Because we are actually talking about the human psyche; collective unconscious symbolism, and the existential drive to attain a sense of individuated existence as a Self in time, astrology, among many other things are 'invented' to achieve our unavoidable goal of self-expression...If only to actually have human consciousness.
Persons can unintentionally project in language and visual art the pattern of their own ( usually unknown to them) natal chart pattern.
I call the observable pattern of 'astrological' behavior , Horoscopic Expressionism: the unconscious depiction of individual birth time.
A rare very explicit sample looks like this (below) and we can see that only one time of day allows for a very convincing instance of parallel symbolism. This is how the psyche projects itself , its own symbolic "image" ( or 'name') when the conscious ego simply just doesn't apply to too many conventions of pictorial 'language', and thereby unwittingly obfuscate the efforts its 'muse':
Astrology could be objective fact. The world around us is always changing just like the space, the stars, and the galaxy. With the improvements of technology we are always one step closer to understanding space. I think we should be studying it more and seeing what we can come up with.
Astrology is really superstition. ABC did a very small study where they told people their personalities. They were using a script to do so. The people all pretty much felt they were being given a real reading and that the reading was accurate about themselves. But it was all the same thing! If you read the predictions, such as in the newspaper, for each person's sign, they are very generic and could apply to anyone. They're vague so that people will believe they're true.
Astrology is based on star signs and how they are linked to the location of stars at the time of one's birth. Obviously location and time of birth are objective and can usually be verified. Astrologers are then supposed to make pronouncements about personality traits and even give predictions about a person based on a star sign. That could sometimes be objectively tested, but on the whole, astrology isn't based on objectively collected data or controlled observation, and there aren't statistical studies to support it as fact.
Astrology is a lot of fun and it makes vague comments that could apply to many people's lives. However, it can never been seen as fast. There is no way to determine that you're personality comes from a certain astrological sign of when you were born. It's completely ridiculous and not fact.
Because there's an overwhelming amount of scientific studies and tests made on the validity of astrology. None of it supports the processes of astrology. But I suppose that only matters for people who care about truth and facts.
First of all, many claim that gravity influences peoples' personality when a planet is in a certain position relative to Earth. No, because the hospital you were born at exerts a greater gravitational pull than Mars. About 500 times more, actually. This is due to the inverse square law, gravity becomes weaker at greater distances. Then there is the whole deal about what asteroids do. How come they don't influence us?
Furthermore, the Sun bombards our atmosphere (and planet) with cosmic rays. Something that actually could potentially affect us. But not in the form of 'How good or bad my love-life will be' (Although, that depends on if one gets to much radiation exposure... But you get the gist). Too add, the planets are all electromagnetically neutral and the strong and weak force are too short range (just extends the atomic radius), so there goes all the four forces that the universe and physics abide.
It is also very unlikely for it to be 'some yet unknown force', because if distance isn't an issue, then what about the exo-planets? Nothing, that's what. Astrology - and other woo woo subjects - are very appealing to humans, which is why most astrological claims work well with The Forrer Effect and confirmation bias. Another reason not to believe something made up by people 2000 years ago, they didn't know the half of what we do now about the universe. Besides, since then, Earth's axis has shifted about 20 degrees, so all astrological signs are off 'by one sign'.
So, definitively No. Astrology will never and should never be considered objective fact.
No, it's not objective, nor is it fact.
Astrology is a pseudo-science, (albeit an interesting one), aimed at the gullible like all other mystic mediums are. There isn't any evidence to prove that the celestial bodies have any impact whatsoever on our lives, and there's no data to back up the very diverse claims that can't even agree with one another.
It's fun, but it's fake.
I do not believe astrology can be objective fact. Most of the tenants are explained by the placement of stars from Earth. The problem with this is, if I move to a different planet, guess what? All the stars are in different places and I can't line anything up because I'm not looking from the exact same place in the Universe. None of the practices align to anything with any real meaning, it's all subjective.