Readers Comments (12)

1. Augustus says:

   February 17, 2011 at 6:31 pm

   Yes it is coherent
   because atheism only says that one does not believe in the existance of a god or gods. Someone who espouses atheism can in fact believe in psudeo science such as astrology or alchemy for that matter. These atheists dont necessarily have to be intelligent or skeptics. Its sad really but thats life.

   But i think you’de be hard pressed to find an atheist who does excpet nonsense like astrology. I know i certainly dont

   Reply »
2. The Reverend Soleil says:

   February 17, 2011 at 6:58 pm

   I wouldn’t say so, for all the reasons you listed.

   Then again, humans are nothing if not walking bundles of contradictions…

   Reply »
3. terry says:

   February 17, 2011 at 7:47 pm

   it makes no sense to me. especially since religion is deeply rooted in astrology.

   Reply »
4. Jay says:

   February 17, 2011 at 7:56 pm

   An atheist could believe in astrology, but that would make them a really stupid atheist.

   Reply »
5. Hail Athe says:

   February 17, 2011 at 8:24 pm

   Not really.

   Reply »
6. Caps Lock (TRS_BC) says:

   February 17, 2011 at 8:28 pm

   An atheist is just someone who doesn’t believe in gods, not necessarily a skeptic or a rationalist. There is no rule that says if you believe in one brand of woo, you have to believe in all the others, too.

   A person can believe in astrology and not in gods, or in psychics but not in astrology… We humans are a misterious bunch.

   Reply »
7. The Answerer says:

   February 17, 2011 at 9:06 pm

   You would be hard pressed to find an Atheist who believes in astrology but not in any religion.

   Because atheism is the lack of belief in a God, which is very much a supernatural concept with no real scientific evidence, they usually have a healthy skepticism of other crap like astrology, numerology, etc, etc, etc ETC…

   Reply »
8. The Other Jarrod says:

   February 17, 2011 at 9:50 pm

   Just because someone doesn’t believe in a god, doesn’t mean that they can’t still be an idiot.

   Reply »
9. Marlena says:

   February 17, 2011 at 9:51 pm

   I don’t think that would make sense, but people’s beliefs about lots of things aren’t compatible. Sometimes it’s situational or you just compartmentalize this belief away from that one or avoid cognitive dissonance in some convoluted manner.

   Reply »
10. Gembird says:

    February 17, 2011 at 10:46 pm

    It doesn’t make any sense at all, but that doesn’t mean you’ll never find an atheist who believes their horoscope. People in general have a tendency to believe silly things. It’s like the Archbishop of Canterbury, he’s incedibly smart but he’s also an archbishop.

    Reply »
11. Secular Solutionist says:

    February 17, 2011 at 11:40 pm

    NO! That is definitely not coherent; For all of the reasons you listed. None of the Atheists I know believe in Astrology.

    Reply »
12. Dale M says:

    February 18, 2011 at 12:21 am

    Though your four criteria do not fit agnosticism, they do fit atheism. So belief in atheism is very consistent with belief in astrology.

    -There is no scientific evidence that supports atheism.
    -Atheism is a belief requiring faith.
    -Anyone who speaks about atheism invariably mixes myth, superstition, metaphor and symbolic language in order to speak of it. Myth, superstition, metaphor, and symbolic language are traits of language and mind that are inescapable.

    What makes science different is that it acknowledges its limitations and treats all statements as somewhat hypothetical. It is utterly skeptical in one sense and quite pragmatic in another. Science doesn’t really believe in anything. Science also never totally dismisses anything. Science is a way of thinking, not a belief system.

    Jung explained astrology as a form of synchronicity. I think scientists often also ponder the possibility of some sort of synchronicity in the universe.

    Many religions are very much against astrology because it explains the universe without god. Astrology is in some senses atheistic.

    Reply »