Astrology vs. the "Hitler Ploy."

Critically examine the argument Valerie Vaughn refers to as the "Hitler ploy" in Art of Self-Defense. (Vaughn's comments on the Hitler ploy on that page are not intended as an answer that astrologers might use to defend themselves against critics who use the Hitler ploy as an argument against astrology) Vaughn writes:

"One of the favorite debunking techniques of opponents to astrology is the "Hitler ploy," which goes more or less like this: Lots of people were born on the same day as Hitler, so if astrology is destiny, how come they weren't all dictators? It so happens there's a well-documented story about this criticism.

Elsbeth Ebertin was an astrologer whose prophecy concerning Hitler caused much discussion in 1923-24. I quote directly from Ellic Howe's Astrology: A Recent History Including the Untold Story of Its Role in World War II.[10] "Frau Ebertin was just about to compose a series of generalized predictions for persons born with their natal Sun in Aries, when she received a letter from one of Hitler's many enthusiastic woman supporters. Her correspondent sent her Hitler's birth date (but not his birth hour) and asked what she thought of his horoscope. Frau Ebertin published her answer, without revealing Hitler's name, in her year book which was on sale by the end of July 1923:

'A man of action born on April 20, 1889, with Sun in 29 degrees Aries, can expose himself to personal danger by excessively uncautious action and could very likely trigger off an uncontrollable crisis,' she wrote. 'His constellations show that this man is to be taken very seriously indeed; he is destined to play a Fuhrer-role in future battles. It seems that the man I have in mind, with this strong Aries influence, is destined to sacrifice himself for the German nation, also to face up to all circumstances with audacity and courage, even when it is a matter of life and death, and to give an impulse, which will burst forth quite suddenly, to a German Freedom Movement. But I will not anticipate destiny. Time will show...'"

The prediction was soon fulfilled. On Nov. 8, 1923, Hitler and his followers staged a badly-organized Putsch, and Hitler was wounded, arrested, and sentenced to the prison where he began writing Mein Kampf. Ebertin claimed to have had little prior knowledge of Hitler's political significance and of the latest German politics. This point is debatable, as it always is in any astrological prediction."

I strongly suggest that you work through the following questions as they are extremely relevant to your analysis. If you can't answer these questions you won't be able to give a detailed analysis of the Hitler ploy.

1. How exactly is the Hitler ploy intended to undermine the claim that astrology works?

2. Based on the assumption that Ebertin got her result by correctly applying the methods of astrology, should we expect is that those results would apply only to people born at the exact same second as Hitler? (Hint: did Ebertin know the second of Hitler's birth?)

3. Say it turns out that at least 200 other people were born in the same hour as Hitler. Does astrology imply that Ebertin's prediction would also apply to those 200 people. Why or why not?

4. Did Ebertin know enough about Hitler's time and place of birth to distinguish his horoscope from everyone to whom her prediction did not apply?

5. What do you think about the idea that the people who had the same horoscope as Hitler actually did have significantly similar events in their later lives?

6.Imagine that an astrologer replies to the Hitler ploy by saying it is based on the mistaken idea that astrologers believe that any prediction made from one particular chart will be true for every individual with exactly the same chart. On the contrary, this astrologer insists that a prediction based on Hitler's chart would only be necessarily valid for Hitler, and could be completely invalid for someone else born at exactly the same time and place, and who therefore had exactly the same astrological information contained in exactly the same chart. How logically effective is this reply?

7. Suppose someone replies to the Hitler ploy by saying that identical charts do produce identical predictions, but the way a prediction plays out in a person's life will vary according to that person's circumstances. Say that John and Nellie are born at the same hour, so they have the same astrological chart, which predicts creativity, assertiveness, and a life crisis caused by an incautious decision. John and Nellie have different backgrounds, and make different choices, which lead them into different circumstances. John is raised by hippies, expresses his creativity by designing handicrafts, expresses his assertiveness by building a successful handicrafts business, and precipitates a life crisis by incautiously marrying a Republican. Nellie is raised by Republicans, expresses her creativity by finding ways for companies to avoid environmental laws, expresses her assertiveness by becoming president, and precipitates a life crisis by incautiously firing nuclear missiles at Saudi Arabia. Nellie goes down in history as a psychopath, while John is ignored by history. As far as their charts were concerned, their lives were identical. The differences in their lives stemmed from differences in their historical circumstances, and not from anything that astrology could predict. A competent astrologer therefore gives different predictions to people with the same chart based on combining the astrological information from the chart with information that these people give him about their personal circumstances.

Now think about developing your own criticism of the Hitler Ploy argument. Here is a generalized version of the argument I want you to criticize.

Premise 1. For every monster in human history (Hitler, Stalin, Richard the Lionheart...), there were hundreds of people born in the same hour.
Premise 2. If the hour of one's birth determines one's future, the hundred or more people born at the same time as Hitler would also have turned out like Hitler.
Premise 3. The hundred of people born at the same time as Hitler did not turn out to be megalomaniacs like Hitler. (None of the megalomaniacs around at the same time were born on the same day as Hitler.)
Conclusion: The hour of one's birth does not determine one's future.
The following questions might help you analyze this argument.

7. Did Ebertin's prediction say that Hitler would rise to supreme power in Germany? Did it say that Hitler would orchestrate the murder of millions of people? Do astrological predictions generally give information of this level? Do astrological predictions generally say whether someone will be good or evil, famous or obscure, powerful or powerless?

8. Do we know for sure that the hundreds of people born on the same day as Hitler did not also expose themselves to personal danger by excessively uncautious action at some time in their lives?

9. Do we know for sure that they did not also run strong risk of triggering uncontrollable crises in their lives?

10. Do we know for sure that they were not all leaders in future battles of various kinds?

11. Do we know for sure that they did not all sacrifice themselves in some way for their nations?

12. Do we know for sure that they did not all give impulses, however small, to national freedom movements?

13. Does the "Hitler ploy" argument give us any reason to believe that the people with the same horoscopes as Hitler did not have substantially similar lives as Hitler's, except for the parts of their lives that astrology says nothing about?

There are actually two "bottom-line" questions here.

14. First, does the Hitler ploy argument by itself prove that astrology does not work? (Explain)

15. Second, does your reply to the Hitler ploy argument also support the idea that astrology does work? (Explain)

One way to approach some of these questions is to assume that they are being asked by someone who thinks that the argument given above them is not a good argument. Therefore, you can assume that an unsatisfactory answer to any one of these questions could potentially refute the argument given above. Your task is to judge whether or not the argument given above stands up under these questions. If you think that satisfactory answers can be given to all the questions, say so and explain those answers. If you think that these questions cannot be adequately answered, say so and explain how this failure undermines the argument.

Another way to approach this problem is to keep the questions in mind as you logically analyze the arguments given above.

Remember that your task is to decide whether or not each argument by itself is strong enough to support its conclusion. Finding that this argument is bad does not mean that other arguments for this conclusion are also bad. If you find it bad, say it's bad and explain why it's bad. The one thing you must not do is bring up other, unrelated arguments to support this conclusion. You can do that later. Right now your task is to evaluate just this argument.

Of course, once you've finished evaluating the arguments, you can go on and add any comments that occur to you. Did you change your mind about anything? Can you come up with better arguments on each side of the issue? Can you figure out what questions have to be settled before we can decide this issue? Based on the arguments you've seen so far, what is your overall take on the issue at this moment? What reasons do you have for coming to this conclusion? Anything else?

Copyright © 2004 by Martin C. Young

---

This Site is Proudly Hosted By: