View Single Post
swedishfish612  swedishfish612 is offline
Join Date: 28 Jun 2012
Location: Southeast, USA
Posts: 1,565

Originally Posted by Tibor View Post

First she wrote: 'Tarot....It is a science of the mind', then she wrote: 'Art, which is what the tarot is,...'
The way I was thought at university is that psychology is the science of the mind. For me personally Tarot is an art not a science.
Yes, that bugged me too. I, too, think of Tarot as an art. And somehow all of this stuff about not doing predictive readings, and calling her way of reading "analytics" feels me. Like she desperately wants to distinguish herself from the stereotype of the old gypsy woman with a head scarf and big earrings and the "woo woo" of Tarot mystique.

And I kind of get that, but in a way I find it a bit, I don't know, arrogant somehow. Like she wants to point out that MOST Tarot readers are superstitious nuts, but she's not one. lol

Originally Posted by Tibor View Post
Another thing: The author clearly believes in past-lives as she mentions it when she defines 'personal unconscious' from a metaphysical point of view. It just made me wonder: if you believe in past-lives then wouldn't you believe in destiny? After all, in this current life-time you are who or what you are for a reason and that reason surely has something to do with who or what you were in your previous life? If you you believe in destiny wouldn't you be more open to the fortune-telling aspects of the Tarot.
I am not trying to discredit what the author said, neither do I support fortune-telling for all the wrong reasons she mentioned in her book; rather I am just trying to understand how the author thinks about Tarot and uses it as a tool for her 'tarot analytics' as opposed to divination.
Yes, that confused me as well! And in flipping around through the book, I see several example readings where she HAS done predictions. I'm just baffled. Again, this book might just not be for me.
Top   #45