4 ms·

Ah, I see, one interesting part is how the LLM generates a summary of the shown "cards" and weaves a narrative together. Interesting and unconventional use of a

Ah, I see, one interesting part is how the LLM generates a summary of the shown "cards" and weaves a narrative together. Interesting and unconventional use of an LLM. .. It seems to me that the only thing that "works" about Tarot cards is that they allow the "user" to generate a semi-prompted narrative via symbolically rich-enough images and concepts. The rest is either hopeful thinking, a reflection of one's emotional state, rationalization or some combo thereof. This makes me wonder: do people like having ever aspect of a tarot "reading" laid out for them? Or do they get more out of their own interpretation?

wddkcs 3y ago
Personal and dictated readings are very different experiences. What you describe is the self help version of tarot. Maybe most common, but not exhaustive of the medium. Practitioners know/Intuit that the typical major and minor arcana (cards that reveal mutable or immutable Fate) layouts are incredibly flushed out in archetypical terms. Using the symbols and suits, you can define not just A personal narrative, but ANY personal narrative. Both the major, and each of the four suits of the minor arcana, capture progressions of conscious thought that arguably encompass every conceivable platonic Form. This is a phenomenal achievement when examined in good faith. You might say it is impractical even if impressive. Still, I have been very surprised to see the principle that is supposed to make the tarot work (the hermetic idea of 'As above so below' or, ' the microcosm can only reflect the macrocosm') pop up in Karl Frissons FEP work. What esoterists describe as 'higher and lower powers', seems to be explicitly captured by ongoing work involving Markov blankets. I am not technically minded enought to get the math, but that's what I take from these interviews - https://youtu.be/KkR24ieh5Ow https://youtu.be/KkR24ieh5Ow
5cott0 3y ago
I've actually never had a tarot reading and only know about it from The Pictorial Key to the Tarot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pictorial_Key_to_the_Tarot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pictorial_Key_to_the_Tarot Waite's descriptions strikes me as densely arcane and potent sounding symbolism that can be used suggestively to try and provoke some kind of experience or insight in the querent. That's my take.

wddkcs 3y ago

Personal and dictated readings are very different experiences. What you describe is the self help version of tarot. Maybe most common, but not exhaustive of the medium. Practitioners know/Intuit that the typical major and minor arcana (cards that reveal mutable or immutable Fate) layouts are incredibly flushed out in archetypical terms. Using the symbols and suits, you can define not just A personal narrative, but ANY personal narrative. Both the major, and each of the four suits of the minor arcana, capture progressions of conscious thought that arguably encompass every conceivable platonic Form. This is a phenomenal achievement when examined in good faith. You might say it is impractical even if impressive. Still, I have been very surprised to see the principle that is supposed to make the tarot work (the hermetic idea of 'As above so below' or, ' the microcosm can only reflect the macrocosm') pop up in Karl Frissons FEP work. What esoterists describe as 'higher and lower powers', seems to be explicitly captured by ongoing work involving Markov blankets. I am not technically minded enought to get the math, but that's what I take from these interviews - https://youtu.be/KkR24ieh5Ow https://youtu.be/KkR24ieh5Ow

5cott0 3y ago

I've actually never had a tarot reading and only know about it from The Pictorial Key to the Tarot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pictorial_Key_to_the_Tarot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pictorial_Key_to_the_Tarot Waite's descriptions strikes me as densely arcane and potent sounding symbolism that can be used suggestively to try and provoke some kind of experience or insight in the querent. That's my take.