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.
If Astrology = True Then Higher Power = True Therefore Lazy higher power would make astrology
In don’t know how to make my position any simpler for you
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.