This is a rambling article with a conclusion which isn't supported by any of the rambling, that conclusion being that "fortune-telling is simply an exhibition of one of many possibilities, rather than the absolute truth. It is, therefore, never really wrong".
It includes a very unusual view of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle where the author quotes without attribution "Everything in the world looks coincidental by any current observation method, since any law or principle is expressed only probabilistically. No one can say whether a thing has absolute inevitability". The only reference I could find to this via Google was http://large.stanford.edu/history/kaist/web/clubs/times/feat..., which also quotes without attribution.
I don't understand why such an article was submitted here.
I don't like this article very much, I don't think Catholicism envisions the world as a giant piece of clockwork controlled by God. But I do think there is value in historical Fortune-Telling.
You could probably plot out a comic book cinematic universe or put together the story arc for a whole video game series out of the characterization baked into Tarot or Astrology.
It includes a very unusual view of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle where the author quotes without attribution "Everything in the world looks coincidental by any current observation method, since any law or principle is expressed only probabilistically. No one can say whether a thing has absolute inevitability". The only reference I could find to this via Google was http://large.stanford.edu/history/kaist/web/clubs/times/feat..., which also quotes without attribution.
I don't understand why such an article was submitted here.