From: dburgdor@cwis.unomaha.edu (Darryl Burgdorf)
Subject: Re: Tarot Card Meanings
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:17:24 GMT


Earlier in this thread, I wrote:
 
> Re:  Your request for a "list" of the meanings of the various cards in the
> Tarot deck ....
> 
> The first and most obvious problem with that request is that the Tarot cards
> do not have set "meanings".  Their location within the layout can influence
> how they're interpreted, as can, in fact, the specific layout you use.
> 
> My suggestion would depend on your purpose.  If you're truly interested in
> learning the Tarot, find a good reference book or two.  They're not all
> that difficult to locate.  If you're just interested in playing, perhaps
> wanting to create a silly "fortune telling" program that no one is going to
> take seriously anyway, then don't bother trying for "realism".  Better yet, 
> drop the whole idea.

I'm not sure I understand why, but I have gotten a phenomenal amount of e-mail
in response.

1)  To the many who have written in reference to my "interest" in the Tarot:

Sorry to disappoint you, but I *don't* have any great interest in the Tarot.
I have what I would consider to be a good layman's knowledge of and respect
for the Deck and its use, and I have several friends who have been studying 
and/or utilizing it for years.  However, I do not, myself, have any pressing
interest in the matter.

2)  To those couple of folk who have written to "flame" me about the post:

I'm sorry if my meaning got garbled.  It was never my intention to imply that
there was anything inherently wrong with the idea of a "computerized" Tarot
deck.  No divination system -- Tarot cards, I Ching, computer-generated random
numbers, whatever -- is inherently any better or worse than another.  What is
important, no matter how you believe they work -- whether through intervention
of spirits, tapping into the "universal subconscious", mind over matter, or 
simple power of suggestion -- is the MINDSET of those involved.  Any system
can work, or any sytem can fail, depending on those utilizing it.

My point was that the Tarot is, when utilized properly, a highly flexible
and complex tool.  No simple "list of meanings" will yield anything much in 
the way of useful, accurate readings.

My suggestion to the original poster was to either (a) really study the
matter, in order to be able to design a GOOD system, or (b) to abandon the idea
in favor of other pursuits.  I stand by those options.  The only other choice
would be to design a program based on a simplistic "toy" version of the Tarot
deck; personally, I believe there are already far too many people who simply
"play" with the Deck or with other divination tools, and far too many programs
available to cater to them.

In short, I was NOT implying that his idea was bad; I was merely suggesting
that if he decides to pursue it, he should do it right.

3)  To the individual in Alaska who sent me the particularly beligerant and
    profanity-riddled anonymous flame:

I hope my response reached your address without any problems.  ;)


My apologies, good folk, for the misunderstandings!

	Darryl C. Burgdorf


 /----------------------------------------------------\
 |   dburgdor @unmcvm.unmc.edu or @cwis.unomaha.edu   |
 \----------------------------------------------------/