects who you are in a predictable way. If they believe it matters what time exactly you are born, that's no big jump in ignorance.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

If they believe it matters what time exactly you are born, that's no big jump in ignorance.

Well said ..

 

[Astro Teacher]

Birth Times

Often when trying to design tests for astrology we find that the astrologer wants an exact time of birth, often down to the minute. Obviously this is problematic for a number of reasons, mainly that there's no commonly accepted definition of the exact minute that a person is born, nor any reason to suppose that the person recording the birth will note that exact time on the birth certificate. But I digress.

What I'm wondering is, why? I mean, these people are using methods that they claim to be centuries, if not millennia, old. Much older, anyway, than the use of minutes and seconds to tell time, which as far as I can tell didn't really take off until the mechanical clock became widespread in the 16th Century. If you need the time of birth down to the minute for an accurate reading, how did people get the idea that astrology worked before the hour was even divided into minutes? Or, you know, before the hour was even a standard length of time (as opposed to "approximately 1/12 of the time from sunrise to sunset")?

And anyway, isn't astrology supposed to be based on the position of stars and planets and so forth? I wonder what would happen if you were to ask one of these astrologers who insist that they can't give an accurate reading without an exact time of birth to go outside one night, find a star or a planet that has some meaning in their system, then look at it again a minute later and see if its position in the sky has changed.

And even if the exact time of birth were somehow significant, why would it be necessary in a test where you're preparing a whole bunch of horoscopes blind and asking people to pick their own out of the list? Consider three horoscopes, all for people born in the same city*. Andy was born October 30, 1980, at 9:20 am. Bob was born five minutes later that same day. Charles was born March 1, 1989, at 10:15pm. Are they really saying that if you showed Bob two horoscopes, one written for Andy and the other for Charles, that he wouldn't think Andy's matched his own life and personality considerably more than Charles's did? (Yeah, sure, that's what I'd say, but I don't believe in astrology.)

I mean (he said, disingenuously) it can't just be that they're making excuses in advance for when they fail the test, can it? "Oh, well, without the exact time of birth, the reading won't be accurate."

*Which brings up another point. If they need the time of birth down to the second, why do they only need to know what city you were born in? Shouldn't they be asking for the exact street address, or latitude and longitude or something?

Time of birth is not always needed to erect a horoscope for a native, though it is helpful to narrow down the placements of celestial bodies relative to the geographical location of the birth. Much depends on the astrologer's own knowledge and expertise, and in these times, you are bound to find far more charlatans and wannabees in astrology who are not experienced and lack the relevant knowledge require to read any horoscope, much less that of a person.

Ancient astrologers used a method that used sunrise as the point of reference for the day of birth; however, times were used centuries ago for those who could read sundials and noted the time of day of birth, which then placed the relevant celestial bodies in their respective houses, or placements at the time of birth.

 

[Rasmus]

Time of birth is not always needed to erect a horoscope for a native,

A native what?

Under what circumstances is it required, then?

though it is helpful to narrow down the placements of celestial bodies relative to the geographical location of the birth. Much depends on the astrologer's own knowledge and expertise,

Surely you're joking?

Either the position of the stars is important and the place and time of my birth allow you to trace them, or they are not important (to the degree of a few minutes or kilometres), right?

How can the competence of the astrologer make any difference?

and in these times, you are bound to find far more charlatans and wannabees in astrology who are not experienced and lack the relevant knowledge require to read any horoscope, much less that of a person.

Yes. that number is 100% and has always been 100%.

Ancient astrologers used a method that used sunrise as the point of reference for the day of birth; however, times were used centuries ago for those who could read sundials and noted the time of day of birth, which then placed the relevant celestial bodies in their respective houses, or placements at the time of birth.

And at yet other times, different made up ******** stories were used instead. The question here is: How is one made up rationalisation justified as being better than another?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Time of birth is not always needed to erect a horoscope for a native, though it is helpful to narrow down the placements of celestial bodies relative to the geographical location of the birth. Much depends on the astrologer's own knowledge and expertise, and in these times, you are bound to find far more charlatans and wannabees in astrology who are not experienced and lack the relevant knowledge require to read any horoscope, much less that of a person.

Ancient astrologers used a method that used sunrise as the point of reference for the day of birth; however, times were used centuries ago for those who could read sundials and noted the time of day of birth, which then placed the relevant celestial bodies in their respective houses, or placements at the time of birth.

Ok then. What level of accuracy is required to get an accurate astrological reading for an individual? Is a reading more accurate the more accurate the time of birth is known?