About

The critical examination of ideas is necessary in all areas of learning. Although some ideas may enjoy a certain status within an insular community, it is only by connecting to the scrutiny of well informed readers that ideas can evolve and gain usefulness as general knowledge. Lack of open discourse fosters an unhealthy climate of excessive skepticism and mistrust. Informed discourse acts to clarify faulty assumptions and remove misleading claims. Critical discourse is frequently necessary to obtain funds for research.

Astrological Review Letters does not attempt a comprehensive review of all research in astrology. Nor does it try to evaluate the overall performance of astrological research. In the history of ideas, important advances tend to be made through remarkable insights and momentous breakthroughs. This is why ARL focuses on key, peer reviewed research, specifically the research that is most frequently cited in claims of evidence either for or against astrology. 

Astrology presents many challenges to conventional beliefs that need to be thoughtfully considered. ARL posts articles and essays to develop the more theoretical and philosophical aspects of astrological knowledge. These articles build a framework of concepts and questions. With regard to astrological theory, there are three crucial questions:
  1. What is the physical correspondence between the individual and the celestial environment that surrounds the individual? This theory would develop correlations between mathematical frames of reference and observed natural process symmetries.
  2. What are the essential operations of the signs, houses, aspects, and planets when reduced to definitive meanings? This theory would align the extensive astrological taxonomy with empirically observed phenomena.
  3. What is the psychological mechanism of astrological interpretation? This theory would develop the assessment of astrological patterns and dynamics drawn from astrological tradition and wisdom.
All comments on the reviews and articles are moderated. You must have a Google account or other registered ID account to comment.

Where PDF documents of the original reviews and articles are available, links to the documents are indicated by the [PDF] symbol.