(3 & 1/2 - actually) Initially, I wanted to give it 2 stars based upon its "one big gaping logical hole" (at liest in terms of the books title). However, in spite of said hole, it still manages to be a pretty good book for any person who already sees Astrology as being valid and who knows what to expect from the book. True, it doesn't do a very good job at defending Astrology against the intellectual critic (and one can only wonder if such a thing is even possible). However, I can't help but be impressed by the wealth and varity of information this book contains. Misleading title aside, I feel this is must reading for any astrologer who wants to know more than just how to interpret charts and transit listings.
If you think that the founding constellations were based upon what people thought they saw when they looked up into the sky; this book has a surprise for you. It tells you why you should be concerned about forced births and why Astrology isn't as pagan as you think. His open-mindedness and impartiality are quite refreshing. Consider, for example, the following footnote: (Chapter Nine) "1. West, J. Toonder, J., The case for Astrology, Penguin. Contains some interesting photographs of time twins, though some details in the stories have been discredited by later research" - (Some Astrologers absolutely rave about time twins yet Robert Parry tells it like it is.)
Mr. Parry responds to twelve of the thirteen most common arguments against Astrology. The one that he just couldn't respond to is the one that goes something like, "How could it possibly work? You mean to tell me that the SKY is divided into 12 personality types? How could a big rock in outer space have a personality?" There just isn't any "logical" defence against that 13'nth argument. However, if the reader knows what to expect (and what to not expect) I would give it a thumbs up, depending, of course, on what the reader is looking for.
It should be understood that in this book, the author is attempting to do something that is extremely difficult (or perhaps even impossible) and that he does a better job at it than Sydney Omarr's work "My World of Astrology". If one wishes to criticize this work fairly, it should be compared to other authors who attempted to do the same thing.
I would further point out, however, that some of his statements about Astrology and free-will are a bit puzzling.
This book aims at defending astrologers' position against major critics. The author gives us the answers to the following 12 typical questions:
1) Pop Astrology: This is a question from the people who know only sun sign astrology.
2) Twins: This seems to be a reasonable question about whether or not astrology tells twins must have the same destiny.
3) Earth-Centered: This is an old question that should have been dealt by modern astrologers.
4) Nations and Peoples: This looks a little tough question about whether people who are killed by natural disaster like earthquakes have something in common in their natal charts. The answer to this question is somewhat related to mundane astrology.
5) Zodiac: This question asks why the stars in each sign that are all different distances from us can cause us the line-of-sight effect. A little difficult question.
6) New Planets: This question asks whether astrologers introduce new planets into their system.
7) Conception: This is a question asking why we use birth time to when constructing one?fs natal charts rather than referring to the time of conception.
8) Fatalism: This is also an old question between fate and free will.
9) Forced Birth: This is a rather new question that has been arisen from the scientific development.
10) Paganism: This question identifies astrology as superstition.
11) Influence: This seems to be a fundamental question asking how planets affect us.
12) Relevance: This question regards astrology as similar to religion.
Though you may not agree on all the answers, I think that this is an interesting book by reminding us of the fundamental questions of astrology.
In other parts of the book, the author classifies astrologers into four types; pop astrologers, small-business person, private and semi-professional astrologers, and fully professional consultants. Pop astrologers and small business people are considered to work for their fame and money. Private and semi-astrologers may not behave on the "Code of Ethics" of astrologers. The author attached the Code of Ethics of Faculty of Astrological Studies for reference. Interestingly, the code prohibits astrologers to commit 'sunsign' forecasting for media. But as far as I know, some of the graduates of Faculty of Astrological Studies, writes sunsign forecasts every day. Maybe the code does not have any power to enforce its provision.
