Philosophize with Aldor44 and Grandma !!!***NEW TOPIC CHECK IT OUT***!!!

[Arabella]

Ok, fun with Facebook

The first three pic I see is a friends holiday snap of a thunderstorm, a spam video of how to act in a job interview, and a pic of a gift card from my local crystal shop.

My question was do I have lunch now? My stomach is rumbling like thunder so yes I am hungry, the time is 12.05 so doing the right thing like in an interview would be to eat now, and either food is a gift or I need to go shopping after lunch

:P

[Thoughtful]

So I guess the first topic is how we balance using traditional meanings and intuitive ones in our readings.  I think there was a similar thread about this recently and I don't want to be redundant, but I believe this topic is important enough to be addressed by a group of philosophers!

 

Balancing the traditional and intuitive in readings hmm!

 

l feel that this should be a totally natural flow of balance between the reader and the cards.  You may start a reading and up pop the usual traditional meanings, but then quite gently you find you are feeling or sensing something stronger within the card/s. You get  different perspectives.

Starting off with tarot is a wonderful, mystical journey.  We all need to start somewhere and that means studying the meanings firstly.  Over the years l found that the more l worked with tarot the less l became rigid in book interpretations, allowing intuition to have its part. 

 

The tarot for me is like talking with an old and cherished friend whose wisdom l can rely on.  Having said this it only happens with decks l am thoroughly attuned to. 

 

In the past a few decks l worked with in my learning phase had behaved  like petulant children who refused to play! or some decks gave me completely outlandish rubbish. One deck in particular wanted to give only marvellous gushing hope.  This happened with a young woman who was so besotted by a man, that she came back and back for readings.  l think this deck lost patience and gave her all that she wanted to hear. 

As a newcomer to tarot then, l should have listened to my inner knowing which was telling me this was all too good to be true, and it was.  It also seems obvious to me now that her energies where taking precedence in the reading, and as novice l was not in control of the balance in my readings.

 

The balance l feel comes firstly with having the right deck, one that you feel happy and comfortable with, once that happens a friendship is formed.  And like a good and trusted friend it will speak clearly and succinctly to you, and as you begin to understand in the first instance what they are  saying, you can also read between the lines (intuition) as one does in any conversation with another.  Everyone has an intuitive abilty to a greater or lesser degree, and using tarot over time can heighten this.  This is how you can look at a card, see its book meaning, and yet you are seeing and feeling something quite different from your usual reading of it.  This is where the flow of balance and traditional meet. 

 

l also feel that the energies between the tarot and myself come into play as soon as l shuffle the the cards,  its that bond again.  When reading for a sitter l believe very much that their energies play a part also.  It becomes a three way energetic link. 

 

So in essence the traditional and the intuitive combine into a cohesive energy which brings in its own balance.

 

But it still amazes me how the right cards always come up for each individual sitter.

 

l do hope l've got the question answered in some understandable way  ;D

 

[Grandma]

... if Tarot started off as a game that sailors played then my guess is that the divinatory aspect would have developed from the superstitious nature of sailors. I’m guessing they would have seen the repetition of a certain card as an omen (whether of good luck or bad). Each sailor would have had their own lucky or unlucky cards and when they got together with others would have shared what they meant to them. I think the development of cards as an oracle was something that happened over time rather than one person deciding “this is how the cards will be read as a divinatory tool!”

 

I love this!  It increases my understanding of tarot and fits in with my personal spiritual belief system as well.  Thank you.

[Grandma]

l do hope l've got the question answered in some understandable way  ;D

 

Yes, you did.  Everyone did.  I agree with or have learned from every single thought, belief and opinion far!  I love good-natured, respectful intellectual debate and I wonder if any will arise in this thread, but I can't yet find a single point to engage in debate about.

 

I'll b back later with another contribution to the meaning/intuition question.

[Wanderer]

OK... I was hoping it would be this sort of thing! I tend to worry about the same topics, because it fascinates me as to how Tarot actually works. I've noticed a few things regarding meanings, as well...

 

When I'm in the early stages of learning a deck (never really got out of that stage with RWS!) then the book meanings seem to be perfect matches. A total beginner can still read the cards, because the cards seem to follow the accepted interpretation.

 

Now that I'm at a much better level, and feel that I actually know the cards individually (some more than others), the book is less important. For example, like with Aldor's horse, I can see completely new aspects to the interpretation that are not in the book, but are blatantly the 'right' meaning in terms of accuracy to the situation. But then, if I draw a card I don't know well, the book still provides better insights than my intuition does, and often includes specific lines that are just as potent as the intuitive ('new') insights from my better-known cards.

 

I've been interpreting this as showing that the cards we draw depend on tapping into the abstract 'meaning' of each. Our subconscious knows the truth of the situation, the universe knows the 'meaning' that ties in with it, and some unexplained sense allows us to connect the two via picking the card that works.

 

The question then is what dictates the 'meaning' of a card, and here I think it comes down to one's experience. Our own brains generate abstract meaning that amalgamates into the local 'meaning field', and when it becomes a clear idea then it can even override the wider 'universal' meaning. Seeing the horse (or in my case the Salmon) in a new way is dependent on being so comfortable with the card that you are recognising the features that aren't the main intended characteristics. That doesn't matter, though, because it is the way that we personally see the cards, and how they connect with the real situation, that will result in that pull towards it.

    Where we develop similar advanced ideas about particular cards, this is because there is a shared history, and our nascent interpretations are themselves derived from the beginner stage where we're responding to the universal 'meaning field' before we develop a personal one. This would explain why different advanced readers can get equally accurate (and sometimes similar) readings with very different cards.

 

Probably nonsense, but there you go. Anyone agree, disagree or want to throw rotten tomatoes?  :)

[Grandma]

Wanderer - Oh, I agree.  You have expressed a higher conscious understanding than I had reached, so thank you.

 

Is it just me, or our writing styles uncannily similar?  This is not the first time I have read one of your comments and thought I could have written it myself, not only in the message, but in the actual words.  So reading what could have been my own words had I known what to say was kind of like reading something I might have written in the future!

 

Okay then, to throw more fuel on this merrily crackling fire, how do various decks figure into it?  The same card in a different deck can give a very different version of the same meaning.

 

And how about our personal experiences?  Do we, should we, could we even,  try not to let our reading be colored by our history?

 

While I was typing this I got a notification that Jewel had posted, so I stopped and read.  As I was nodding along in agreement or gasping at new knowledge, and wanting to comment every time, I realized that if I respond to every point made by every person as I would love to do, it will be a full time job and nothing else will get done.  So if I don't acknowledge everything everyone says, please know that I have read and valued every word.

 

And now another notification!  I am just going to post and then I promise to read and value.

[Jewel]

I google meanings of cards all the time and sometimes the meanings on different sites hardly seem to be about the same card.  That's where intuition is needed, and - for me at least - a knowledge of the querent's circumstances, seem important.  I also think that just like a pianist practices scales until she knows, without having to even think about it, exactly where to place her fingers to produce a certain sound, and only then can she create the music she hears within her, we need to know meanings inside out in order to draw readings from the cards.  I will practice those scales forever and hopefully will someday approach being able to play the music in the cards.

This really resonates with me.  I agree that the historical aspects are very important to keep in mind.  They are the background, the foundation of what has evolved.  By understanding they were originally designed as playing cards, we can also understand why we will always find variances in interpretations.  By knowing that someone later came and applied meanings to them individually, we get a map from which to start our journey.  A jump off point.  But it also opens up the fact that we can see something different in the cards and contrast our opinion to the now established base meaning.  Many times it is just carrying the idea further, or possibly not as far.  Sometimes we find a whole other aspect to a card.

 

What I find is the key in a reading is context.  Once the cards are in a spread they are part of a narrative, they are no longer a single card in a vacuum.  Their meaning becomes intertwined with that of other cards and its meaning begins to flow within a context, a narrative, a story.  This is where you play your own music as so eloquently stated by Grandma.  When I first started out I used the book meanings and then tried to figure out what each card was saying and how they fit together.  Twenty some odd years later I now look for patterns first, then interpret each card within the context of the pattern, and then summarize the reading.  But it has become a narrative, I can read the notes (cards) and the nuances (patterns) which adds to the melody.  This is what I love about Tarot.  But the basis, the point of starting out comes from the history.

 

and

 

that tarot is not a static art, but a dynamic one.  Shouldn't meanings evolve?  Aldor44 came up with something about the six of wands that  as far as I know, completely new -

"now this interpretation might be weird- but that was what I got. To me he is symbolized here not by the rider but by the horse ( to me the horse appeared sad - while everyone else are happy) He is being led while wanting to lead. he does all the hard work while the man on top gets all the praise and rewards. He wants to be the one on top and get recognition and rewards for everything he does- however, while having the passion and inner strength and desire- the understanding or maybe the tools of how to get there are missing - the horse despite being much more powerful than his rider- doesn't know how to turn the tables and become the leading one..."

 

This blew me away.  Should it be disregarded because it's not on labyrinthos or biddy?  Oh my goodness I love this sort of discussion.

I love this, it is derived directly from the imagery.  The horse longs for the recognition the knight is getting.  I see this somewhat as a shadow meaning to this card.  Victory is not obtained in a vacuum, and recognition should be shared when it is a group effort or some will feel unappreciated.  If the imagery of the cards were not important we would read straight pips all of the time.  When you have the depth of imagery added to context and synthesize it the level of depth can be astounding as in this case.  I do not have the full context of the reading, but if it works with the narrative of the reading I would say it is very valid.

 

 

I know just what people mean about reading tarot being more than just memorizing meanings.  I've written in two different threads this week that if it were just memorization, anyone could do it.  I've used the analogy in both places that just applying memorized meanings to the cards is like building a basic piece of furniture like a bookcase from a list of instructions, but that real reading is like building an original unique beautiful piece of furniture from raw materials, hard work, inspiration and artistry.

 

But one needs how to use the tools, how different wood behaves, and so on.  It's craft as well as art.

 

I tried memorizing, and frankly that just did not work for me.  I do think the value of it is to have a springboard to jump from, like you set some basic instructions.  I think the type of learner you are will influence how to best get started.  When I tried to learn through book knowledge alone it lead me to really feel there was proscribed way of reading the cards and to ignore and push away my intuition.  If I could not remember a book meaning I was stuck.  It was years later the internet came around and I found Aeclectic and whole new world of understanding opened up to me, and when I took on doing 21 Ways to Read a Tarot Card by Mary Greer the world just burst open.  I learned to use my "child eyes" (thank you Ix Chel for that phrase) and absorb the messages in the art itself, then combine those with book knowledge, and the world of patterns and context combined with imagery and historical knowledge started coming together.  With it my intuition and confidence.  The readings have become deeper and I am no longer constrained by the book meaning, it is just a guide or basic principle from which to go.  Reading tarot is a skill and an art.  I can very much relate to your furniture analogy above.

 

If I were starting all over again, I would get a few decks pull out the same card from each deck, use my "child eyes" to see what the card from each deck is telling me to see if there is a common thread.  I would then pull out the book (or look up the site) and see what it says and see how closely I came to it or how it all might weave together to get different aspects of a card meaning.

[Jewel]

Where we develop similar advanced ideas about particular cards, this is because there is a shared history, and our nascent interpretations are themselves derived from the beginner stage where we're responding to the universal 'meaning field' before we develop a personal one. This would explain why different advanced readers can get equally accurate (and sometimes similar) readings with very different cards.

I love this, so eloquently put.

[Wanderer]

Thanks, Grandma - very interesting that you were coming to the same conclusions!

 

I know what you mean about the writing style, yes... we do have some different approaches, I think, but a lot is quite uncannily similar. I guess it's bound to happen on forums occasionally, though - too many people interacting to avoid the odd coincidence*. It's odd that those similarities are shared with similar lines of interest and interpretation as well, though!

 

Did you (or anyone) have any thoughts as to what the 'meaning field' actually is, or what its precise characteristics are - assuming that people agree such a thing is really there? This is where my poor little brain starts to reaaally struggle. Speaking of which, I've got to go and lose a quiz now, but will check in later.  :)

 

 

*if there truly is such a thing, as opposed to synchronicity.

[Grandma]

Jewel - please see my Reply #30 in response to your Reply #31.  It's time travel...

 

Thanks, Grandma - very interesting that you were coming to the same conclusions!

 

I know what you mean about the writing style, yes... we do have some different approaches, I think, but a lot is quite uncannily similar. I guess it's bound to happen on forums occasionally, though - too many people interacting to avoid the odd coincidence*. It's odd that those similarities are shared with similar lines of interest and interpretation as well, though!

 

Did you (or anyone) have any thoughts as to what the 'meaning field' actually is, or what its precise characteristics are - assuming that people agree such a thing is really there? This is where my poor little brain starts to reaaally struggle. Speaking of which, I've got to go and lose a quiz now, but will check in later.  :)

 

 

*if there truly is such a thing, as opposed to synchronicity.

 

I don't know about the meaning field.  I will investigate.

 

A definition of synchronicity from Wikipedia "Synchronicity (German: Synchronizität) is a concept, first introduced by analytical psychologist Carl Jung, which holds that events are "meaningful coincidences" if they occur with no causal relationship yet seem to be meaningfully related" and a definition of Zen by Jane Hirshfield "Zen pretty much comes down to three things -- everything changes; everything is connected; pay attention" - probably such thing as coincidence but in a meaningful way, whereas in the vernacular the concept is more casual or funny (strange funny, not ha ha funny) hmmm....

[Jewel]

Jewel - please see my Reply #30 in response to your Reply #31.  It's time travel...

;D Love it!  and yes, I can see that this thread is going to get very overwhelming to respond to because there is just a lot of cool stuff to talk about here.

[joy]

Love to Philosophize, thanks Grandma[/member] for starting this thread!

 

I think that cards can have different meanings for different people depending on their history/experience. What I like with the exchange of readings is, that often someone sees something from a total different angle and that can open up a deeper meaning.

 

As far as I understand Tarot - I am still at the very beginning - the same card can say something different depending on the querent? Not only on the question but also on the querent?

[Grandma]

 

As far as I understand Tarot - I am still at the very beginning - the same card can say something different depending on the querent? Not only on the question but also on the querent?

 

You're welcome, Joy. Yes, I've thought about this as I'm sure have many others. It's a great question. I know the same card can say something different depending on the querent.  This most recently occurred to me when I thought that a reading someone posted about a friend seemed spot on to me, but then a whole different interpretation of every card popped into my mind and I realized that it was a perfect reading for Grandpa, who I must have been thinking about on some level.

 

This is actually what led me to starting this thread and I will probably explain more at some point.

 

I have decided not to be altruistically frustrated by not being able to respond to every comment in everyone’s replies, and selfishly frustrated by not being able to receive feedback on every comment in every one of mine.  Instead I choose to savor, to dive deeply with joy and excitement, into every post I write and every response I receive.

 

(A synthesis of Zen, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and the message I often get in readings and meditation, to make the most of what I have.)

 

This thread is already more than I dared to hope for!  Thank you all!

 

[joy]

Grandma[/member]  <3 <3 <3 ((

[TheFeeLion]

Did you (or anyone) have any thoughts as to what the 'meaning field' actually is, or what its precise characteristics are - assuming that people agree such a thing is really there?

Just gonna jump in quickly here while I’m on my break...

I think this “meaning field” is something like the collective unconscious. Something that everyone unconsciously dips into when needed (an sometimes when not lol)

 

Gah! Took too long reading everything so now I’ve run out of time! Back later for more :D

[Wanderer]

 

Okay then, to throw more fuel on this merrily crackling fire, how do various decks figure into it?  The same card in a different deck can give a very different version of the same meaning.

 

And how about our personal experiences?  Do we, should we, could we even,  try not to let our reading be colored by our history?

 

(I know what you all mean about responding to everything... it's already very difficult! ;))

Now, the various decks. This is something that bothers me as well, but I think does tie in. The meanings embedded in the collective unconscious (thanks, TheFeeLion[/member] - that sounds about right! :)) are constructed by the users of the specific cards in question. When a variation is devised and made use of, it generates its own subtly different field of meaning, which can become embedded either by repeated use or by deliberate intent of the artist. This is most obvious when an entirely new system (e.g. Greenwood/Wildwood) is developed, where some of the meanings are very RW-like, but others have been designed to represent different concepts. Before it develops into its own field of accepted meaning, newcomers are guided primarily by the intent of the authors.

 

Personal experiences feed into how we read the cards, certainly, and to what meanings we see in particular symbolism. I don't think that's a problem, because by that stage, we generate our own meaning field that can override the collective. For those that are deeply intuitive and deviate a lot from the rote meanings, the cards they'll be drawn to will be the ones that correctly tie their own understanding of their meaning to the reality as seen by the subconscious. In other words, the result will just as correct for any reader, because the cards will appear according to that reader's way of thinking - and experiences. Trying to  avoid letting our experiences colour the reading will be counter-productive, because our experiences are a part of what makes the reading work for us.

 

Hey, that's a hypothesis that can be tested!  :D Does anyone feel that when they try to suppress the influence of their own experiences on their interpretations, the readings become weaker? Or stronger, or no change?

[Grandma]

Hey, that's a hypothesis that can be tested!  :D Does anyone feel that when they try to suppress the influence of their own experiences on their interpretations, the readings become weaker? Or stronger, or no change?

 

I've read mostly only for myself, so suppressing the influence of my own experience would be silly.  IRL I've read only for Grandpa, one of our grandsons, and a woman sitting next to me on a plane.  For the first two, I totally used my own experiences; for the third, not at all - that wasn't a conscious decision, just nothing came up.  And in readings and reading feedback on line, it has varied from just a little to a whole lot - again, no conscious decisions, just what came to mind. 

 

So I guess the question applies to me less than I realized, which is ironic because I asked the question that is the basis of the question.

 

But that is conscious use of past experience.  Without a doubt, I believe our unconscious or subconscious memory influences everything we do, so it must be a factor in my reading too. 

 

Maybe a contributing factor to use of experience is that I, like most of us perhaps, am choosy about what questions I read.  If I don't feel a connection to the querent and/or question, and I read it anyway, those are my weakest readings.

 

(On a side note, the one that was least well received was the one where my reading style was not what the querent expected.  Coincidence/synchronicity or causal relationship?  Weak reading or disappointed querent, or both?  From now on I may set a prerequisite of having read at least two of my readings before I accept another querent.  Is that facetious or serious?  Your guess is as good as mine.  But I put six or eight hours into a full forum reading and from now on I want to make sure to explain exactly what the querent can expect before I agree to read.)

 

Oh my goodness, a question makes me think, and the resultant thought raises another question!  I feel like I'm in the intellectual coffee house with the ardent seekers of deeper meaning I always hoped to find way back in college...

[Arabella]

Oh my goodness, a question makes me think, and the resultant thought raises another question!  I feel like I'm in the intellectual coffee house with the ardent seekers of deeper meaning I always hoped to find way back in college...

 

Isn't it great?

[Grandma]

Hey, that's a hypothesis that can be tested!  :D Does anyone feel that when they try to suppress the influence of their own experiences on their interpretations, the readings become weaker? Or stronger, or no change?

 

I've read mostly only for myself, so suppressing the influence of my own experience would be silly.  IRL I've read only for Grandpa, one of our grandsons, and a woman sitting next to me on a plane.  For the first two, I totally used my own experiences; for the third, not at all - that wasn't a conscious decision, just nothing came up.  And in readings and reading feedback on line, it has varied from just a little to a whole lot - again, no conscious decisions, just what came to mind. 

 

So I guess the question applies to me less than I realized, which is ironic because I asked the question that is the basis of the question.

 

But that is conscious use of past experience.  Without a doubt, I believe our unconscious or subconscious memory influences everything we do, so it must be a factor in my reading too. 

 

I just had an astonishing realization while reviewing feedback to some of my readings.  The feedback is so on target to my own experiences that is made me shiver.  I apparently was extremely influenced by my own past experiences and didn't even pick up on it at the time.  And these were my two strongest and most positively received readings to date.  Verrrry innnterrresting...

 

Now what does this say about the intersection of traditional meanings, intuition, and the influence of our own history?  And here is something cool - in social work there is the concept of "conscious use of self" which is a positive use of a therapist's own experiences in counseling clients, but there is also the dangerous concept of counter-transference, which is when a therapist's history causes her to relate to a client in a certain way that impedes the helping relationship.  It's been 16 years since I got my MSW and I never got to put it to use anyway so I may have not remembered that quite right and I'm too lazy to look it up, but it's close enough and provides a fascinating parallel, I think, to the use of our experience when we read the cards.

 

And:

Grandma[/member]  <3 <3 <3 ((

I'm don't know exactly what that means but it sure does make me happy!

[Arabella]

I just had an astonishing realization while reviewing feedback to some of my readings.  The feedback is so on target to my own experiences that is made me shiver.  I apparently was extremely influenced by my own past experiences and didn't even pick up on it at the time.  And these were my two strongest and most positively received readings to date.  Verrrry innnterrresting...

 

If this is touching on what we talked about briefly with my feedback on your reading for me, we are now bringing the third influence into this discussion. The first - traditional and historical meanings of the cards, the second- our use of those meanings and our intuition and the third - our own experience, what we are going through at the time or our "colouring" of the question, the sitter and the reading.

 

Do we sometimes put ourselves in there when reading for others, in the way Grandma has spoken of above? I think I do. Does that me a bad reader or a good one?

[Raggydoll]

I just had an astonishing realization while reviewing feedback to some of my readings.  The feedback is so on target to my own experiences that is made me shiver.  I apparently was extremely influenced by my own past experiences and didn't even pick up on it at the time.  And these were my two strongest and most positively received readings to date.  Verrrry innnterrresting...

 

If this is touching on what we talked about briefly with my feedback on your reading for me, we are now bringing the third influence into this discussion. The first - traditional and historical meanings of the cards, the second- our use of those meanings and our intuition and the third - our own experience, what we are going through at the time or our "colouring" of the question, the sitter and the reading.

 

Do we sometimes put ourselves in there when reading for others, in the way Grandma has spoken of above? I think I do. Does that me a bad reader or a good one?

 

There are no good or bad readers. You are a reader, and every reader is different from the next - which is a good thing since every client is unique too. This way everyone can find someone that they resonate with. I believe that each and every (potential) client that find us does so for a reason. They did not find just any reader, they found you. That doesn’t, however, mean that you must or even should help everyone that finds you. You might in fact be meant to turn them down, to refer them to someone else, to help them rephrase their question, to change their focus, to widen their perspective, or to develop more realistic expectations. That’s what I believe, anyway  :)

 

(And if we find that we put ourselves in our readings for others, then maybe, just maybe that is what is meant too)

[Arabella]

Oh yes, totally agree with you, Raggydoll.

The sitter seeks that reader, in that place and time. So many times in my life now has just the right person shown up at just the right time, including this forum and you, my phellow philosophers.

 

[Grandma]

There are no good or bad readers. You are a reader, and every reader is different from the next - which is a good thing since every client is unique too. This way everyone can find someone that they resonate with. I believe that each and every (potential) client that find us does so for a reason. They did not find just any reader, they found you. That doesn’t, however, mean that you must or even should help everyone that finds you. You might in fact be meant to turn them down, to refer them to someone else, to help them rephrase their question, to change their focus, to widen their perspective, or to develop more realistic expectations. That’s what I believe, anyway  :)

 

Aha!  Time for the good natured, respectful intellectual debate I was hoping for!

 

Raggydoll, I disagree.  Of course there are bad readers.  There are bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad priests, bad teachers, bad politicians, bad dog groomers, bad stockbrokers, bad hairdressers.  Why not bad readers?

 

Not all readers know enough, or are responsible enough, to turn people down, refer them to someone else, help them rephrase their question, etc.  Anyone can put a sign in a window offering tarot readings.  Anyone can sell readings online, and I’ve seen  people here write about doing just that with a week or two of experience under their belts.  One poster even wanted to make a website offering readings as a way of starting out with tarot.  I’ve seen interpretations in threads that I didn’t agree with, but I understood the writer’s reasoning.  That’s fine, I don’t have to be right, and I’ve learned from these different ways of seeing the cards even if I stuck with my own interpretation.  But I’ve also seen interpretations that left me shaking my head, and some that made me cringe.

 

And not even everyone who truly desires to be a good reader has the ability.  People flunk out of medical school and cosmetology school because they just don’t have what it takes.  Tarot readers don’t have schools to flunk out of or licensing tests to pass, nor do all tarot readers have what it takes to read tarot. 

 

And don’t even get me started on charlatans…

 

[Raggydoll]

There are no good or bad readers. You are a reader, and every reader is different from the next - which is a good thing since every client is unique too. This way everyone can find someone that they resonate with. I believe that each and every (potential) client that find us does so for a reason. They did not find just any reader, they found you. That doesn’t, however, mean that you must or even should help everyone that finds you. You might in fact be meant to turn them down, to refer them to someone else, to help them rephrase their question, to change their focus, to widen their perspective, or to develop more realistic expectations. That’s what I believe, anyway  :)

 

Aha!  Time for the good natured, respectful intellectual debate I was hoping for!

 

Raggydoll, I disagree.  Of course there are bad readers.  There are bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad priests, bad teachers, bad politicians, bad dog groomers, bad stockbrokers, bad hairdressers.  Why not bad readers?

 

Not all readers know enough, or are responsible enough, to turn people down, refer them to someone else, help them rephrase their question, etc.  Anyone can put a sign in a window offering tarot readings.  Anyone can sell readings online, and I’ve seen  people here write about doing just that with a week or two of experience under their belts.  One poster even wanted to make a website offering readings as a way of starting out with tarot.  I’ve seen interpretations in threads that I didn’t agree with, but I understood the writer’s reasoning.  That’s fine, I don’t have to be right, and I’ve learned from these different ways of seeing the cards even if I stuck with my own interpretation.  But I’ve also seen interpretations that left me shaking my head, and some that made me cringe.

 

And not even everyone who truly desires to be a good reader has the ability.  People flunk out of medical school and cosmetology school because they just don’t have what it takes.  Tarot readers don’t have schools to flunk out of or licensing tests to pass, nor do all tarot readers have what it takes to read tarot. 

 

And don’t even get me started on charlatans…

 

You are right. I guess I wasn’t actually counting those as real readers. But I agree that because they call themselves readers I should have been more specific in my wording. So I’m not gonna debate you on this one, sorry to disappoint you  :))

[Raggydoll]

You know what, this talk about good vs bad tarot readers has really got me thinking. On an intellectual, rational level I truly agree that there must exist objectively bad readers, but I still have this inner resistance to the whole thing. I think that it boils down to the fact that I would feel so very uncomfortable myself to decide if someone is bad at reading cards. I mean, there must be some objective ways of classifying readers based on such things as traditional knowledge or accuracy, but I’m still not 100% at ease with it. I mean, there are so many different types of readers (and clients), and some readers are purely relying on intuition which would make it extra hard to decide if they are good or not. Plus, you rarely get feedback and updates in real life readings the way we do here, so a lot of the time your feedback will consist of returning customers or referral customers (don’t know if that’s the correct term, but I mean when one satisfied customer tells another person about you).

 

And also, I guess I’m a little bit scared of the thought that other people would decide that I was a useless reader. I mean, how do you bounce back from that sort of thing? By saying “everyone used to think I was a bad reader but now I’ve really worked at it and I feel that I am finally good at what I do”  ::)

 

This has been a very thought provoking topic indeed and it has unearthed some of my own subconscious ideas and insecurities.