Testing the Tarot?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 17 Jan 2005, and now archived in the Forum Library.

Keslynn	17 Jan 2005
My boyfriend is the scientific type. He's skeptical about tarot (not in a mean way). One day, we got around to discussing the possibility of setting up an experiment to test the accuracy of tarot card readings/readers. I don't think we ever came to a conclusion on the best way to experiment, but I'm curious to see what others have thought up. If you were going to scientifically experiment to test the accuracy of tarot readings, how would you do it? :) Kes

IDN	17 Jan 2005
It's a really interesting question. For most other areas that are considered "mystical / super-natural / etc" (ie ESP, ghosts, etc) there always seems to be some systemtatic monitoring / research going on. I wonder if anyone is studying the tarot in this way? It would make a great project! Regards, Ian

wandking	17 Jan 2005
In my expirience Tarot won't pass a pre-arranged test. It's when I'm not testing it that the cards seem to defy the law of averages. Recently I got the same three cards using three different decks but I wasn't testing the cards. In the past, when I did daily self-readings, certain cards appeared in every spread day after day. Perhaps you might try keeping records of actual daily readings, using a real Tarot deck. Then use a "control deck" of 78 different non-Tarot cards and then compare the results. One of the most striking things that happens to me when I do readings is that if I mention a card, it invariably shows up later in the spread. During the last live reading I performed the seeker got the two of wands and I said "that's like a lower arcana version of the Magician... He drew two more cards and then the Magician... I told him about my odd phenomenon and then said well at least I didn't mention the "T" card and winked at a fellow reader who was present during the reading... He then drew the Tower, which was the "T" card I had on my mind. I mentioned no other cards except those on the board during that reading. These incidents are not exceptions with me, they seem to be the rule. Nothing else in my life implies I possess any psychic ability.

Myrrha	17 Jan 2005
One thing would be to decide what exactly you mean by accuracy. Accurate predictions? A reading that accurately gets into the querant's head and helps them see their life differently? --Myrrha

tarotbear	17 Jan 2005
Once upon a long time ago there was a thread (I think it was on Aeclectic) about 'what would happen if every answer your cards gave you was absolutely true?' or something along the lines of what if someone sold a deck that was the 'Absolutely true, each-and-every-time, every answer is the correct answer Tarot.' And what would happen if such a thing came to pass and actually existed? Faced with answers you didn't like, but were absolutely in no-way could be wrong ... would it change the skeptics' minds? Many people quote Carl Jung as saying 'Tarot is of the moment.' Tarot reveals the answers based on that exact time that you asked the question. If you wait until tomorrow and ask the question again, you will get a slightly or vastly different answer depending on the events that have unfolded in the intervening 24 hours. How can you get two different answers to the exact same question? Which one is the correct answer? Tarot does not 'give us the answer' as much as it points out good choices and bad ones and makes you look at them and choose what will work best for you. If you get a horrid card reading with yucky events foretold, you have free will to change what you can. The moment you make any decision, you have already altered the future path. If you like what you see, don't change anything and use the Tarot to follow your progress. The idea of giving your cards a quiz? Not going to work very well. You would do best to journal your readings (You don't journal your readings? Shame on you! LOL!!) for what is unclear tonight might become very clear in the light of morning and the answer you said was a load of crap could be the exact answer you need. Sometimes things don't make sense until months later when events play themselves out.

DollieAnna	17 Jan 2005
I don't think the Tarot likes to be tested...lol!

Dovanna	17 Jan 2005
Being in the science field myself (and having the scientific method beaten into me over and over), I naturally questioned everything about Tarot cards when I was first exposed to them. I thought about ways to test their accuracy, but there are so many different ways to interrupt things that it seems impossible to throw any sort of science at it and make it stick. ;) The best readings that I do (for myself and others) are when I throw science to the side and just have fun with it.

tao51	17 Jan 2005
The Tarot are on the primitive level just a deck of cards with pictures. When the cards are stimulating mental activity then they are moving to another level. Do I need to test the Divine Comedy because it stimulates thought. The Tarot helps to interpret situations. It provides information about the question. I understand testing psychic ability involving identifying blocked cards. The readings are exciting and stimulating.--Tao

jumptothemoonyea	17 Jan 2005
it's like testing the unconscious, with tarot, we connect to that invisible, hidden beautiful world, we let the others in too, we hold them in the divine energy, opened by the cards, transforming them and us on levels only smallest part of which could be consciously understood; what does it matter what is right or wrong here, just to be closer

Nevada	17 Jan 2005
I'm torn about this. While I would love to be able to test Tarot and show the world some scientific proof of it, I'm afraid it would be a difficult thing to test properly. So much depends on the reader, the question, the circumstance. It's sort of like testing to see what shape a particular kind of tree will grow into. You will get a general idea, eventually, that an oak grows into a different shape than a fir, but you won't get exact shapes, and you'll get some rather freaky exceptions to the norm. In fact trees may conform better than Tarot readings, and that still won't mean there's nothing to Tarot. But I'm still interested in finding a way to do this. Nevada

Sinner	17 Jan 2005
Well I found the following info from an interesting book called 'teach yourself TAROT' by naomi ozaniec: A test has already been conducted by Jane English, a physisist and former skeptic of tarot. She tried to apply scientific method to tarot and published her findings entitled "A Scientist's Experience with Tarot". Basically, she selected 3 cards daily and recorded any correlation with her own life experience. She then applied statistical analysis to her own two year record. Additionally, two friends also supplied personal records covering a two year period. Her own journal provided 1,982 choices, her friends supplied another 2,395 and 2,015 selections respectively. Now these journals were prepared a long time before she had the idea of compiling a statistical analysis. She then used a pack of control cards, blank on one side, and numbered on the other. They were shuffled like tarot cards but chosen without any meditative preparation. She also programed a computer to perform the same process: 13 runs were made totalling 24,183 selections. Of the 13 runs, nine runs produced a probability of non-randomness of less than 50%; two runs produced a probability of 53% and only one run produced a probability of 65%. The probability of non-randomness for the selections made by the three individuals stood at 95% for each of the journals . The probability of non-randomness using the index cards stood at 53 percent. Thus she concluded: "Saying the choice is random is the same as saying that the cards are totally seperate from the person who picks them. Saying that the choice is not random is to say that there is a connection between the persona and the cards. After doing all the analysis I was struck with the reality of the connectedness of the cards and the person who chooses them in meditation even though my old scientific belief system asserted there was no connection. The statistical analysis doesn't show the nature of the connection between the person and the cards; it just shows that it is very probable that there is a connection of some kind." So overall she proved to herself that when using tarot cards, the cards you pick in a meditative state are almost certain (95%) to be non-random that is, directly influenced by the subconcious of the operator. Hope this helps

tarotbear	18 Jan 2005
I can almost guarantee you that the cards are picked by the subconscious of the operator; in fact, that is why I stopped doing readings for myself because I found out I could influence the cards more easily than you could believe! If you believe that you can program a crystal, then you can influence which cards will pop up in a spread. This is why when someone says something dumb like ' I want you to do a reading for me but I don't want any bad cards!' I always say ' I don't pick the cards - you do.' However, making the cards you want to see pop up in a reading is not the same as 'testing' the cards to see of what they say is accurate.

similia	18 Jan 2005
I found this very amusing article one day. Some scientists tried doing a contolled trial to verify the validity of tarot. They shuffed and drew the cards, and then both the reader and the querent left the room. In some cases they replaced the cards with random other ones, to see if the reader or querent could tell the difference when they returned and completed the reading. It was interesting that the results were not as expected.... http://www.parapsych.org/papers/48.pdf

Kiama	18 Jan 2005
I think there are firstly too many variables to be able to subject Tarot to a scientific test... Do you test the cards, or do you test the person's interpretations? Most likely the latter, but of course, people have bad days and good days, etc... People get tired, and nobody knows everything about all the cards, so people might also miss something in a card. And how do you test whether it was accurate or not? It depends on your sense of the future. If you go with the most common one - that Tarot shows you what will happen IF you carry on the way you are - then you can't test it. Simply because the person being read for may have chosen a different route and thus changed their future. But that doesn't mean the cards were wrong... And does the value of Tarot really lie in its accuracy of the future? No, I doubt it. I think the true essence (oh dear God- there's that word!) of Tarot and its value lies in its usefulless and the way it is applied to our lives. Can you measure that with science? No. I am naturally a sceptical person. I'm also a scientific type. I have to be- I study Philosophy. But I can still be sceptical and see that the Tarot works and is useful. I guess what I mean is that scepticism and Tarot are not exclusive - in fact they go very well together. In the end, what made me realize that I believed (for want of a better word) in Tarot, was that I saw the difference it made to the people I read for, and I recognized how it affected me. I also saw the uses of it beyond fortelling the future. Blessings, Kiama

Keslynn	18 Jan 2005
Myrrha wrote: One thing would be to decide what exactly you mean by accuracy. Accurate predictions? A reading that accurately gets into the querant's head and helps them see their life differently? --Myrrha That was one of things I was wondering about. What premise would you begin the experiement with were you to run one? Accuracy or impact on querent? Either one could probably be tested. I understand the difficulties in experimenting with the tarot, but that's what I think makes it such an intriguing question. I'm asking in hypotheticals here. I'm not going to run off and set up an experiment. I'm a nerd but not that big of one. ;) The studies that similia and Sinner posted were really interesting. Thanks! :) Kes

wandking	19 Jan 2005
Great answer... very eloquent... What little I've seen on Jung's work with Tarot I admire... Can you recommend a good book on the topic?

tarotbear	20 Jan 2005
You may have seen everything there is to read already. In truth everyone acts like Jung wrote volumes and volumes about Tarot - he didn't! He found that Tarot linked in nicely to his ideas about archetypes. One of his diciples (Sallie Nichols) wrote a book called "Jung and Tarot, an Archetypical Journey" {ISBN 0-87728-515-2}, and to tell you the truth, I was a little disappointed that it is her vision, not Jung's even though she studied with him when he was still alive. Try to find it in a used book store!

TemperanceAngel	20 Jan 2005
Not so long ago there was a thread in here about someone who was testing the Tarot, let me see if I can find it for you.....

fairyhedgehog	20 Jan 2005
Before you can "test the Tarot" you need to decide what you are testing it for, or in more scientific terms, what your hypothesis is. If you believe, as I do, that the magic of tarot lies in our own creative ability to relate the cards to our lives, then I'm not sure what use a test would be or what it would show us. It would be like trying to test the beauty of a Beethoven sonata. When you look at the test mentioned in an earlier post, I think that there is a problem if you try to make tarot predictive irrespective of the human person who is translating it. I don't believe that is possible. If in order to validate the test someone has to decide whether a card is 'relevant' to a specific situation, the validator is using the very faculties you are trying to test!

wandking	21 Jan 2005
I've sadly discovered Jung wrote precious little on Tarot, as you say... I appreciate you steering me toward that close reference to his work.

full deck	21 Jan 2005
wandking wrote: . . . One of the most striking things that happens to me when I do readings is that if I mention a card, it invariably shows up later in the spread. This happens to me as well. Last night, for example, I saw the King of cups selecting cards for me from my 1811 Swiss Deck (Marseilles) and that was the first card that I turned over. I had not touched this deck in months too. It happens enough that I consider it a mark of veracity.

wandking	21 Jan 2005
Events, like those we discribed could relate to psychic ability, which is about as hard a pill for science to swallow as Tarot is but I exhibit no other psychic gifts. I think this very testable phenomenon would be a valid "test for Tarot." If it doesn't prove Tarot works it might indicate a conclussion even more profound.

full deck	22 Jan 2005
wandking wrote: . . . If it doesn't prove Tarot works it might indicate a conclussion even more profound. You know, Wandking, I've mentioned before that such may have a relationship to the nature of time and our perception of such, i.e., do I think of a certain card because I can perceive something that happens a little into the future or am I influencing the outcome of a reading just by my observation of such? It's a bit like certain ideas regarding the nature of time and space that I read of in physics.

wandking	22 Jan 2005
full deck, I think that future cards in spreads do not truely represent the future, since it is fluid and ever-changing. I believe cards in these positions generally represent what the reader or client perceives the future holds. Perhaps it is as Jung said and through Tarot we tap into a collective human unconciousness. To get this board back on track, since Jung was in escense a scientist, it would have made sense that he tested the cards to some degree but I've found nothing in print to indicate he performed any expiriments to test the validity of Tarot... Does anyone know of findings he published on this topic?

Cerulean	22 Jan 2005
For instance, the tests might be: 1) Can a tarot card be a pictorial suggestion be an effective motivator or be a more effective motivator than a text-based random generator of allegorical quotes or fortunes? Or a comparable book or calendar of postive thinking and actions? 2) Can tarot as a tool be as effective or more conducive to meditation or active behavioral change? Is familiarity a factor in effectiveness or does the variety of new tarot pictures stimulate a better response? 3) How familiar do people have to be with the suggestion of archetypes to consider tarot to be effective in their readings? How do the people define effective readings? 4) Is there a strong correlation between the person who tests on the higher end for effective visual learning and tarot 'effectiveness' or personal beliefs on tarot effectiveness? 5) Does analysis of any of the above contribute to enjoyment of tarot or does it promote boredom or introduce analysis in a way that the tarot user does not like? 6. Mary Katherine Greer has done some interesting surveys of tarot subjects, including what moods that people suggest or think certain cards portray--she used the Rider Waite Smith, current U.S. Games edition, and she doesn't seem to be inclined to use any other deck for her studies for such surveys. So others are free to to use their decks to conduct 'tests' or responses. I didn't participate in the survey, I just attended a lecture when she spoke about this and what I gathered was it helped her feel that the RWS did have a great variety to offer for her reading and teaching style. Just some thoughts. Regards, Cerulean

wandking	22 Jan 2005
Cerulean, those are thought provoking survey questions and Greer is certainly one of the strongest modern influences on Tarot. Do you have the results of the survey?

Cerulean	22 Jan 2005
http://www.tarotpassages.com/emotionsmkg.htm Hope it is helpful Cerulean

wandking	23 Jan 2005
thanks Cerulean... those are very interesting results

tarotbear	23 Jan 2005
wandking wrote: since Jung was in escense a scientist, it would have made sense that he tested the cards to some degree but I've found nothing in print to indicate he performed any expiriments to test the validity of Tarot... Does anyone know of findings he published on this topic? Once again, not having read anything directly but having read works by one of his disicples, I don't think Jung wrote extensively about tarot at all; it's something that has built up a mythos of its own over time since people know Jung 'talked' about it. If there is more than twelve pages written on the subject by Jung himself, I'd be surprised. Jungian theory is based on archetypes, just like tarot, and Jung found the connection was fascinating since he felt that we are born with archetypical symbols deep in our collective consciousness, and many use this idea when they discuss tarot archetypes. Other that that, that is pretty much all there is to know. Jung was NOT a tarotist, had wild tarot parties to research his ideas, or a massive deck collector or anything like that. Many use the fact that a scientist like Jung even mentioning Tarot gives it some sort of justification that simply isn't there. The C. G. Jung Institute is in Los Angeles; try a search and see what you can find.

wandking	24 Jan 2005
thanks tarotbear... I think jung allowed his patients to look at all the card faces and pick the ones that appeared to apply to their life... The patient then told the story... Is that consistent with your understanding?

The Testing the Tarot? thread was originally posted on 17 Jan 2005 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.