An explanation of why we trust horoscopes even when they are wrong
2026-05-29 13:27:57
TiranaPost
A popular astrology app, for which the author of one analysis paid $11.25, promised him that next winter he would "lose himself in love" and experience the ecstatic feeling of being part of something bigger than himself.
It sounds deep, romantic, and mysterious. But what does it really mean?
According to the analysis, this "prediction" could mean anything: a new relationship, a new job, joining an organization, a political party, a dance group, or even simply the success of a book that attracts new fans. In short: nothing concrete.
The author argues that astrology often relies on vague formulations and psychological biases that lead people to believe that the stars are “speaking” about their lives. But when astrologers have made specific predictions, history has shown that the errors have been spectacular.
One of the most famous cases is related to the year 1914. The magazine “Modern Astrology”, created by the British astrologer Alan Leo, predicted a year of peace for Europe. Just a few months later, World War I broke out.
Even more sensational was the case of German astrologer Carl Heinrich Huter, who in 1956 declared that Queen Elizabeth II would have a short reign due to the “ominous” position of Saturn in her astrological chart. In reality, Elizabeth II remained on the throne for 70 years, becoming the longest-reigning monarch in British history.
Astrology has also shown an uncanny ability to "change your mind" after events occur.
When Charles III's engagement to Diana Spencer was announced, British astrologers described their astrological charts as "perfectly compatible." But after the dramatic split in 1992, those same charts suddenly began to be interpreted as signs of "trauma, anger and disaster."
Renaissance mathematician and astrologer Gerolamo Cardano once published a detailed astrological analysis of the Roman emperor Nero, linking his character to the influence of Mars, Venus, and Saturn. He later discovered that he had used the wrong date of birth.
Another case involved Winston Churchill. For years, various astrologers constructed “perfect” astrological charts for his life and personality, claiming to have found the exact time of birth from the events of his life. All were proven wrong once the real time was published.
According to the author, astrologers are much better at using the stars to explain the past than to predict the future.
The analysis also draws on the book Understanding Astrology: A Critical Review of a Thousand Empirical Studies 1900–2020, one of the largest critical studies on astrology. The authors' conclusion is straightforward: astrology may give people a sense of meaning or emotional comfort, but there is no scientific evidence that it actually works as a predictive system.
