Astrology vs. Tarot, which's "better"?

[tarotbear]

Regardless of what divination system(s) you use, once you look into another system you will begin to see that they overlap somewhere. The fact that they overlap means that one system can add depth to another; it does not mean that one system is better, easier, more accurate, etc., than any other.

 

[bobbob]

I find 9 times out 10 they same the same thing or something very similar.

 

[ArcanoMáximo]

I agree but...

I think exactly like you, and what Flidais said let me struck, really make sense, i'll try for my self to check!

For all Tarot readings, I request the month, date, and year of birth. I have noticed on many occasions that one of the cards drawn into a spread will match a planetary placement in the client's chart (for example, the 5 of Cups appears and the person has Mars in Scorpio in his chart)

But, the thing is that i have something to confess about why i started this thread.
The truth is that i had a discussion with someone that was a Tarot Reader till she found the Astrology and then realized that it is more serious, exact and deeper, not at fraud at all like Tarot(?!)GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I said her that surely she wasn't a very good reader, and that the problem was her, not Tarot.
Then i started to wonder me how many more Astrologers would be thinking that, even when as we all think here both have the same basis.
Haven't you had the same experience?

 

[dadsnook2000]

Some comments

ArcanoMáximo, you said, "Then i started to wonder me how many more Astrologers would be thinking that, even when as we all think here both have the same bases." I would not agree with this statement that both Astrology and Tarot have the same basis!

** Astrology is an interpretive process that uses observed/calculated planet positions and spatial orientations to tell about an event or a birth. Astrology is a science and/or a process that was developed initially some 2000 years ago.
** Tarot is an interpretive process that uses illustrated cards, seemingly random drawn, to provide meditative and divinatory insights in relationship to a given question or concern. Tarot was developed some 500 years ago and evolved into a divinatory format more recently, and incorporates symbology that was common to its founding cultures.

As one who practices both systems, I do not generally engage in both systems for one reading. On another web-site which I co-moderate I have posted both Tarot and Astrology readings on a single subject, currently a predicitive effort concerning the upcoming Iraqi referundum. I have often seen querents seek different answers relative to either an astrological or a tarot reading -- tarot querents often start with a narrow question while, in my experience, astrological querents want a general life/status reading in which to have a context for a specific issue and its timing/progress.

Dave

 

[Psychebleu]

ArcanoMáximo, you said, "Then i started to wonder me how many more Astrologers would be thinking that, even when as we all think here both have the same bases." I would not agree with this statement that both Astrology and Tarot have the same basis!

** Astrology is an interpretive process that uses observed/calculated planet positions and spatial orientations to tell about an event or a birth. Astrology is a science and/or a process that was developed initially some 2000 years ago.
Dave

I have to disagree with this. Astronomy is a science - Astrology is not. Astonomy is about observation and estimation. Astrology is about interpretation, in it's application to human issues. Basically, myths are projected on the actual heavenly bodies - and that is what interpretation is based on. This is even the case with 'sacred geometry' - and there is nothing scientific (in the material sense) about that process.

Also, unfortunately the person Maximo refers to is common - that attitude. It's also a very false assumption. You cannot simply compute positions and have an exact answer - astrology (like any method of divination) takes some intuition or 'psychic' ability for accuracy. Anyone who practices astrology knows that Neptune trine Sun (to the same degree) doesn't mean the same thing in every natal chart - there are so many other factors that must be considered for synthesis. How do you do this? I can tell you it goes beyond exact, dry calculations.

So, it's 'science' in the sense that Psychology is science. Even Psychiatry - there are dozens of medications - exact quantities of ingredients mixed under strict controls- but those methods don't smoothly translate when it comes to applied psych - which I liken to the process of interpretation.

 

[dadsnook2000]

My view still stands . . .

Psychebleu, I stand by my brief statements -- brief in that a few lines cannot be all encompassing or all convincing. Conventional sciences and astrology both follow basic procedures, use basic proofs and assumptions, and also engage in creating theorums. When venturing into unknown or relatively "new" areas, both have to find their way. Whether it is something as fundamental as metalurgy, as dynamic as chemsitry and biology, as open to debate as psychiatry, or as something such as astrology -- it all moves ahead and has both adherents and distractors.

All of this is true even though we recognize that some practice their science or art or whatever better than others. Our level of competency is not the issue here. Some of us are very good at what we do, others less so. Dave

 

[Psychebleu]

Just to clarify

I chose from your quote, because that is the part I disagree with. Although, I may have responded to what was *implied, from the pov of the average person that doesn't practice astrology*. You can't deny that when people hear 'science' - they're not thinking Psychodynamic theory or Jung's Collective Unconscious, yet astrology falls very much into that tradition of science. Yes, we work with heavenly relationships that are observed but there is no way to physically, tangibly test and observe the phenomena - which most people associate with the scientific method.

 

[dadsnook2000]

On the contrary

Well known tests have been carried out relative to Lunar effects on cell water conternt and cell salts, rain in New York city starts when Jupiter is on the nadir angle (when other conditions of both a physical and astrological nature suppor it, some crystals change their magnetic field orientation under some astrological/astronomical (same thing) alignments, sunspots affect both the weather and the stock exchange in a broad way and people respond to their biorhythms which are based on the Mercury cycle, etc. The French astrologer Gauguin (?) carried out a life long study that showed many astrological influences on various professions -- as well as not proving some influences that he had expected to see.

So, I submit that there are indeed many ways to objectively view and confirm the influences of heavenly bodies here on earth. Dave

 

[Psychebleu]

Paul Gauguin, yep, I have his book, and tried applying that theory to my own natal. It's piecy and far from fool proof form what I remember - but I haven't given it much time or effort.

And yes, the studies mentioned have been done on non-human subjects - but how often is that the basis of one's astrological practice? No *thorough or extensive* testing has been done concerning human behavior or even physical effects on a variety of human subjects, using astrological configurations. It's almost completely irrelevant to the practicing astrologer - except as a means of further exploring and developing pet theories - in a very abstract way.

 

[dadsnook2000]

My sense . . .

I believe that we may have touched upon most/many of the primary points of veiw on this question. I also believe that neither of us is trying to convince the other of our views but is merely offering their own convictions. It has been a great discussion and I thank you for your effort and sincerity.

I would like to encourage others to make their views known. Perhaps we can all find a basis for adjusting or enlarging our views on this interesting topical area.
Thanks again. Dave