Tarot and the scientist

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 24 Oct 2002, and now archived in the Forum Library.

evenstar	24 Oct 2002
There have been quite a few threads here about tarot and religion, and how to explain tarot to a loved one that is closed/concerned about it due to their religious beliefs, but what about the other way, where a person rubbishes it as being "unscientific". I think I thought I saw this mentioned by Woof and fairyhedghog inside a thread somewhere else but I thought I'd start a new one! Most of my friends are, like myself, very scientifically minded (mathematicians, physicists, computer programmers...). I wouldn't be falling over myself to tell them what I do as they would immediately be on me for some kind of scientific proof of how it works. Personally I approach the tarot as more of an advisor. When I query it might give me some new things to think on, or a new way to approach a problem, but will not necessarily tell me what will/will not happen. As someone said on a post (I am going to have to look these references up...), the human mind is very good at making things apply, and making stories that are meaningful to them, so that everyone will get something from a reading. How do other people explain themselves to people who dismiss tarot from a scientific viewpoint?? .... just found the original posts and pasted them here too .... Quote: Originally posted by Woof Could you help supply an argument for friends who are strict athiests who believe that anything beyond hard science is pure fertilizer and condescend to those who believe in something more? I'm tired of hiding my interest for fear of being labeled a gullible new age air head by my friends/family. Woof Quote: Originally posted by fairyhedgehog Well, I am an atheist, so you can be an atheist and use tarot :) In my view your friends condescension is not a sign of their superior intellect but of a lack of understanding. My take on tarot is: The pictures have developed over a long period of time, and represent images and symbols that are important to the human psyche. In a spread the challenge for the reader is to take the card that has landed randomly in a particular meaning-position and weave a story that makes sense of the card, the position-meaning and the life of the querent. We are able to do this because of the way the human mind works to make sense of the world by making stories. The value of this is: Fun. We enjoy making up stories and it is healthy for us psychologically to do so. Creativity. We get used to looking at things in different ways and we become more creative at problem solving as well. Insight. By using this tool, we may come up with ideas and thoughts in relation to a situationthat might not otherwise have occurred to us. So we are not gullible new-age airheads but very creative people :) BTW, you don't have to share this view to put it to your friends. You could just say "Well, one way of looking at it is ..."

Woof	24 Oct 2002
Thanks for pulling this out to a separate post. I think possibly the hardest part for me is feeling they're putting me down as emotionally weak for relying on/consulting with something so superstitious. I think it's improtant to consolidate my own feelings about tarot. I know it helps me think things through, it gives me different lenses through which to see a problem or approach my day. And whether there's anything more I don't know and doesn't really matter to me. I like the minor rituals I do surrounding it, like lighting candles and sitting meditatively with the cards for a while. They make me feel good. I've noticed some odd things since I've started studying which I would never bring up such as an increased frequency, vividness and length of my dreams. I think it's easiest to just avoid the issue altogether with some people but when one of them is your husband and you think he's snickering at your new "hobby" it's tough. Thanks for listening Woof

Sinta	24 Oct 2002
Well as I guess from my point of view (am oracle programmer, databank developer) I see the tarot as nothing but a tool. They are just cards and nothing at all spiritual (again my opinion) ;) Visiting a tarot reader, is like visiting a consultant. The Reader uses the cards, and tells the querent what he/she sees and asks the querent at the same time, what they see in the cards. A consultant /psychiatrist does the same thing, except with images of ink blotted into paper, holding up and listens after asking their patient, what they see. It's absolutely the same thing. A lot of psychiatrists are now using the tarot as well. Of course its hard to explain the mystery of reoccuring cards though.. but hey. *shrugs* Maybe I've just seen a lot of wierd things in life to accept such happenings. ^-^

dangerdork	24 Oct 2002
I'm pretty new, so I'm not sure if this concept has come up here before: The tarot is very much a right brain exercise. Since we usually allow the language-oriented, analytical left brain to ride a little closer to the surface, maybe we tend to use that part of our brain to process our day-to-day concerns in relationships, family, ambitions, etc. The exercise of looking at these concerns in terms of pictures, symbols, and metaphors turns over the process to the holistic, metaphorical, visually oriented right brain, which is also the seat of creativity. Most meditative processes are a conscious effort to allocate a greater portion of our thought processes to the right brain. Tarot is ideal for this because of its imagery and use of metaphor. Even though I just made this all up, it sounds like it has reasonable basis in scientific thought. :)

Keslynn	24 Oct 2002
I have several friends who are atheist or agnostic who basically patted me on the head when I told them about tarot. Basically, they humored me. But then, they all eventually got curious about it and had me do a reading for them, usually with the "what the heck, why not?" sort of feeling. Often the readings were so accurate that they've since come back to me for other readings. Scientific method uses repetition of phenomena as it's basis. The tarot has worked for them so far, and the proof is in the pudding (so to speak)! For those friends of mine who still look at it skeptically and won't ever have a reading, I accept that, and generally they don't ridicule me for what I do. That would mean I had rude friends! ;) Modern science is almost as much a religion as many others. That's their choice. :) Kes

Umbrae	24 Oct 2002
Golly… God and the New Physics -- P. C. W. Davies Witch Crafting: A Spiritual Guide to Making Magic -- Phyllis Curott You know…folks who say (even with degrees), “Tarot is just a bunch of cardboard and ink”, need to look into Quantum Physics…The above links are only two of a bunch of wonderful sources out there. Science provides us with proof. But a true skeptic will disbelieve in the face of facts.

Riversea	24 Oct 2002
I believe very strongly in the metaphysical, spiritual side of the Tarot; I've no problem with it. However, I also recognize the validity of the Tarot as a psychological tool. I can't say that I am surprised that scientific-minded folks dismiss the Tarot as a lot of bunk; it just shows that they don't really know ANYTHING about the Tarot outside of what they have seen in the movies! I can understand some people not buying into the metaphysical side, but I would challenge anyone to disprove its usefulness as a tool for problem-solving and self-exploration and reflection. It is like Woof said, one of the levels I view Tarot on is the "different lens" concept. I, generally, approach problems the same way everytime. I can't help it; I have certain habits that have developed over the years. They kick in. The Tarot helps me think outside my personal box. It gives me new and creative parameters to look at issues from. Could I do this without the Tarot? Probably, but it is much easier with the Tarot. And self-exploration? Humph... studying archetypes and reflecting how they might be manifesting in and effectings one's life... yup! Just a load of hooey! No possible value or validity there. Jung, what a nutcase! ;) (Ok, I'm sure plenty of people have trouble with Jung, but you have to admit, he's well respected by many, even scientific-types). And I've often thought of inkblots/Tarot idea, too. And science itself doesn't have the whole picture. The fact that any new discoveries can be made shows this to be true. Don't get me wrong. I adore science! If my math skills had been stronger, I might have studied to become a scientist. I seriously thought about it. And quantum physics seems to have opened up quite a can of worms. It seems entirely possible that metaphysics and hard science may meet in that realm. The possiblities are exciting! By the way, does anyone else think of Newton when you deal with the Four of Cups from the RW deck? Sometimes, it makes me think of Newton, bored with the world, sitting under the apple tree, waiting for the apple (divine inspiration) to strike.

Lovelace	25 Oct 2002
Just to put a scientific view to some of the points and questions raised so far... A rational skeptic doesn't disbelieve in the face of facts. What makes them facts is that they can be believed by a reasonable mind that has measured a reasonable amount of evidence. And recurring cards don't need to be a mystery; any card has a 1/78 chance of showing up, regardless of whether it showed up earlier. It's just a matter of coincidence. It's the person reading the cards that attaches significance to the card that recurs, and how the person interprets the cards is the important thing in any case, not the cards themselves. I'm with fairyhedgehog in that I see the cards' value in the images they present, images that resonate with us due to our cultural and personal experience. The act of interpreting these meaningful images gives us a new perspective on issues, as people have pointed out, and also, I think, clarifies our intuition by getting us to think of things in terms of more universal and recognizable patterns. And on a more personal note, I suppose, I find it hard to muster the motivation to imagine a lot of higher spiritual things and ideas on top of the scientific world - the world that can be measured and observed - when that world is so amazing and inspires such reverence on its own. This is why I see things scientifically. I'm with Ford Prefect: "Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe there's fairies at the bottom of it?" Intuition is nothing more than pattern recognition, sure, but pattern recognition so sophisticated that it can read people, predict their future, understand what someone is really saying despite what words they actually use? That's the kind of thing that I feel spiritual about. :TAS

jmd	26 Oct 2002
The last paragraph of Lovelace's post already points to fields where traditional science remains without: to see a garden as beautiful is going beyond its mere measurement and observation. Science is truly wonderful, and fortunately its investigators are able to transcend, as human beings, its constraints. Witness, for example, the inspiration of so many who have laboured over problematic data. Unlike possibly some of the other posters, I would say that it isn't that these people are making meaning of the data, but rather truly discovering such. In other words, the concepts which are able to link and make sense of the information are to be discovered through intuitive insight. This goes beyond, then, the mere quantitative and observable, to the qualitative aspect. Presumably, a similar aspect occurs in a Tarot reading. One goes beyond the mere observation of card or card sequence, and enters a state whereby these may, through intuitive insight, become meaningfully understood. As in the case of the scientist, the reader as to go beyond the 'merely observable' to its meaningfulness. As to whether it is enough to see that a garden is beautiful without the need to also see its fairies, I suppose that this is certainly the case for most of us. Similarly, it is enough for most to see the effects of a common cold without the need to see its causative bacteria. In neither case does our everyday 'need' imply the normally invisible to be non-existent.

Talisman	26 Oct 2002
'Lo all, A splendid thread! It was well known to ancient philosophers that the world was composed of five elements: Earth, Air, Fire, Water and Surprise. To stand on the shoulders of those who have gone before and see the fifth element, a scientist must have an open mind, alert to new possibilities. A narrow-minded person sees only what he wants to see, a tight focus which excludes things challenging to his beliefs. To a scientist whose imagination is triggered by new combinations of things, I suspect Tarot would be a valuable tool. Any spoke can lead an ant to the hub. On the other hand, take a scientist like Issac Asimov (biochemist), a prodigious writer. I imagine his mind being like rows of perfectly ordered filing cabinets, indexed so everything he knew and every book he'd ever read was at his fingertips. Literally. He wrote books, many, many books, on an electric typewriter, typing at 80-words a minute. Perfect, he said, because he thought at 80-words a minute. I'm guessing Tarot would have been useless to him, because while he certainly had an open mind, he always knew exactly what he thought because he always knew exactly what he knew. But I (admittedly no scientist) sit aimlessly shuffling my cards back and forth preparing to lay them out, and ask, "Well, er, ah, what am I thinking about?" I guess you're thinking, "That may be the single dumbest question anyone ever asked of the Tarot." Let me see if I can explain it a little better. Red Smith was a preeminent sportswriter, a very literate and intelligent guy. Once, during a newspaper strike in New York City, someone asked him what he thought about the matter. "I hate it," he said. "How do I know what I think if I can't read what I write?" Sort of like that. Before Newton, everyone knew that if you dropped something, it fell, or if the ground was a long way away it probably wasn't a good idea to jump out a window and count on the chance a truck load of mattresses was going by. Newton asked the question. And asking the question, and being open minded to the fifth element, is what science is about. Tarot too. Just a fresh way of looking at the world. Talisman

jmd	26 Oct 2002
In terms of various discussions which have occured on the Forums, the following may be of interest: Sanctum Sanctorum ; What makes Tarot work? ; But How Does It *Work*? Part 2 ; Carl Jung's deck? ; What drives Tarot - Image or Archetype? ; and Deva Tarot / "Non-Standard" Tarots . Posting these links will only, I hope, add to this wonderful and important thread, and not diminish discussions!

ihcoyc	26 Oct 2002
I cheerfully admit that I cannot prove that tarot does anything more than to return cards at random. Even so, it is helpful. I look at it mostly as a brainstorming tool. Even if it does no more than that, there are too many situations where some kind of random input is helpful. It helps you to take a look at a situation from a new angle, and the insight comes in that way.

wavebreaker	26 Oct 2002
Quote: Originally posted by Lovelace I'm with Ford Prefect: "Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe there's fairies at the bottom of it?" I'd like to add another Douglas Adams quote, this one is from Wonko the Sane in So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish: "I'm a scientist and I know what constitutes proof. But the reason I call myself by my childhood name is to remind myself that a scientist must also be absolutely like a child. If he sees a thing, he must say that he sees it, whether it was what he thought he was going to see or not. See first, think later, then test. But always see first. Otherwise you will only see what you were expecting. Most scientists forget that." ;)

Khatruman	26 Oct 2002
I haven't read through all posts, but I was sparked by Sinta's talk about it being a right brain activity. The problem with a total reliance on science is that it is too much a left brain world, which discounts entirely that other half of our brains. I developed a multicultural folklore class for my Adult High School English program and the hardest thing to get students to see is the magical aspects of much folklore. To them, myth, faeries, et al, are merely made up stories. I have a hard time getting them to come over to the right side and accept some reality in the supernatural. Let me quote you something from the LWB that came with my Creative Whack Pack, a pack of cards developed and often used in the business world by Roger von Oech, who has a Ph. D. in Creative thinking and developed and studied creative thinking. "Creativity Oracle--Many cultures have developed oracles to give counsel to their members when making decisions. Some examples include: the Greek Delphic Oracle, the ancient Chinese I Ching, the Egyptian Tarot, the Nordic Runes, and the North American Indian Medicine Wheel. The purpose of these oracles was not so much to fortell the future, as to enable the user to delve deeper into his intuition when dealing with a particular problem. Most oracles consist of a system of messages from which the user randomly selects one or more in a specific pattern. The random selection is important. Many people use the same problem-solving approaches repeatedly, and as a result, they come up with the same old answers. A random message forces you to deal with the problem in a way you probably wouldn't have otherwise, and as a result, you're forced to look at it in a different way." I see the tarot and oracular devices as a tap into the deeper mind in each of us, and all of us, since I am a great follower of Jung and the collective unconscious. I hope I have given some additional insite.

Lovelace	26 Oct 2002
I hope I didn't come across as too rigid in my earlier post. Of course science hasn't created a complete picture of the world yet, and I'm fascinated by all the philosophical ramifications of quantum mechanics: the fact that we honestly have no idea what's happening at the lowest levels of reality. Very cool, very interesting. I think what I was trying to get at, though, is not that the garden is still beautiful if you don't notice the fairies, but that I think the garden itself is more beautiful than the fairies could ever be. The garden is growth, life, birth, death, change, sunlight and darkness - it's everything that means anything to me. Fairies are nice, but since they're ideas born of the minds of man, they just can't be as complex as things in the living, material world. Of course the significance they have for human beings is real, and I respect that, but I could never love something supernatural like I love real things, things I can see and touch. As for the brain, it is far, far more complex than is suggested by splitting it into a right/left dichotomy. While different sections do have generally specific functions, all parts of the brain working together in a mind-bogglingly complex dance of tiny electrical impulses are required for the synthesis that leads to intuition and scientific innovation, as well as any other very high-level thinking. :TQS

DeLani	26 Oct 2002
I agree with Lovelace, that it's too easy, and perhaps not entirely accurate, to split the brain into Right/Left. There have been some scientific studies (sorry, don't have my footnotes handy!) that showed that when people were listening to music, looking at art, and *engaged in ritual* the communication between the spheres of the brain was off the chart (so to speak). Tarot uses two of these, art and ritual, to jump-start inter-hemisphere cerebral activity, which is the best thing to do when trying to solve a problem from a different angle. Also, the inkblot theory is valid, but Tarot has the advantage of Jungian archetypes - a much more powerful psychic barometer/stimulator. In my opinion, of course. I have to go - I have a 15 lb. cat laying across my hands as I'm trying to type, and he's getting annoyed that I keep moving my hands!

The Tarot and the scientist thread was originally posted on 24 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.