An image is worth a thousand words

Most of the times, this is quite true. Images are easily recognizable and a lot more easy to understand than words. Pick any blog, and even if the writing is good, we all know that rich imagery is more effective in creating interest and sharing knowledge.
In advertising, images are used to a larger extent, increasing the frequency of visual messages so consumers could easily recall what a brand is trying to communicate.

Simplicity

But not all images are equally important or relevant. For instance, they shouldn’t be too complex, as this would made them harder to understand. This is particularly crucial when designing something, as we should strive to explain a concept or message in the simplest way we can.
The design principle of “form follows function” is one of the main advocates of simplicity, focusing on the purity of function and the real usefulness of objects, instead of the decoration of the form. In a more spiritual sense, we all find beauty in the simple things of life, as they are shown to us with not too much information to interpret, just “being”.

When we design something, if we add some irrelevant information, we’re hurting the message quality and it will become less useful. On a practical scenario, when a sales person is pitching their Powerpoint quoting word-by-word what’s on the slide, they should be aware that their clients are seconds away from getting another cup of cofee.

Rules of thumb

Sometimes it’s easier to communicate visually, if we have some shortcuts available. Art, design and visual imagery in general, all share interesting patterns that we all can use to help people understand messages:

• Archetypes:

  
  These common traits are shared between most cultures, and found in myths such as death and rebirth, or the heroes stories (from Gigalmesh to Superman). Advertising often uses brand-ambassadors as a representation of heroes or highlights the healing features of cosmetics as a reminiscence of rebirth.

• Mathematical patterns
  
  The Fibonacci series, the golden section or the rule of thirds have been successfully used in art, so you should try it sometimes and see if it helps to better explain your message.
• Face-ism
  Humans tend to prefer faces that are more average, more healthy and have rounder shapes. No wonder kids are a regular presence in ads.

Emotion carrier

Usually advertising has a more materialistic take on visual imagery, using them to represent the brand or company values, announcing that a product is fresh or a service is secure.
But sometimes, through their simplicity or using established patterns, visual messages have the power to awaken feelings, and cause a solid emotional reaction.

These are the times when images have the power to open up our hearts.

A long, long time ago, in a land called Babylon, people tried to make a sense out of Nature and God. To help them in their lifes, calendars were created, based on the stars and natural cycles. The zodiac map was also created, conveying a generic illustration of the placement of the stars and their influence on human life. And so, Astrology was born.

Later came the Romans, that adapted this doctrine, changing the names of the Babylon gods, to their own mythological gods. And so, Astrology became accepted, based on the ancient philosophical Principle of Correspondence, were diferent categories were related if some of its features were similar. This principle gave Astrology the perfect excuse for being accepted and gaining historical relevance.

Fast forward 2000 years.
(Quite easy since nothing really important happened to Astrology meanwhile).

In the 20th century, the principle of correlation is no longer valid, since it makes no sense to relate categories that have no logic relation between them – correlation doesn’t proves casuality.
Astrology doesn’t seeks relation in the physics or astronomy, but instead in an arbitrary set of magical names and in a old generic representation of the celestial map.. Which is to say that it stands in clay, believing in a 3000 years old set of rules, but still aiming to be as valid as a constantly evolving Science.

We can start by questioning the zodiac map, since the precession of the equinoxes and soltices has moved about 30 degrees in the last 2000 years, making irrelevant any prediction, as we probably would be born in a complete different astrological solar sign. Regarding astronomic factors, is also worth considering why the different astrologies (Eastern vs. Western) give such different interpretation on the same set of stars, or what was the star influencing Armstrong when he set foot on the Moon.

If we really believed that certain patterns could influence our lives or predict the future, we must also admit that those who knew it were maximizing their advantage. In a darwinistic approach, if such capabilities were possible (predict the future), i’m sure that the human being would already evolved to took advantage of such an amazing feature.
Maybe stars can influence our lives (mass, gravity, energy) but in such a small scale that it could never change our boldness, wealth or future telling.

Modern astrology is quite more refined than the traditional one, appealing to concepts such as social equality and the power of the individual, a sort of compatibilism related to Humme and Thomas Hobbe. But this modern astrology logic of free will, becomes it’s own end. If free will exists, we really should’t be needing this astro-mambo-jumbo, since we really only depend on ourselves.

Questions that upset most of the average Joe, weren’t given any satisfying and verifiable answer by Astrology. The fact that 2 identical tweens could have such different lifes or why 2 astrologers could draw 2 complety diferent maps, or even why to choose specifically the birth moment (when does a fetus becomes life?) haven’t been put under scientific scrutiny as far as i know.

A true science sets his own prediction based on a organized body of theories, and understands and explains how the predictions are valid. As for Astrology, it uses argumentative falacies, such as ambivalence or confirmation bias, and the more it runs away from critical thinking, the closer it gets to religious fundamentalism.

The arbitrariness of astrology is common to other pseudo-sciences, that are not based on universal and verifiable data, but rather in historical and cultural traditions. What should be universal (name of a star), becomes an instrument (qualities of Jupiter) to predict something.

The benefits that Astrology brings,based on positive heuristics such as comfort and simpathy, stand in the same ground with other new-age doctrines, but never near Science, since it never achieved anything significant to the evolution and knowledge of mankind.

The truth in Astrology ends up in techniques such as selective thinking, role playing, obscurity by complexity, parciality in the interpretation, the use of stereotypes and Barnum principle, rapports and positive emotions.

In conclusion, the debate about astrology will always be of epistemologic nature, for each individual would have his own set of beliefs. If we believe in something, even if it is false, then it will always be true. If we find it false, it is false. What seems more logical to you?