2 of Swords as Bicameral Mind

[Zig]

Not trying to be fancy here, but as I understand the Bicameral Mind as a theory, hypothesis or proven mental operation, it suggests one part of the mind speaks and the other listens and obeys. I'm not sure this mental operation is exactly what I'm attributing to the interpretation of this card I've come to defer to, but for me it works like this, for example:

 

Say I am constructing a platform that must be assembled in a stairwell so painting can take place. The building of it will have to be thought through in detail so that when it is legged up the uppermost surface will be level and safe for placing a step ladder. I won't call this mental preparation meditation, but it is somewhat trance-like. I imagine how tall I wish the platform to be, and imagine the various stages of achieving the outcome. I see myself measuring the length of the platform and determining how many step rises it will span, and see in my mind the process of placing a leveling tool on some temporary sticks to determine where the legs will fall, which determines leg lengths.

 

And so on. But there's more. I mentally formulate a list of tools like pencil, tape measure, C-clamps, level, jig saw, screw gun... then materials such as 1x4 boards, and scrap slabs for cross bracing. Usually but not always, this leads to making sketches but the earliest stage is entirely mental and visionary. I build the thing in my mind.

 

With the Pamela Colman Smith illustration I use, the figure is blindfolded so he or she is unable to look outward, but is only seeing inward to the mental images. The Ace has its own unique feature or identity which goes beyond numbering, so the 2 may be considered the lowest slot in the suit of intellect. The resulting meaning for drawing this card turns out to be: "This thing needs to be thoroughly thought through before it can be brought to reality."

 

This is my first post of this kind. I can't wait to see how it develops.

 

 

[Guest]

I also drew the Two of Swords in my daily reading. Here's the Deviant Moon card:

Great interpretation,  I think a better term, rather than meditation, would be visualization.  It's a powerful tool, one that definitely will help you see inside the cards if you apply that to your readings.   But I'll take it step farther - it looks like 2 sides opposing each other.  In terms of your interpretation, are you of "two minds" about a situation or a decision?  Are you fighting against yourself in your mind?

[Zig]

Hi OTarot, (Which when I say it somehow sounds like The Lone Ranger.)

 

Thanks for your response and for sharing your card. This is an excellent image for conveying the creator's idea about the meaning. ("Inside me there are two dogs that are constantly fighting...") I don't trash traditional interpretations, but my initial post here is the one to which I defer these days, until the next epiphany. Your question calls up one of the interpretations about indecision or tension between two items, situations, choices, ways of being... I followed that consideration for a time, but at the moment that particular meaning is more closely assigned to the 2 of Pentacles for me--which I will post about after I see how this goes.

 

Like I said, I'm new here and don't know where all this is going to lead to.

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Zig said:

Like I said, I'm new here and don't know where all this is going to lead to.

You and me both!  At least it's a fun and interesting journey!

 

I see a connection between the 2 of Swords and the 2 of Pentacles as well.  But I see the 2 of Swords as a battle between 2 sides, whether it's conscious/subconscious or choice a/choice b or a literal battle between 2 people, while the 2 of Pentacles talks more about juggling several options.  This is where I think you're interpretation comes in.  If you think about juggling, the only thing between you and dropping the ball is keeping your focus (keep your eye on the ball)

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Zig said:

Hi OTarot, (Which when I say it somehow sounds like The Lone Ranger.)

Hi hOTarot Away!

clip clop clip clop

 

:D

[November]

Hello, the 2 Swords could also be about neutrality: you look at both sides of a situation, but you choose to do nothing, maybe because you don't want to have anything to do about that. However, this "inaction" can't last forever, I mean in this way you don't solve the problem, like when after a quarrel you avoid to speak with the other person. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, November said:

Hello, the 2 Swords could also be about neutrality: you look at both sides of a situation, but you choose to do nothing, maybe because you don't want to have anything to do about that.

That's a great way to look at it.  To quote the rock band Rush:

You can choose a ready guide
In some celestial voice
If you choose not to decide
You still have made a choice

 

So another interpretation is someone battling themselves about a decision and the card is a warning that not deciding may not be in your best interest, so be proactive and decisive about the situation.  Great job opening that up, I hadn't considered that!

 

 

[Zig]

Hi @November and @OTarot. It's so nice of you to contribute to this topic. Thank you. The aspect of the card suggesting inaction is definitely worth considering and it would be a mistake to remove that from my collection of possible interpretations, although I've come to assign this picture of a stage or moment to the absolutely essential preparation for action rather than a prelude to paralysis.

 

As I read various  comments all around it becomes increasingly clear to me that each reader develops their own colloquial usages owing to how their cards communicate with them. Although I support keeping some attachment to foundational meanings so the language we share doesn't become completely bonkers.

 

I'm thinking of all the material OTarot included in the Hierophant post from a collection of sources, and how this helps inspire me to read old books I once found definitive and absolute, and this time through I notice the ways I've come to disagree with them. The ones that hold up best I consider the most thoughtfully written (although there's a possibility I'm falling into the human weakness of giving highest credence to those who agree with me.)

 

Even so, as I go through the threads and comments I know I'm not being silly for seeing one opinion is correct, and the other opinion as also correct. Then, those opinions offered may stretch my boundaries by adopting them or not.

[Guest]

In a way, you just fulfilled the 2 of Pentacles and 2 of Swords!  The suit of Swords covers communication (you started this thread!) aand logic (contemplating meanings), and then you drew the The 2 of Swords, showing you were "of two minds" about the cards...one from the traditional interpretation and then from others' interpretations, giving you indecision on which method was best.  With the 2 of Pentacles, you juggled all the different meanings before deciding to take your interpretation - keeping the attachment to the traditional meaning while allowing for your own meanings to speak to you.  

 

You might just be the Sage of the Tarot!

 

 

[Zig]

Thank you, OTarot. This community is loaded with sages. You are one too. Looking over the spice rack though I feel more affinity to the Old Bay Crab Seasoning of Tarot.

[Guest]

Oh? Are you saying you're crabby?  

[Zig]

I was just trying to be light and amusing, and it seemed funnier than Minced Garlic. What card would you like to see thrown out for group analysis next? So much has been touched on here about the 2 of Pentacles I might start a thread about that one as soon as I'm sure I'm not moving too fast and violating community norms and expectations.

[Guest]

I think you're good.  I think you should look at all the cards in the pack and find the one that speaks to you.  What's it saying?  What is it telling you?

[Sar]

Hmm, What is Bicameral mind? 

[Zig]

Hi @Sar. Thanks for posting and considering this. What do you think of the way I defined it in the original post at the top here? I'm fully prepared for someone to tell me I totally misunderstand the concept, so I added examples of what I meant, which may fit the concept of the Bicameral Mind or not.

[Sar]

15 minutes ago, Zig said:

Hi @Sar. Thanks for posting and considering this. What do you think of the way I defined it in the original post at the top here? I'm fully prepared for someone to tell me I totally misunderstand the concept, so I added examples of what I meant, which may fit the concept of the Bicameral Mind or not.

Hello

I had never heard about the expression before, then I googled and found the Bicameral Mentality. 

It sounds a lot like living in two worlds, as in here, with one foot wiht the people and living the ordinary lives and the other foot with the rest. Where you hear and see things and every thing has its own voice, not just Gods, bit animals, trees, rivers and everything we surround us with, the things we created. Like Kant explains with the Ding an Sich, We know what a chair is and how it presents, but we have no idea what the chair thinks about itself. 

 

[Zig]

Hi @Sar This is getting too dense for my pretty little head.

 

I only wanted to point out that my most common interpretation of this card, although I haven't dismissed others, is that the process of thinking a thing into reality in the imagination before acting, is the process that seems captured in the 2 of Swords. Blindfolded, looking inward, trans-like, letting the act of doing take place in one's thoughts and mental images before going forward. Even the act of brushing my teeth is something I see myself doing, and then I am able to do it. As I understand the bicameral mind, it suggests a part of the mind gives the orders and the following part puts them into action. My aim was not to study the theory of the bicameral mind, but to use my understanding of it to illustrate a point of view about a possible interpretation I could share.

 

Your post makes me think of some stuff I've read attempting to define the worlds of The Qabalah, which also uses a chair analogy effectively. I don't know if it was Dion Fortune, Paul Case or Rachel Pollack quoting someone else, but it is close enough to what we are discussing to mention it. The metaphor described the chair as a sample of The World of Form, born from the idea of sitting which came forth in the previous world. This is starting to hurt my head. Perhaps my wish to have a smart looking title is coming back to bite me in the beard. I may have to go into a corner and weep for a while.

 

[Sar]

I  love this discussion, because we only know what we think about 2/Swords presentation. We have no idea what the cards think of itself. The eyes are hidden, blindfolded, from a distanse. 

[Zig]

I'm glad you're enjoying it. To follow up: I have no clear idea how I present, and what I think of myself is even less reliable.