If you want to be absolutely sure that no “people skills” interfere with the message of a reading, the ideal would be to simply read by mail. The querent sends in their question. The reader pulls the cards and types (or speaks into a recorder) his or her interpretation based solely on the occult meanings and principles of the cards. Any human interaction might otherwise effect the reader consciously or unconsciously through verbal or non-verbal communication. Such a reading is not invalid.

Actually, a computer can do this better than a human being (just input all of the occult principles and meanings per card and for as many card combinations as possible). A human being can still do better at integrating the data in an entire spread, but at least the computer data will make sure you didn’t forget any of the basics elements.

All I’m saying is to be aware there are con-artists who train themselves in people skills and human trends, with the intent to deceive. That doesn’t make learning about people skills bad.

There’s a whole range of tarot reading styles and methods that can be used honestly and ethically and most interactive ones consciously use some “people and communication skills.” To claim that the tarot can only be read in one way is like saying that only one religion is right and only a particular strict sect of it should be followed. That person will usually claim to know what the “right way” is that everyone else has to follow.

And all I could think of was: wow… this must work with other people… Sad.

That is why many people think that reading cards is for guessing the best way off of stuff…

Anyways, great episode and we want more of Mary Greer!

Thank you for a wonderful Podcast that is certainly thought provoking. One thing that was not clear for me in this Podcast is whether either of you acknowledge that one form of cold reading is simply that a reader goes into a reading knowing nothing about a client – asking no questions, and, in some cases, stopping the client from voluntarily giving them information until the reading is over. What I got was that the “only”, or perhaps better worded as “major” meaning for a cold readng was the more negative form of reading a clients body posture, facial expression etc. I really feel that both meanings have equal weight.

Tarot can be used to scam people -it can be used as a “mis-direct”, taking their attention away from the reader. The client’s readtion to a given card can also be used to color or direct the reading. The majority of readers, however, do not read in this manner.

You made an important distinction when you noted that the intent, ethics and purpose behind the use of various techniques determines the category that they call in (scam reading or true reading).

Mary makes the point that many eraders do not understand the mechanisms that they are using during a reading. My thought here is that we can read using intuition and the cards, and that it will flow, and the message t hat comes out is what it needs to be. The reader is t he channel that they were meant to be. Playing the devils advocate, if readers were encouraged to study the mechanisms used in their personal style of reading, would the mechanisms then becme more important than the reading itself. Would they then have the ability to get in the way of a reading?

I see cold readngs and mentalism as vastly different from a Tarot reading – or from any other type of oracular reading. Perhaps the reason that most readers are not drawn to this material is because they have no need to know it.

Is the study of this material providing a more solid base for our readings, or is it clouding them?

Blessings,
Bonnie

A charlatan is someone who uses the techniques of mentalism and stage magic, and uses it to gain money, sex or power. Or all three.

My first love is magic. The rabbit out of hat kind, not the Golden Dawn kind. I’m something of a frustrated sleight of hand artist. Magic and mentalism have always attracted a (pseudo) sceptical crowd. I don’t know why that is. Perhaps it goes back to the days of Houdini and Dunninger exposing phony mediums.

I have a huge library of magic dvds and books. Mary Greer is quite correct that these are expensive. But mentalism, sleight of hand, and other secrets, are a very special skill, that is not publicly available, and magicians really don’t want it to be. I’m glad something like 13 Steps to Mentalism is expensive. In the wrong hands, one could start their own religion with that one, and divert the course of civilization.

That is one of the qualities that mentalist take advantage of.

Apologies,
Brad

It wasn’t my intent to legitimize cold reading or the fraudulent use of tarot. I know we both mentioned telling the querent where the information came from if it wasn’t from the cards. And I personally disagree with people using the cards to push an agenda and I include in this category people who do solely ‘intuitive’ readings where there is no regard for basic card interpretation. I probably should have qualified that I know people who do it and don’t personally approve.

I think the basic point, which may have been lost in the execution, cold readers have hijacked some simple ways to connect and communicate in a reading. I do think the book, How to Make People Like you in 90 or less (which is not a cold reading book) has ideas that could help readers get their message across.

Mary Greer talks a lot about the intent of the reader, and if someone is “legitimate” they could use cold reading as an adjunct to the reading. It is bad to do a scam cold reading for money, but perfectly ethical to do cold reading techniques if that “helps a person.” Wouldn’t a legitimate tarot card read simply read the cards, and not be looking for visual cues, such as puzzled expressions or nodding the head in agreement? One wonders why the cards are needed at all.

The icing on the cake was your off-hand remark about knowing a “psychic” who uses cards as a mere prop for whatever cold-reading agenda she is pushing. Mary Greer agrees that this can be a good tool for psychis. I call it bullshit, and this denigrates the value of the cards by spouting off whatever meaning she WANTS them to be.

Am I misinterpreting this show? I hope so.

I apologize about my tone, but this really upsets me.

Sincerely,
Brad Ingle