5 ms·

Greetings. I'm rather new here and a friend steered me towards here. I'm a pagan, and unfortunately this has caused a rather ugly stir in our communities. In

Greetings. I'm rather new here and a friend steered me towards here. I'm a pagan, and unfortunately this has caused a rather ugly stir in our communities. In recent (last 1.5 years), TikTok has been the primary contributing 'terrible occultists, witches, and pagans'. Their practices equate to what we would describe as cargo cultism, commercialism, and general lack of any understanding what we do. Most of us look down on the TikTok types, and we believe for good reason. Now, tarot. For those of you unaware, it's seen as a 78 card (standard card deck, with an extra card between jack and queen, and a new suit called trumps) divinatory method to be able to answer questions we have in our practices. There's 2 major ways to do a reading : mechanically, and intuitively. This person was doing an intuitive reading... Which is what makes this even uglier. And if it were just a mechanistic reading, you still have to deal with slightly different symbology changing the card descriptions. Long story short, they should have never did a reading about someone else without permission. And they should have never did this publicly. And they should have never accused anyone from a reading. At all. It is a spiritual practice, however. Basically it took a practice many of use privately, and brought it out in the open as some criminal tool... But without any of the science.

fractallyte 4y ago
This is a very enlightening comment, thank you! Some commentators might take issue with the very last word: 'science'... Regarding symbology, for both intuitive and mechanistic readings, isn't there a lot that can be interpreted - in many different ways - from even a single symbol, let alone a string of symbols? Edit: adding this part for anyone who wants to dismiss this as pseudoscience. Jung devoted much of his life to the study of the 'collective unconscious' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious) and 'synchronicity' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity). This intersects with notions about 'manifestation' (in pop-spiritual culture), and also with explorations in well-regarded fiction: Childhood's End, by Arthur C Clarke (the scene with the Ouija board), and His Dark Materials, by Philip Pullman (the alethiometer). These ideas are very much on the edge of the curve scientifically, but nevertheless, it would be unwise to dismiss them. If someone who believes in the veracity of this took the trouble to write a comment here (and risk annihilation!), then I'd like to hear their point of view...
- tarotuser 4y ago
  Ah indeed. It was my intent to compare tarot and esoterism to that of evidentiary science in a criminal setting. DNA evidence is a reproducible fact of being present at a scene. And other crime scene investigators can prove it in a scientific setting. But alas, I was tired last night and didn't come across the way ai had intended. > Regarding symbology, for both intuitive and mechanistic readings, isn't there a lot that can be interpreted - in many different ways - from even a single symbol, let alone a string of symbols? Well in a mechanistic reading, I would expect the readings to mostly coincide, as long as the readers were using the same decks. Different decks have different symbology, and those readings can have very different results.... But again, for the same decks, would expect a similar reading. It's the intuitive readings that will throw a major curve ball. In those readings (I do both, btw) I will receive mental pictures, smells, sensations, and more of a reading I do for others. The card symbolism starts me to see those hidden senses (occult as occluded from sight). This tiktoker may have gotten her image intuitively... But how would you know it wasn't a student in her class, or someone was targeting her for being in gender studies, or she pulled it from someone else who happened to be thinking about this prof? And many times, an intuitive reading won't make sense until something else happens. That's happened to me a few times, with a eureka moment days or weeks later. And with intuitive readings, I have gotten pictures of people, smells of perfume and cologne, maps of areas, and other hidden things. I approach them as 'features of interest'.. certainly not as some presumption of guilt! I'm certainly not expecting anyone else to believe me. And I have no way to prove it, other than anecdotes by me and those whom I've done readings before. This is just my anecdote of someone who's been in the occult for 15+ years, and seen more than my fair share of craziness. But this whole debacle of a TikTok reader making public accusations is just sickening.... And falls in line with the types that call themselves "baby witches". For example, it is considered gross form to do 3rd party readings, which this was. It's also in terrible form to make accusations, even if 100% legal and no civil action. Frankly, I sincerely hope this tiktoker loses their shirt in the lawsuit. It is abhorrent and unconscionable to do what they did. And I hope the prof is able to restore and maintain their status as a professional they are.
  - hnfong 4y ago
    3rd party readings and public readings aren't just terrible form, but if one believes in the non-materialistic aspects, it's widely said to be terrible for one's karma. And if one doesn't believe in this, why even participate?
kortilla 4y ago
> tool... But without any of the science. There is no science to tarot reading. There may be a well-defined methodology, but that doesn’t make it a science because it’s not testable and doesn’t make any predictions falsifiable more so than chance.
- metadaemon 4y ago
  Hypothetically, wouldn’t the presence/absence of statistical significance (in reference to tarot-derived predictions) count as testable?
  - eimrine 4y ago
    I would believe in that kind of stat significance only if it has been obtained by a double-blind method. BTW I afraid that tarot predictions are too vague for being translate-able into language of strict facts (no precise dates, sometimes no precise people, and always different results after repeating the game each time).
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
system2 4y ago
I don't mean to disrespect but there is absolutely no difference between rolling dice then adding meanings to the results and tarot deck shuffling and picking randomly. It sure looks fun though.
- bowsamic 4y ago
  I don’t think you’re adding anything to anyone’s comment with that. Do you think they aren’t constantly told this?
  - system2 4y ago
    Since the parent comment mentions science maybe I can get a response to my scientific observation. I do not think they are constantly told this. This is my first interaction with a tarot believing person online. I wrote my comment with the hope that I can learn their scientific approach to tarot. If not, what makes them believe it is even remotely real.
    - bowsamic 4y ago
      I don't see where they mentioned that tarot is scientific. I think you misinterpreted their English
      - tarotuser 4y ago
        Indeed. What I was trying to say was that police and criminal investigations have a reasonable amount of science to ascertain guilt. (Aside some of the junk science used: blood spatter analysis, lie detectors, etc). Tarot can be mechanistic or intuitive. It's my belief that we don't yet have the science understand to explain how it does and doesn't work. And NOBODY should be making public accusations based on a tarot reading. That's just ethically wrong to begin with, aside legal and civil damages caused.
    - tarotuser 4y ago
      I mentioned science in the frame of evidence in a criminal investigation. It didnt come across as such. I fell asleep not too long after that comment. > I do not think they are constantly told this. I definitely have been told this. Major practices are called religion, whereas minor practices are just 'cult' and weird. The existing larger religons' congregants are the worst to demean me and my practices, all the whole doing it themselves. But no matter. I didn't get into tarot until after I became a pagan. I had a whole string of 'strangely coincidential' things that happened to me and people around me that have no relation to how they would in science. And that includes doing private rituals, and 2 people who don't know each other, directly asking about them in detail. They both admitted they could see what I did. Again, I recognize the extreme personal nature, and no proof. (In a way, it's similar to a ZKP where recording it and showing it after the fact gives no proof.) > I wrote my comment with the hope that I can learn their scientific approach to tarot. The mechanistic reading is the boring one. Basically you just read the book and apply the straightforward answer to the question based on the book descriptions. An intuitive reading is when you get pictures in your mind, and feel senses that others can't. The only equipment I know can do this is an fMRI. I certainly cannot construct one, nor find someone who'd do occult/divinatory research. I'd be willing though. As for my other backgrounds, I'm a cloud/systems engineer by profession, so I'm well aware of the scientific method, and how my pagan practices are mostly irreconcilable with my scientific and engineering upbringing. I would love to connect the 2 realms together, but given what I do, and the research lab and equipment required, is highly unlikely I ever will do that.
jgrowl 4y ago
> And they should have never did this publicly. "Contemplate the twelfth figure of the Tarot-Keys, remember the grand symbol of Prometheus, and be silent. All those Magi who divulged their works died violently, and many were driven to suicide." -Éliphas Lévi

fractallyte 4y ago

This is a very enlightening comment, thank you! Some commentators might take issue with the very last word: 'science'... Regarding symbology, for both intuitive and mechanistic readings, isn't there a lot that can be interpreted - in many different ways - from even a single symbol, let alone a string of symbols? Edit: adding this part for anyone who wants to dismiss this as pseudoscience. Jung devoted much of his life to the study of the 'collective unconscious' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_unconscious) and 'synchronicity' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronicity). This intersects with notions about 'manifestation' (in pop-spiritual culture), and also with explorations in well-regarded fiction: Childhood's End, by Arthur C Clarke (the scene with the Ouija board), and His Dark Materials, by Philip Pullman (the alethiometer). These ideas are very much on the edge of the curve scientifically, but nevertheless, it would be unwise to dismiss them. If someone who believes in the veracity of this took the trouble to write a comment here (and risk annihilation!), then I'd like to hear their point of view...

tarotuser 4y ago
Ah indeed. It was my intent to compare tarot and esoterism to that of evidentiary science in a criminal setting. DNA evidence is a reproducible fact of being present at a scene. And other crime scene investigators can prove it in a scientific setting. But alas, I was tired last night and didn't come across the way ai had intended. > Regarding symbology, for both intuitive and mechanistic readings, isn't there a lot that can be interpreted - in many different ways - from even a single symbol, let alone a string of symbols? Well in a mechanistic reading, I would expect the readings to mostly coincide, as long as the readers were using the same decks. Different decks have different symbology, and those readings can have very different results.... But again, for the same decks, would expect a similar reading. It's the intuitive readings that will throw a major curve ball. In those readings (I do both, btw) I will receive mental pictures, smells, sensations, and more of a reading I do for others. The card symbolism starts me to see those hidden senses (occult as occluded from sight). This tiktoker may have gotten her image intuitively... But how would you know it wasn't a student in her class, or someone was targeting her for being in gender studies, or she pulled it from someone else who happened to be thinking about this prof? And many times, an intuitive reading won't make sense until something else happens. That's happened to me a few times, with a eureka moment days or weeks later. And with intuitive readings, I have gotten pictures of people, smells of perfume and cologne, maps of areas, and other hidden things. I approach them as 'features of interest'.. certainly not as some presumption of guilt! I'm certainly not expecting anyone else to believe me. And I have no way to prove it, other than anecdotes by me and those whom I've done readings before. This is just my anecdote of someone who's been in the occult for 15+ years, and seen more than my fair share of craziness. But this whole debacle of a TikTok reader making public accusations is just sickening.... And falls in line with the types that call themselves "baby witches". For example, it is considered gross form to do 3rd party readings, which this was. It's also in terrible form to make accusations, even if 100% legal and no civil action. Frankly, I sincerely hope this tiktoker loses their shirt in the lawsuit. It is abhorrent and unconscionable to do what they did. And I hope the prof is able to restore and maintain their status as a professional they are.
- hnfong 4y ago
  3rd party readings and public readings aren't just terrible form, but if one believes in the non-materialistic aspects, it's widely said to be terrible for one's karma. And if one doesn't believe in this, why even participate?

kortilla 4y ago

> tool... But without any of the science. There is no science to tarot reading. There may be a well-defined methodology, but that doesn’t make it a science because it’s not testable and doesn’t make any predictions falsifiable more so than chance.

metadaemon 4y ago
Hypothetically, wouldn’t the presence/absence of statistical significance (in reference to tarot-derived predictions) count as testable?
- eimrine 4y ago
  I would believe in that kind of stat significance only if it has been obtained by a double-blind method. BTW I afraid that tarot predictions are too vague for being translate-able into language of strict facts (no precise dates, sometimes no precise people, and always different results after repeating the game each time).

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

system2 4y ago

I don't mean to disrespect but there is absolutely no difference between rolling dice then adding meanings to the results and tarot deck shuffling and picking randomly. It sure looks fun though.

bowsamic 4y ago
I don’t think you’re adding anything to anyone’s comment with that. Do you think they aren’t constantly told this?
- system2 4y ago
  Since the parent comment mentions science maybe I can get a response to my scientific observation. I do not think they are constantly told this. This is my first interaction with a tarot believing person online. I wrote my comment with the hope that I can learn their scientific approach to tarot. If not, what makes them believe it is even remotely real.
  - bowsamic 4y ago
    I don't see where they mentioned that tarot is scientific. I think you misinterpreted their English
    - tarotuser 4y ago
      Indeed. What I was trying to say was that police and criminal investigations have a reasonable amount of science to ascertain guilt. (Aside some of the junk science used: blood spatter analysis, lie detectors, etc). Tarot can be mechanistic or intuitive. It's my belief that we don't yet have the science understand to explain how it does and doesn't work. And NOBODY should be making public accusations based on a tarot reading. That's just ethically wrong to begin with, aside legal and civil damages caused.
  - tarotuser 4y ago
    I mentioned science in the frame of evidence in a criminal investigation. It didnt come across as such. I fell asleep not too long after that comment. > I do not think they are constantly told this. I definitely have been told this. Major practices are called religion, whereas minor practices are just 'cult' and weird. The existing larger religons' congregants are the worst to demean me and my practices, all the whole doing it themselves. But no matter. I didn't get into tarot until after I became a pagan. I had a whole string of 'strangely coincidential' things that happened to me and people around me that have no relation to how they would in science. And that includes doing private rituals, and 2 people who don't know each other, directly asking about them in detail. They both admitted they could see what I did. Again, I recognize the extreme personal nature, and no proof. (In a way, it's similar to a ZKP where recording it and showing it after the fact gives no proof.) > I wrote my comment with the hope that I can learn their scientific approach to tarot. The mechanistic reading is the boring one. Basically you just read the book and apply the straightforward answer to the question based on the book descriptions. An intuitive reading is when you get pictures in your mind, and feel senses that others can't. The only equipment I know can do this is an fMRI. I certainly cannot construct one, nor find someone who'd do occult/divinatory research. I'd be willing though. As for my other backgrounds, I'm a cloud/systems engineer by profession, so I'm well aware of the scientific method, and how my pagan practices are mostly irreconcilable with my scientific and engineering upbringing. I would love to connect the 2 realms together, but given what I do, and the research lab and equipment required, is highly unlikely I ever will do that.

jgrowl 4y ago

> And they should have never did this publicly. "Contemplate the twelfth figure of the Tarot-Keys, remember the grand symbol of Prometheus, and be silent. All those Magi who divulged their works died violently, and many were driven to suicide." -Éliphas Lévi