Substack cometh, and lo it is good. (Pricing)

The less intelligent more likely to accept astrology as scientific

Over at Culture of Science Sheril Kirshenbaum posts a figure from the NSF displaying what proportion of those without high school educations and those with college educations accept the scientific status of astrology. It’s pretty clear to me that this is the ASTROSCI variable from the General Social Survey. It asks:

Would you say that astrology is very scientific, sort of scientific, or not at all scientific?

It’s also nice that this question was only asked in the latter half of the 2000s. So it’s timely in terms of demographic breakdowns. Speaking of which, here are a whole host of classes and their attitudes toward astrology’s scientific status:


Very scientificSort of scientificNot at all scientific
Male52669
Female53065
Age 18-3483458
Age 35-6442670
Age 65-42472
White42572
Black113851
Hispanic84051
Extreme liberal73162
Liberal53065
Slightly iberal42868
Moderate53461
Slightly conservative52570
Conservative61975
Extreme conservative61876
No high school diploma94150
High school diploma73262
Junior college42868
Bachelor21780
Graduate degree11385
Atheist and agnostic62371
Higher power42868
Believes in god sometimes72470
Believe in god, but with doubts42769
Know god exists63065
Protestant52768
Catholic53164
Jewish61678
No religion72865
Bible word of god63164
Bible inspired word of god52867
Bible book of fables62570
Human beings developed from animals62866
Human beings don’t develop from animals52669

But what about intelligence? To look at that I used the WORDSUM variable, which is a 10-question vocabulary test which has a 0.70 correlation with IQ. Below are the attitudes toward astrology by WORDSUM score (0 = 0 out of 10 score, 10 = 10 out of 10 score):


WORDSUMVery scientificSort of scientificNot at all scientific
0133750
1143551
2144739
384349
454352
543165
672865
742076
841879
911980
101486

It’s pretty straightforward, the more intelligent are more skeptical of astrology. I wanted to display this in a graphical format. So I created an “astrology is scientific score” like so:

Score = % very scientific X 2 + % sort of scientific X 1 + % not at all scientific X 0

In other words, the higher the score for a class, the more accepting that class is of astrology’s scientific status. Here are the results:

There’s a pretty clear relationship between being dumb, and being more susceptible to the idea that astrology is a real science. Why? I think it’s because astrology is an eminently intuitive, plausible, and seductive, concept. Modern astronomy grew out of astrology, which is a cross-cultural enterprise which emerges in distinctive and unrelated civilizations. And why not? Most humans experience awe and wonderment when they see the stars. On first blush the idea that they may have something to do with the fates doesn’t seem ludicrous.  The less reflective and dull are possibly less susceptible by modernist conditioning toward skepticism of these intuitive concepts which have been banished to the outer darkness of superstition by science.*

* Organized religion has also played a role in this skepticism. In particular, the Abrahamic religions, which evolved in an environment of competition with late antique ‘astral religion.’ But this is obviously not always t he case. Most forms of Hinduism are steeped in astrology as very much a valid and utilitarian enterprise. And in any case the campaigns by Christianity and Islam against astrology has often been fitful and futile.

Posted in Uncategorized

Comments are closed.