Ricardo F. Morín
Interpretation after Gothic Church Interior, Dutch School, 17th century.
Acrylic on board
Approximately 12 × 18 inches
1978
The mind can conceive explanations that exceed what it can establish. The difficulty begins when it grants those explanations an authority that the available reasons do not justify. A conviction then acquires the standing of knowledge without satisfying the conditions that would warrant that recognition.
Theology, astrology, and science do not justify their claims in the same way. Theological arguments may appeal to revelation, tradition, religious experience, or philosophical reasoning. Astrological predictions assert relationships between celestial patterns and human affairs that require empirical support. Scientific explanations acquire credibility through evidence, testing, and comparison with alternatives, while remaining subject to correction. These differences matter: openness to examination does not make all claims equally credible, and the inability to disprove a claim does not establish its truth.
The fact that the mind conceives an explanation does not establish that its object is imaginary. The question is what warrants accepting it and what could require its revision. When every possible outcome is interpreted as confirmation, experience ceases to distinguish between the belief and its alternatives. If no outcome can count against it, its apparent agreement with everything that happens cannot by itself establish its validity.
Astrology illustrates how this problem can affect agency. An accepted prediction may influence decisions, discourage attempts, and narrow the possibilities a person is willing to pursue. When those choices help produce the anticipated outcome, the person may attribute it to destiny, overlooking the contribution of the expectation itself. The prediction need not come true to impose a limitation: a belief about what must happen can restrict what a person attempts to make happen.
Reflection requires the discipline of keeping conclusions open to examination and revising them when the evidence warrants it. That discipline extends to convictions that provide comfort, coherence, or direction. It requires neither perpetual indecision nor equal doubt about everything, but confidence proportionate to justification.
The endurance of an assertion does not by itself establish its truth, and its openness to revision does not mean that it must eventually prove false. The mind compromises its capacity for discernment when it ceases to examine the convictions that guide its decisions.
Ricardo F. Morín
September 21, 2026
Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania
