I find this confusing, tbh, if the Kircher system is silly nonsense that seems irreconcilable with making an effort to understand it.
First off, you must realize that I am crotchety and curmudgeonly and I really don't mean half the things I say. I don't
really find the Kircher Tree to be utterly nonsensical. A bit annoying at times, perhaps, but not without value.
I disagree with some of the fundamental principles involved in the construction of the Kircher Tree of Life, and because of that, I've elected to use an alternate version of the Tree in my own personal practice. However, that's a personal choice on my part, and does not in any way reflect on the external value of the Kircher Tree.
Indeed, while I disagree with the starting point of the Kircher Tree, the interior logic of that system is actually quite sound. It holds up on its own, as a complete, self-contained esoteric system. And while it might look silly or confusing when analyzed from an outside perspective, studying the Kircher Tree from within encourages the use of a strong, rigorously applied methodology. It can never be said of the Kircher Tree that "association X doesn't make sense", because every association on the Tree
does make sense within the interior logic of that system. (Ask Zephyros sometime why the Chariot has to be placed where it is on the Tree of Life, and you'll see what I mean.)
The system is not for me, because my view of the world is different enough from the world it represents that the glyph stops being useful. But that does not ever mean that the system itself is flawed. As a matter of fact, the system is cohesive and rather beautifully designed, and as a self-contained unit, it makes perfect sense. It just doesn't overlap with my worldview or my understanding of the Tarot.
In a way, this is like talking about religions. I am not Christian. And every now and then, I get my butt in hot water when I let slip an insensitive comment about Christianity being silly and nonsensical. But I don't actually
mean that. Christianity as a religion is not for me, because it is built on fundamental principles of belief that differ radically from my own. But as a religious system in and of itself, Christianity is actually quite consistent. The interior logic of the religion is sound, and anyone who claims that Christianity is nonsense hasn't spent nearly enough time looking at the structure of the faith and understanding the way Christian doctrine would answer the questions they pose.
So while Christianity and I don't necessarily get along, I still think there's value to be had in studying it. And if I met someone who had been working in a Christian theological paradigm but who was having difficulties with the faith, I would encourage them to study the religion in depth and try to really understand it before rejecting that faith altogether.
The same goes for the Kircher Tree of Life. The ontology captured by the Kircher Tree is vastly different from the way I understand the world--so much so that I'm often tempted to label it nonsensical. But I don't actually mean that, and to be frank, the Kircher Tree is a beautifully structured system that makes sense when you meet it on its own territory. For anyone who is having difficulties with the Kircher Tree or who is tempted to abandon it altogether, they certainly have the right to do so, but I would encourage them to study the Tree in depth and do everything they could to understand it before writing it off as valueless.
Ultimately, Qabalistic study is a deeply personal process. No individual can tell any other that they should or should not work with a particular version of the Tree of Life. But at the same time, it's a process based on disciplined, methodological study. And I think that dismissing the Kircher Tree before attempting to understand it on its own merit would be an abandonment of that discipline.