SilverLeaf Posted January 4, 2021 Posted January 4, 2021 On 11/28/2020 at 6:18 AM, Wanderer said: I'm totally with Tim & gregory on this one. Each card contains a vast range of meaning that the 'book meaning' attempts to encapsulate. Even though there are certainly readers who go much more from intuitive insights (and almost ignore the cards), and others who base their readings within a framework of deep theoretical/historical knowledge, reading depends to some extent on intuition. The book meanings give you a way to 'read-by-numbers', and that might still be effective in a simple sort of way, but it doesn't reach the art of it. The keywords, especially... they're shorthand examples of the broad spectrum of specific meanings that the cards are trying to represent. The actual generic meaning of a card is more abstract, and multi-faceted... but it contains the keywords, and the significance of the details that the artist has put into the deck. How do you pick out the relevant meaning? Intuition. When reading, the overall knowledge or visual impression of the card's meaning forms a backdrop for the intuition. Whether we get that impression by rote learning (initially), or by experience, it's still only the background. Intuition tells us how to read the card in this context: which details leap out, how it connects with other cards, and how it interacts in meaning with the question and position. Beyond that, sometimes the intuitive meaning falls outside the abstract spectrum that we'd expect, because some apparently trivial detail that we've never noticed throws itself into our heads and presents an entirely new perspective. Of course, that detail isn't completely random - it's still a part of the whole card, and that card was constructed to include it... but the meaning of a detail on the edge of a situation can be very different to the overall 'book meaning'. Slightly off-topic, maybe, but not really: this is part of the reason why I focus on one deck. There are so many levels of detail to become familiar with that I don't feel I'm near to exhausting the Wildwood yet, and it rather demands my undivided attention. Some other decks appeal, certainly, but I know how long it would take me to become properly familiar with them. I guess that those who are happy reading from hundreds of different decks have honed their observational reading to another level: they don't need familiarity because they can see the messages in whatever cards are put before them. I'm in awe of that ability... but I also feel I'd struggle anyway, because it's knowing the shape of the whole deck, and how the cards relate to the ones that are not drawn, that makes the reading cohesive for me. Sometimes, the meanings of cards are defined by the cards that they're not, if you see what I mean. Anyway, enough rambling! 😊 Haha, Wanderer, was reading this thread and your post, without looking at names, thinking "This person sounds like me", and then did a double-take when I saw it was discussing Wildwood, and scrolled up to see that of course it was you writing!
Arcadia Posted January 4, 2021 Posted January 4, 2021 I will usually start by looking at the energy of each suits in a spread, this will then trigger my intuition that allows me to focus on what the cards are saying. I also find keywords a big help decks like the Thoth deck are quite useful with the key words shown on each card, but often i will go by the meanings i have learnt from books
devin Posted January 4, 2021 Posted January 4, 2021 (edited) On 11/29/2020 at 10:48 PM, Wanderer said: Anyhow, I hope I've finally got my point across - even if I seem to be all on my lonesome here in the conclusion that there's something scientifically inexplicable going on with a reader's intuition (now that's something I never expected to write! 😁) Having gone through all the debate, though, I'm more convinced than ever that psychological cue-driven intuition doesn't come close to explaining it, whether we like it or not. I'd love to be able to tell people that it's a scientifically understood process, but in all honesty, I can't. Anyhow, I'll stop trying to persuade you all! Thanks for the interesting discussion. Really, your dedication to going against the crowd here is admirable. But, y'know, if you're reading systematically with rules and set guidelines, meanings, et cetera, plus taking the context of a question into consideration, there's not much necessity for including the paranormal in one's thinking , not as far as the reader side of the equation is concerned, anyway. However, I've come up with a loophole! If you entertain the idea that current theories of mind and memory are, owing to the amount of internal contradiction and regress they involve, inadequate, then it is entirely possible that the functioning of even standard cognition and memory involves a degree of psychism (what a wonderfully old fashioned word), intuition, or whatever.... leaving the door open to all manner of interesting woo. 😀 You dig? Incidentally, I think one of intuition's first uses was in referring to the alleged spontaneous and immediate intellection experienced by spiritual beings. Edited January 4, 2021 by devin
Wanderer Posted January 4, 2021 Posted January 4, 2021 33 minutes ago, devin said: I've come up with a loophole! If you entertain the idea that current theories of mind and memory are, owing to the amount of internal contradiction and regress they involve, inadequate, then it is entirely possible that the functioning of even standard cognition and memory involves a degree of psychism (what a wonderfully old fashioned word), intuition, or whatever.... leaving the door open to all manner of interesting woo. 😀 You dig? Oh, I do indeed... and yeah, I think that's probably right - we really don't understand consciousness yet, and panpsychism has a huge amount of explanatory potential. Feels like cheating in this particular case, though! 35 minutes ago, devin said: Really, your dedication to going against the crowd here is admirable. But, y'know, if you're reading systematically with rules and set guidelines, meanings, et cetera, plus taking the context of a question into consideration, there's not much necessity for including the paranormal in one's thinking , not as far as the reader side of the equation is concerned, To be honest, I don't really recognise that description, because my reading process isn't that systematic. The number of possible shades of meaning from even a small spread is very high, and the question is how we draw out one particular inference from the reading, rather that one of the others that we know aren't relevant. If what you're saying is true, then given the same card/s turning up for two blind readings (i.e. unknown, remote sitter), let's say both with a general relationship query... you're saying you would read it in exactly the same way for each of them? Now it's never actually happened to me (that I remember), but I'm absolutely sure that the readings would differ. The cards push me towards the right general direction, but the detail and specific meaning leaps out spontaneously. I'll register a new facet of a card, for example, without any obvious prompting by the other cards (and even in one-card spreads), and I have no rational basis for understanding that unique response to the card in question. That's the inexplicable part, to me, where the psychological explanation of intuition in insufficient ... but of course others may read in different ways, and it's possible that the duplicate spread, for some people, would indeed generate a duplicate reading.
Wanderer Posted January 4, 2021 Posted January 4, 2021 17 hours ago, SilverLeaf said: Haha, Wanderer, was reading this thread and your post, without looking at names, thinking "This person sounds like me", and then did a double-take when I saw it was discussing Wildwood, and scrolled up to see that of course it was you writing! Ha! How interesting... maybe it's a peculiar mindset of Wildwood devotees... 🤪☺️
SilverLeaf Posted January 4, 2021 Posted January 4, 2021 52 minutes ago, Wanderer said: Ha! How interesting... maybe it's a peculiar mindset of Wildwood devotees... 🤪☺️ And professional scientists!
Wanderer Posted January 5, 2021 Posted January 5, 2021 15 hours ago, SilverLeaf said: And professional scientists! Oh, now that's interesting! 😎
devin Posted January 5, 2021 Posted January 5, 2021 16 hours ago, Wanderer said: To be honest, I don't really recognise that description, because my reading process isn't that systematic. Sure, sure, but it can be done that way, without recourse to a reader's psychic ability. Anyway, I enjoyed your opinions.
Wanderer Posted January 5, 2021 Posted January 5, 2021 1 minute ago, devin said: Sure, sure, but it can be done that way, without recourse to a reader's psychic ability. Anyway, I enjoyed your opinions. No arguments there! my initial suggestion that inadvertently caused all the kerfuffle was that there is a spectrum of psychical intuition among readers, rather than it being a purely rational (if subconscious) process that works the same for all readers. It's been a very enlightening discussion, and thank you also for your input!
Recommended Posts