Books vs. No books

Morgan of Avalon

This exact same question comes up on poker forums all the time. There is a great deal of intuition in poker and Tarot, as well as skill, and creativity with that skill. It's an interesting parallel in the question of book vs no book because until the last 5 years, there were only a handful of books on poker...now there are hundreds written by every pro player and every donkey that ever sat at a table and lost his money to sharks. So, the variety in actual good advice and knowledge in said books is huge...much like tarot books of which there are many many more.

The consensus in most arguments of this kind is that middle ground of reading/learning from books and then translating into your own style when you have the information is where most people end up. Some people are naturals...they just are and don't get into books at all. Thats fine, but there are also people that become very very good after reading tonne's of books both good and bad, to acquire as many perspectives as possible before making their own path via what they'd read, what they feel and what they experience through practice.

Good or bad book, there's always something to learn, even if it's only that you believe the author to be completely wrong in every facet of their information...this still results in worthwhile analysis of why their views are wrong to you, and recall of what you already know for yourself. Don't take everything you read as gospel, discuss your readings and interpretations with both like minded and opposite thinking people, and take what you can from each book and turn it into your own style and things will fall into place :)

At the end of the day, just take as much as you can from whatever source works best for you...as they say in Texas Hold'em - "A minute to learn, a lifetime to master".
 

Scion

What a fascinating parallel Morgan! Many thanks for bringing that perspective to bear here. And one with a lot of resonance if you think about it, with it's blend of artistry and science... the mitigating factors of fortune and wit... amateurs and pros and everything in between... real life stakes and people who are passionate about their own perspectives. Study and intuition doing the eternal duet as usual.

Love that.
 

Umbrae

Scion said:
mbrae, with all due respect... no one has suggested that readiing books is high ground except you. }) Banning or burning, approving and condemning books are other things that no one else has suggested... except you. :) Is there something you aren't telling us...

I don't believe in high ground in this situation. I believe in ground.


Dude! Ya completely missed the point of my post (which was not that obtuse).

But with that in mind, I'll play Hold 'Em with ya anytime.

Now some would say that Book Study (which books?) vs Intuition (or is it psychic?) represent a proper duality.

What do I really say and really think?

It's all one. We are one. One world, one people, one heart beating out the drum of the universe, one all.

But thinking we ‘know’, limits us. Regardless of how we ‘know’. If it’s from too much study or too much reliance on ‘intuition’. Any time we refuse to leave our comfort zone – we limit.

And since the universe is limitless, it’s limit-less.

Now as I was saying about CC Zain and the Tarot...

It does not take much research to find the following:
The Great Pyramid in Egypt, was once both a power generator (more about it can be found in the chapter on metaphysics in the book The Children of the Law of One and the Lost Teachings of Atlantis), and a center for final stage spiritual initiation for the Children of the Law of One.
Its great hall was lined with the painted tablets, depicting the stages of spiritual development & initiation that were later to become the major arcana of the tarot.
Master Thoth (the grand master of the Children of The Law of One), aware of the ever growing darkness that was to be, and knowing how the written word can be controlled and corrupted by the greedy & the power mongers, put the keys of knowledge (of the spiritual initiate’s path back to the One), into images on cards. As mentioned earlier, these were the first tarot cards, which were replicas of the images that lined the great hallway of the Great Pyramid of Initiation. Thoth knew that images would be more difficult to change by the corrupt, and more difficult for them to understand. He also knew that, those on the path of ascension towards the One, would someday see & understand their meanings & secrets. To further insure the safety of these keys, he added more cards to the major arcana, creating the full system of divination. The method of divination, he taught to those of the land of Egypt who were leaving Egypt for other lands (Wandering Egyptians (EGyptians) that would later be known as “Gypt-sies”). Knowing that these Egyptians would use this divination system to reveal the future of others for profit, he knew that greed itself, would insure that the Egyptians would preserve the images as much as possible, and that the knowledge would be preserved in many different lands.

So is this accurate? It's in a book. It's on the net! It must be true!!!

That's why I quoted Fudigazi...'Which books?' Not all books are equal, regardless of how well you may spin the words.
 

Morgan of Avalon

Thanks Scion, I love the way you brought my jumbled thoughts together!

I have mentioned on other threads that I have been using my tarot cards as a self insight tool whilst I play online poker. The more I look, the more I see the connections the two "games" have to one another, it's quite incredible.

One thing I find very interesting is the duality of the two..male/female aspects particularly. Many more women than men appear to be interested in tarot, and many more men than women are intersted in poker. Of course there are percentages either way, but on the whole...seems to be a big sway each way in the male/female camps of each. The very interesting thing I find is that of the men in tarot, most tend to be creative, intuitive beings with a lot of self insight and little ego to interfere with their work or readings. These are the same skills and attributes that female poker players display...at least the good ones that can apply these "female" type traits and combine them with the mathematics/logic of the game.

Coincidence on the male/female thing? Hmmm. It always gets me thinking deeper about human emotion, balance, ego, nature/nurture etc etc. Sorry I'm raving here, I think too much sometimes, goddess help you if there's a keyboard around LOL!!
 

Scion

Umbrae said:
Dude! Ya completely missed the point of my post (which was not that obtuse).So is this accurate? It's in a book. It's on the net! It must be true!!!

That's why I quoted Fudugazi...'Which books?' Not all books are equal, regardless of how well you may spin the words.
Actually I didn't miss it at all... I just didn't think it was actually a point that anyone could take seriously: some books are silly. Ummmm, okay. :confused:

We both know that anyone can cite a lot of drek on both sides of the argument: for study or intuition. Anyone can make mincemeat out of idiots... that goes without saying. It isn't even an argument, so why discuss it? My point is that there's no purpose in drawing an imaginary line through people's growth experience (Study|Intuition) and then pointing out to them that you've drawn a line. It is meaningless. How does pointing out that books of tax law aren't a source for learning French help anyone?

Obviously all books are not created equal... I said as much earlier in the thread. Several people said as much, although less explicitly. What's your point? Because some people are morons, crappy books need warning labels? That's the nature of universal education and a free press: citizens have to make their own decisions. What a concept. The responsibility is individual and immanent. This seems to me the point of Fudu's anecdote about the watchmen's voracious book appetite AND Gregory's observation that books specifically on Tarot don't help her, but she wants to expand her referential sphere...

But to dismiss all books because some books suck is as weird as dismissing all intuition because some hunches are wrong. It's a syllogistic fallacy: Because Texans have accents and I am from Texas, I have an accent? Uhh, nope.

On the other hand, if we did a survey on Aeclectic we'd find far more posts telling people to "do what feels best" and "just wing it" than we would find cogent, specific recommendations for substantive books that might actually be of value... let alone syllabi for a course of study. To suggest that someone believes that anything printed on wood pulp is immediately more valuable than wisdom received subjectively is an argument that you alone have made. And I feel like you're making rhetorical point more than you actually believe that. But at no point in this thread or in any other has someone said that being in print makes something true, and to suggest they have is not only false, but ridiculous.

If you look up a few pages, Frelkins made an equally pointless comment about Etteilla as the ultimate source of Tarot wisdom, which not only had nothing to do with study/intuition, but illustated perfectly the kneejerk, soundbite-addicted sense of history that seems to be our legacy. To say Etteilla (or Zain) knew nothing says more about your knowledge of Etteilla (or Zain) than anything. If I can find value in them, then bully for me, and if I don't, then again, bully for me.

Fudugazi's point about many books containing wisdom is a powerful one. I think too often we get bogged down in the stereo instruction model of the universe wherein to study Tarot we read books on Tarot, when we might just as likely learn more from a book of O'Hara poetry or a history of Provencal cooking or by taking a walk at night.

What's more interesting to me is Morgans observations about the similarities between the acquisition of expertise in Poker and Tarot, the similarities and differences. That to me seems like something to discuss...
 

Umbrae

Imagination is more important than knowledge...
Albert Einstein

Scion said:
If you look up a few pages, Frelkins made an equally pointless comment about Etteilla as the ultimate source of Tarot wisdom, which not only had nothing to do with study/intuition, but illustated perfectly the kneejerk, soundbite-addicted sense of history that seems to be our legacy.

Thank you.

Perhaps…you should study some Etteilla. Your vapours are overwhelming.

Further, to imply that I have implied dismissal of books is in itself a fallacious syllogism – the very idea is to be defenestrated, along with your dismissal of other posters.

Although you dismiss my participation as pointless – I never implied anything you’re ranting about.

In post 50 I told of what happened to a poster who once quoted Zain on this very forum.

And in response to your participation – the thesis poster states:
Splungeman said:
How many fish is an umbrella? I thought that was common knowledge. :p

I feel like I clearly lack the mental dexterity (and vocabulary) necessary to in any way respond to the above post without looking like a neanderthal by comparison. All I can say is that I *think* I disagree with you. I'm not sure. I don't think I've ever had anything I've ever written so thoroughly dissected, analyzed, and decimated. I am out of my league here. You were going after the usage of the word "can" for heaven's sake! I can't compete with that! Not that I was really trying to compete...

I will abandon this question because raising it has only seemed to make me look like an idiot (I have experience in that field...so the feeling is not new). I mean idiot in the best way of course...as in one who is humbled. Perhaps I did merely use different words to regurgitate an old debate, but I didn't (and still don't) believe that to be the case. And I think I got some responses that provided a little insight into what I was getting at...so I'm satisfied in that regard. Feeling more battered and bruised (mentally) than I was expecting, but hey...I'm probably the better for it...right? Right?

But hey! I do have one bone to pick before I log out tonight! I thought using a silly word like 'glorp' was perfectly reasonable given the negative response to using the word 'intuition'! I had no intention of launching into a semantics debate, so I decided to just make something up. Plus "glorp" is more fun to say than "intuition" or "psychic". Say it right now! Say it repeatedly! See?! SEE?!

*bursts into tears and slinks away to find some Nyquil and a bed* :D

My question is – why must we batter and abuse others to make our points? Why must we dissect and use divisive language? To make a point?

Stupid point if that’s the only way to get it across.

Einstein said it best...
 

Alta

Moderator note:

I do not exactly consider it entertainment to ask adult members to stop calling each other names. And prefer to not close threads and/or edit them. However, Solandia has had this in the Forum Posting Rules for a long time:
Respect Our Members

The Aeclectic Tarot Forum is dedicated to the purpose and the pleasure of sharing knowledge, insight and appreciation of Tarot. To maintain our Forum as an friendly and educational area for everyone, please follow our rules when participating.

We are a Tarot-focused discussion forum for people of varying ages, nationalities, cultures, spiritualities and Tarot beliefs. Please write in clear English, remember your Netiquette, and read over your messages before posting in order to avoid possible misunderstandings.

Play nice while you're here. We ask that you refrain from discussing political topics: having a worldwide membership, we also have a diverse range of political opinion.

No flaming, baiting, insults, or harassment of other members on the forum or via private message. Lack of respect for other members will result in post removal and/or temporary or permanent suspension of all member privileges.
I refuse to take sides here. This is a topic wherein members have strong opinions. So be it, but discuss the topic, not the other posters.

Marion
co-Moderator
Talking Tarot
 

Splungeman

I'm back!

Noooo...no really driven away. Just weary at trying to rephrase the question again...which I am figuring out may be impossible.

You see ultimately I was going to try to make the point that any kind of research WILL influence your Tarot reading, which ties (kinda) to the "everything is research" comment. On the other hand, I think research is good for a Tarot reader ultimately. Even reading the stupid books can be valuable to you, not because you agree with what they are theorizing or endorsing, but because you now have an understanding of the perspective of those you disagree with.

Research helps us to identify things in our cards that we may have overlooked before. It can help us if we want to explain to a sitter the historical origins of Tarot or the symbols used. It helps.

I think the only way or kind of study that hurts a Tarot reader is the approach that whatever is written about a certain card or symbol is ALWAYS the case 100% of the time. Hence we run into people who say, "THAT'S not what THAT card means!! You don't know what you're doing!" The well researched person can immediately respond (this is a dumbed down example), "Yes...I understand that you may be thinking that Death means 'change' and nothing else. That is a common assumption that is sometimes true and sometimes false. Today, because of the position the card falls in and the cards flanking it, it means XYZ...etc."

So...my opinion is that memorizing set keywords or ideas to apply to the cards is detrimental to Tarot reading, but more broad spectrum research and study only enlivens and improves the quality of a reading.
 

Splungeman

I want to add to that last post that I think no matter what kind of study you do, the ultimate challenge for the Tarot reader is clearing their mind and trying to see the cards objectively. The arsenal of knowledge and glorp is there (or whatever they both are, if you agree with Scion that they are one and the same), but I think the appropriate meanings will emerge, so long as you are in the "zone" so to speak.
 

gregory

But I am not convinced.....

See - I read glorpishly (as an aside: I am SO grateful to whoever came up with this word; it has solved a problem of terminology I have had for years !)

ANYWAY - I have always been afraid that the reading up I ached to do would make a difference. But in the end the reading up won out; I just HAVE to read books; someone out there invented them for ME, I just know it. I can't pass print. I read ANYTHING.

And I am sorry to have to tell the people who are sure it makes a difference that I TRULY do not think it has done. I have just looked over all my oldest readings, and I would not change a word - even given what I now in theory know that I didn't then....