Tarot and Psychology

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 16 Oct 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

purplelady	16 Oct 2002
I found this article listed at tarotpassages http://duard.dreamscrying.net/tarotpsych.html It's kind of long but about the authors theory that tarot reading , and specifically phone psychic readings, are very similar to a seeing a counselor or psychologist. And the cost is a better deal. What do you think?

Laurel	16 Oct 2002
That was a facinating article. When I was hired as a phone psychic in '97, it was just as I was graduating from college where I'd invested a lot of my time into being trained as a peer counselor and dispute resolution mediator. I was certainly sincere about my readings and drew very, very heavily upon the skills I'd learned there. However, some of my experiences were very different. The average reading wasn't 30 minutes. It was closer to 10 minutes- and I was constantly hung up on, cussed out, or had clients who put nothing forth into the reading, or worse, gave me false information to base things on. There were some 30 minute readings, even 60 minutes ones (the max I was allowed by the company to make), but generally people wanted to be on the phone less than 15 minutes which was not enough time to actually process the situation and utilize any affirming psychological techniques. My folks were both counsellors- while I was a phone psychic making $15/hour (the caller was paying $300/hr), my father was making $80/hour in private practice following his retirement from the Meadows, a fairly well-known Chemical Dependency treatment facility down in Arizona. He'd been personally trained by Pat and Pia Melody (authors of the classic _Codependent No More_) and had been involved in counseling or social work for 30+ years. So his clients were getting the --much-- better deal than mine in terms of both money and experience. I have thought from time to time about becoming a spiritual counselor, using tarot cards as part of my "tool box". I loved the work itself when it came to helping people define their problems, look at the situation, affirm what they needed, and set goals. I simply loved that. But I'd never never never be a phone reader and warn away everyone else from doing the same- its too demanding and you aren't compensated nearly well enough. There's got to be better ways of combining psychology and tarot than that. Laurel

Jeannette	16 Oct 2002
I once attended a tarot workshop where one of the gentlemen in attendence was a licensed psychotherapist. He said he occasionally used tarot cards as a tool in his counseling work (he didn't specify exactly how, but I interpreted his comments to mean that he applied them in a variety of ways, depending on the client/situation). However, he also said he couldn't ever talk about his use of tarot as a therapy/counseling tool with his colleagues. To do so, he said, would have subjected him to suspicion and accusations of "quackery." How sad, in a profession that sees value in tools and techniques like the Rorschach test and "creative visualization," that tarot should be condemned out-of-hand as useless at best, and counterproductive at worst. It seems rather... shortsighted. But I suppose psychologists are human, too, and thus are as prone as anyone to the "preconceived notions" syndrome. -- Jeannette http://www.tarotgarden.com

Kiama	17 Oct 2002
I have always seen Tarot, or at least one use of it, as another counselling/therapy tool. or me, it can help the querent see what they already know, or what they need to know. It reflects what is going on, and thus helps people cope. And I agree, it definitely IS cheaper! I haven't read the article yetdue to limited time at the internet cafe, but hopefully I'll get to it soon! Kiama

Umbrae	17 Oct 2002
I have always thought, and said, (I tend to say what I think), that readings usually amount to psychotherapy for the common man. Most folks out there (as opposed to common perception) cannot afford to go to a shrink, so they come to us. Which is why I get so danged perturbed by folks (on both the inside and the outside) who do not take our role seriously.

MeeWah	17 Oct 2002
PurpleLady: Thanks for sharing a fascinating link! I see Tarot reading as a form of intuitive counselling so I agree that it can be a "better deal" but it depends on what the reader charges. As Laurel points out, with phone line psychic readings the expertise can be dubious & costly.

Alex	17 Oct 2002
a RE visit to a therapist (a cheap one) may cost an individual about 1 000 U$/year IF one has insurance. The minimum cost in the DC area is 75 U$ a section and most modalities of therapy will assume that about 7-8 months are needed to get the first results. Moroever, some people either do not respond well to therapy and/or they become dependent on their therapists, what determines a very debabatable investiment/benefit ratio for such treatments, in the case of people that have common problems. A difference between therapists and Tarot readers, however, is that therapists are seldom straightforward to a client RE his/her behavior. The reason being, they have to build a relationship based on mutual trust and unconditional regard with the client. WHat may take a Tarot reader a couple of minutes to say, may take a therapist a couple of months. Alex. Quote: Originally posted by Umbrae Most folks out there (as opposed to common perception) cannot afford to go to a shrink

Moongold	18 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Umbrae I have always thought, and said, (I tend to say what I think), that readings usually amount to psychotherapy for the common man. I agree with Umbrae, MeeWah and others that Tarot reading can be seen as intuitive counselling. Many of us do the same kind of counselling with friends, family, workmates, neighbours at different times. The distinguishing characteristic of Tarot is that there is a framework - the cards themselves with their archetypal and historical meanings - and Tarot readers interpret these with same kinds of skills and personal approaches that counsellors and psychotherapists use. I've just been reading Mary Greer's "Tarot Mirrors" where she discusses various styles of reading and acknowledges that she herself uses a combination of the therapeutic and analytical approaches. The "Mythic Tarot" which I really like, was designed by two psychoanalysts, Liz Greene and Juliet Sharman-Burke. "Heart of Tarot' by Amber K and Azrael Arynnk uses a Gestalt approach for healing with Tarot. The list could go on. The personal awareness and supportive insights I have received from Tarot study in the last four months have been considerable. Only one other involvement has been so powerful for me. There is an interesting discussion occurring on TarotL, another website, at the moment about Tarot and psychology. This grew out of the recent sniper incidents and the finding of the Tarot card at one of the crime scenes. The press were looking for a credible comment on Tarot and contacted the American Tarot Association. People were talking about the mystery that surrounds Tarot and its association with the occult, and suggesting that it would be good if there was some kind of accreditation process for Tarot readers. Well and good, but I desperately hope that this doesn't stop ordinary folk from being able to use Tarot in the diverse ways that we do. The Western positivist paradigm co-opts so much that is good and beautiful about practices like Tarot, natural health remedies, meditation and so on. I guess it would be good if counsellors were exposed to different techniques like Tarot as tools for their work. One would hope they would only use the Tarot if they were interested in it and committed to using the cards ethically, however. It might sound corny but for me the Tarot is a way that I encounter the Divine. In that sense it is sacred and must be regarded with deep respect. I see most people here feeling like this as well. These wonderful discussions we have about Tarot altars and Tarot bags! And the sensitivity abd respect that people show each other all the time... I welcome the comparison between Tarot and psychology because of the shared boundaries, and think it can only benefit the image of Tarot. There is something so unique and sacred about Tarot that I strongly believe it will survive the inevitable dissipation or corruption that comes with too much exposure to the worst parts of our media and scientific and cultural cliques. Thanks for posting the article. Moongold

Alex	18 Oct 2002
a bit more. Counselors and psychotherapists project their theories onto these figures that represent "archetypal" experiences. It's clear how much psychoanalysis pervades the book interpretation offered for the Mythic deck, for example, which is the primary deck I use. However, people from other backgrounds project other sets of values/interpretations onto the archetypal images offered by the cards. Whether done by a psychotherapist or by a construction worker, whether done today or 100 year ago it's still counseling but the approach_ the theoretical framework_ might differ quite some. We have to remember that modern psychoanalysis is different than modern psychology and that both are about theories. The Tarot will probably watch the 10 of swords of modern psychoanalysis and beyond. It offers material to conceptualize, and to work on our ethical, moral and spiritual values, our scientific theories, or any combination of these 4, but it is not, in itself, any of these. Alex. Quote: Originally posted by Moongold The distinguishing characteristic of Tarot is that there is a framework - the cards themselves with their archetypal and historical meanings - and Tarot readers interpret these with same kinds of skills and personal approaches that counsellors and psychotherapists use.

catboxer	18 Oct 2002
That's an interesting article, and this has developed into a very interesting thread. Some might also be interested in Alfred Rosengarten's "Tarot and Psychology." I've only read very little of it, but I'd like to sit down and digest the whole thing when I have time.

Alex	18 Oct 2002
I once paid about U$ 200 for a Rorschach test for diagnostic porpuses; the results were as simple as "she is a dilectant and has a mind of her own". Reason being, I'm an entomologist and just by coincidence I happened to see insects and insect parts all over the ink blots. I was studying for my prelims when I took it, so entomolgy was very very fresh in my head. See, the average person doesn't see insects on the ink blots, therefore almost every answer of mine feel outside the standard deviation. Not that I don't have a mind of my own; but now, tell me about "uselless". Quote: Originally posted by Jeannette and/or Lori How sad, in a profession that sees value in tools and techniques like the Rorschach test and "creative visualization," that tarot should be condemned out-of-hand as useless at best, and counterproductive at worst. It seems rather... shortsighted.

Moongold	19 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Alex It offers material to conceptualize, and to work on our ethical, moral and spiritual values, our scientific theories, or any combination of these 4, but it is not, in itself, any of these. I really like the way you've described Tarot here, Alex. Further to my own comments, I guess Tarot doesn't really need accreditation or the sanctification of the social or psychological sciences to have credibility. It has lasted well enough for the last five centuries without this. Thinking about this issue today I began longing for the opportunity to meet other people who are interested in Tarot so that we can have these sorts of discussions face to face, and then I remembered that the Tarot Conference is in Melbourne next year (I think) so there will be that chance. Yea.........! Oops - just checked. It's 2005 Moongold

Alex	19 Oct 2002
Everything that is "aside", or not part of the mainstream of knowledge, seeks accreditation from the "sciences". Acupuncture has earned more credit after detection of magnetic fields around the acupuncture points became possible by modern tools. Homeopathy hasn't yet achieved the same level of credibility because people can't figure out, how substances that have been shaken and diluted 1000000s of times can still hold any healing potential. We seek now approval from the sciences as our ancestors used to seek approval from the Catholic Church in the time when that institution was burning inteligent people in open shows. Paul Feyerabend wrote lenghtly about that, for he envisioned a democratic society where people can do their little things without being bothered by standard measures of validation. According to him, science has replaced the dominant Church as the standard validator of knowledge, and not always for the good and happiness of the people who that sutain Science where it is through their taxes. The only validation we really need for the Tarot is to know that it works for the good of the ones it is supposed to work. Thanks, Moongold, for your comments. This thread has turned very interesting. I have studied a lot of psychology throughout my life, I have also seen therapists of different backgrounds, and sometimes I must confess, psychology_whether it reaches us through parenting, pedagogic methods, a therapeutic treatment or a book on the subject matter_ falls short for the demands of life. The Tarot, on the other hand, has not limits. It will only fall short when our experience and knowledge don't let us see all of its potentials. Quote: Originally posted by Moongold Further to my own comments, I guess Tarot doesn't really need accreditation or the sanctification of the social or psychological sciences to have credibility. It has lasted well enough for the last five centuries without this. Moongold

Zhritza	19 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Alex The only validation we really need for the Tarot is to know that it works for the good of the ones it is supposed to work. I agree wholeheartedly with this; validation from society is not nearly as important as we sometimes feel it is. I think that with tarot, as with everything considered to be outside the "mainstream" (although at least in liberal parts of North America, "different" still appears to be "in"), looking for increased acceptance from society in general is a waste of our time and energy. We have a right to demand and expect tolerance, of course; and we need acceptance from our loved ones. But I don't want to spend my precious time and life-force trying to get strangers to like me, and ideally, I wish no one else had to feel like they need that either. It took me a long time to arrive at this conclusion, so I feel pretty vehement about it and I hope you'll pardon me if I sound a bit extreme. What I believe needs to be focused on is desensitization. People who are intolerant need more exposure to the things to which they are not accustomed, so that they are less likely to become violent toward those whom they think are different, and/or to be damaging to their own children by raising them with restrictive or judgmental ideology. The tricky thing is figuring out how to do this effectively in regard to people who like being intolerant and have no desire to live in a changing world, even though they already do. This is why visibility is important. For example, when Kiama does a workshop that people tell their acquaintances about, or when someone writes thoughtfully about tarot in any publication, those are steps toward increased visibility. People who encounter information about stuff that they perceive as freakish or wrong can continue to feel that way, but the more they encounter it, the closer they will come toward a "live-and-let-live" mindset. There are millions upon millions of people from whom this is the most we can ever expect in terms of openmindedness, and if we throw ourselves into trying to get more from them, we squander ourselves. So I believe it's more constructive to aim for tolerance, and become less attached to being liked by "the masses," if such a thing exists. This can be applied to anything off the beaten path, not just tarot. (As a point of reference, I formulated these ideas for myself in regard to others' attitudes toward my own lesbianism, and I am merely extending them for this purpose.) I just realized that this is the kind of thing that ultraconservatives point to when they claim that the "liberal media" is trying to control people's minds. Aiming for increased visibility is not about changing minds. It is far more realistic and practical than that.

Moongold	19 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Qolus What I believe needs to be focused on is desensitization. People who are intolerant need more exposure to the things to which they are not accustomed, so that they are less likely to become violent toward those whom they think are different, and/or to be damaging to their own children by raising them with restrictive or judgmental ideology.................. So I believe it's more constructive to aim for tolerance, and become less attached to being liked by "the masses," if such a thing exists. I just realized that this is the kind of thing that ultraconservatives point to when they claim that the "liberal media" is trying to control people's minds. Aiming for increased visibility is not about changing minds. It is far more realistic and practical than that. Yes, prejudice is often based on ignorance and it is a real challenge to counter this. I worked in the mental health field for 12 years and constant community education campaigns have not succeeded in taking away the fear and prejudice around mental illness that you often encounter in the community. Interestingly, what does often work is personal experience , either of illness in family or friends or by some positive encounter with the concept of mental illness. As a gay woman myself Qolus, I completely understand your comments about the strength within and being able to live comfortably with who we are without the need for approval from others. I am quite new to the study of Tarot but I've been quite impressed with the scope and depth of the literature available already and the huge variety of people interested in Tarot. Also the consciousness of spirituality and the power within , however you define that. There are enough people practicing Tarot and keeping the knowledge vital and growing to ensure the survival and development of the art. The association of Tarot with psychic and occult power is what fascinates people, I think. That is the essence of Tarot, however, for me. It somehow works as a bridge between dimensions. It is a way I can understand the unknown internally and externally. I personally find the mix of the wildly mystical and scholarly analytic approaches to Tarot fascinating and keep wanting to know more. It will be interesting how things evolve. Our minds and our dreams are our own, however, and we can still choose our own way. If I ever become confident enough to do public readings or expostions on Tarot I can sit in the park and attract passers-by or do a paper and readings at professional conferences. Now that would be a challenge! I am old enough to remember when it was almost unheard of to speak about spirituality, dreams and things like art and music therapy at professional psychosocial rehabilitation conferences and now no conference program would be complete without these topics. Some very strong and original souls just got in there and made sure the mainstream knew about different approaches. Moongold PS: Catboxer, do you have the bibliographic details for that book on Tarot and psychology that you mentioned?

renard	19 Oct 2002
Hi, guys. Liz Greene, the English psychological astrologer and writer, is working on a book on tarot and astrology. What's relevant is that her practice and thought integrates (basically Jungian) psychology with astrology. It's a very powerful union -- I can't wait to see what she has to say about tarot. Namaste, Renard

catboxer	20 Oct 2002
Moongold: You can see Rosengarten's "Tarot and Psychology" here: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/102-5610616-6089714

LadyShallot	24 Oct 2002
I have read Tarot and Psychology. I have incorporated some of his ideas into my own readings. One of his ideas is combining the querent picking some cards intuitively, the reader choosing some and some being picked by adding and reducing the numbers in the layout. His approach is very dialectic and has helped me as a reader to allow the querent to bring his insights in to the cards to the table.

Moongold	25 Oct 2002
The web has many interesting articles around this subject. Here's one I found this morning: http://www.chibardun.com/~ezecker/page10.html I'm compiling a bibliography of sorts and will make it available when I've finished. Moongold

Teranar	25 Oct 2002
I full heartedly agree we should not worry about validation from society. I have been a sort of psycologyst in my school reading tarot from the few who do not look and scream witchcraft or satan, and I have done what years of psycological therapy could not for one person. We should not worry what society will think - we should worry with what works, and the people we are ultimately helping. After all, what ultimately comes first - people in need, or our silly public image? I can wait for acceptance and until then be labled whatever.

DeLani	26 Oct 2002
Gosh, this is the perfect thread! (this one & "Taort & the skeptics"). I've been asked to give a brief lecture to a class of Phsychology doctorate students at my local university. Which is great - I'm so glad they are trying to learn about "alternative" therapy methods! But I needed some more facts and ideas to round out my speech! Thanks folks!

jmd	27 Oct 2002
I don't know why I hadn't read this now three-page thread before. I suppose that I tend to find that psychologising the Tarot tends to take away from rather than deepen it - but this is only my personal opinion. A small number of people I know who work in the mental health profession tend to use, at times, the Tarot. Quite frankly, it doesn't seem to me that they use it as Tarot, but rather as images semi-familiar and socially acceptable, which can be focussed upon and extrapolated from. Psychological discussions about Tarot tends to, in my experience, seek to understand the Tarot from this specific perspective - in the same vain as others seek to understand the Tarot from either Qabalistic or astrological perspectives - rather than allowing the Tarot to slowly unravel and reveal itself. Still, for the sake of the thread, two other books on my shelves which may also be of interest to those with Jungian inclinations are Kenneth D. Newman's The Tarot: a myth of male initiation (Quadrant Monograph - CG Jung Foundation, New York, USA, 1983, no isbn), and Irene Gad's excellent Tarot and Individuation (Nicolas-Hays, Maine, USA 1994 isbn 0-89254-026-5).

The Tarot and Psychology thread was originally posted on 16 Oct 2002 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.