The question assumes that astrology should not be believed because it is a creed that has been superseded by scientific thought, which has had the advantage of freeing humanity from the superstitions linked to the condition of ignorance about the causes of natural phenomena.
However, I would like to point out a couple of facts:
- The attack on astrological thought generally takes its cue from spurious material, from what the media channels spread (newspaper horoscopes, etc.); as I have argued in other posts, this has nothing to do with astrology.
- Astrology has become, like many other things, a commodity. That makes it possible to face it with an uncritical spirit, developing an attitude of superstitious dependence that proponents of scientific thought can easily attack.
That said, the reason astrology persists is that some believe it. But believing, in this context, does not mean giving real value to the object of one’s faith. It simply means that one follows one’s feeling, or something said by others, for reasons related to existential insecurity and the like. We create a simulacrum of astrology, bond with it, and become followers or detractors without knowing, in both cases, what astrology is precisely.
Astrological thinking is not against modern science, and it is not a legacy of ancient superstitions: it is a worldview complementary to the current one. For those wishing to know more: