ravenest
But it's the combination of all the symbols that creates the Universal Pantacle. Individually each symbol stands for a definite category of idea. No one is disputing about their width of scope! But each individual symbol isn't inclusive of every single idea. There has to be division and demarcation between the individual parts. If each symbol were a pantacle in it's own right you would have a Tarot deck composed of a single card.
This is my view (if I understand you rightly) ... yes, it would be one card ...that is what I mean when I say that without 'boundaries' it all turns to slush ... becoming one card is ... 'neater ' .
One example (using Jung's archetypal / collective unconscious idea ) ; we all have a related understanding what a crescent moon shape represents (unless we have never seen a night sky -which would be very unusual). One person might see 'moon' or it might represent phases, or a lunar month, or the fertility cycle, or the tides or a horned creature or or or .... now if I say ... running , that is out of the 'Moon field' .
If I say, 'running' because once I was chased by a bull and had to run ... that is a personal association and not a part of the symbolism of the crescent moon shape.
Again; its up to the person having the reading to make associations, the tarot readers job, as I see it, is to supply interpretation and meaning of symbols as they interrelate in a reading, not to project their personal associations into the reading (unless it is their reading)