Skysteel
willowfox said:You need the full 78 card deck for the full life experience.
Does one also need 78 Runes for 'the full-life experience', even though most sets contain 24, and at most, about 33?
willowfox said:You need the full 78 card deck for the full life experience.
jmd said:One needs only observe a single rain-drop for divination. That does not make a partial tarot deck complete.
jmd said:There is still, however, a separate question that is quite independent of its usage for divinatory purposes. As a deck of 78 cards, does it have broader reflections on life's myriad and rich experiences, or does it somehow 'lack' something by removing some (or indeed a large chunk) of its set?
jmd said:Life's experiences can of course be differently configured in representation (such as with 24 Runes, or the combinatorics offered by astrological charts, etc.). For each such set, however, a similar comment can be made: is the reduced set as rich of life's myriad possibilities (not in the act of divination, but in these being reflected in the set)? I would suggest that removing Berkana and Perth (for example) diminishes the set, even though for divinatory purposes, a single rune may well lead to divinatory insights - and similar comments can be made by removing considerations of the 'inner' planets of Mercury and Venus in astrology.
Skysteel said:Does one also need 78 Runes for 'the full-life experience', even though most sets contain 24, and at most, about 33?
willowfox said:You know as well as I do that the Elder Futhark is only 24 runes but are limited in their meanings, they were great for hunter/gathers/farmers of that time 500 B.C. but life has become enormously more complicated since those days.
So, to restrict yourself to 22 cards is doing yourself a disservice because the tarot is 78 cards for a reasonably "full life experience".
valeria said:Everyone should use what they feel comfortable with, but regardless of what they use, that doesn't make a reading any less viable.