You have one premise and two conclusions. I’d argue a higher power existing should also be a premise and not a conclusion, given that it sounds like its necessary for astrology to work.
Thank you for clarifying, because when you say a lazy higher power could have used astrology it sounds like you are basing the reason for why you believe in astrology because you think there’s a lazy higher power.
Okay. How do you know astrology is true?
You have one premise and two conclusions. I’d argue a higher power existing should also be a premise and not a conclusion, given that it sounds like its necessary for astrology to work.
Thank you for clarifying, because when you say a lazy higher power could have used astrology it sounds like you are basing the reason for why you believe in astrology because you think there’s a lazy higher power.