Is the Tower worse than three of swords?

Rachx

I agree. What I find a little awkward though is that sometimes we get into conflicts over differing perspectives when in actuality we are all coming from an imaginary narrative....our own. There is something kind of strange in that for me, and I'm just wondering if anyone else felt it.



Hi Ruby, for me it's just everyone's different personal intuition. Because it's personal, sometimes people take it personally but we don't need to take it personally at all, because there is never an absolute right or absolute wrong. Nothing is black or white. What is right for me can be wrong for another person. That is the wonder of this forum, it's diversity. Do you think that because mostly the readings are for ourselves there is sometimes a personal wish to see a favoured outcome and when that doesn't happen our egos suffer? We want to see the sun card all the time! That is just not life. This forum with its different opinions and perspectives can really help move us out of our own egos and see the objective picture, i try to do that anyway. We are all learners. The idea is - it's a learning forum so we don't need to take anything personally at all.

I like UTC especially because the whole spread is hidden so we never see the whole story. It's good training i find, in letting the cards speak for themselves and it really highlights to me where my personal bias is. It's the diversity of viewpoints and perspectives that makes it so special. Without knowing background it's really easy to have an imaginary one sneak in without realising! Every post comes from a different POV from around the world - which is coloured by the posters culture, childhood, beliefs and values system and so on. We think we are being objective but we never can be because of our lives to date- we can't help it, in my opinion. I find that Practising without background is really useful for me - it helps me remove my readers bias (rose coloured spectacles!) so I can try and learn to be more intuitive (well, try anyway! [emoji23]) x
 

Rachx

Just been thinking too - we don't know anything about anybody on here, so we have to be objective and totally non judgemental and non attached. It's cool [emoji41] I was thinking that was the only way to properly learn. Taking stuff personally could be a block to letting the learning in maybe? If we are more open and objective we let more in if you know what I mean..just my thoughts while singing in the shower!
 

Ruby Jewel

Just been thinking too - we don't know anything about anybody on here, so we have to be objective and totally non judgemental and non attached. It's cool [emoji41] I was thinking that was the only way to properly learn. Taking stuff personally could be a block to letting the learning in maybe? If we are more open and objective we let more in if you know what I mean..just my thoughts while singing in the shower!

It's all good. I'm learning a lot with these interactions.....I think about things in my life that I haven't let cross my mind in years.....so it is kind of like "why am I saying all these things anyway?" I seem to think it is relevant in some way because I think I know what's going on and then I realize it is just my fantasy so, half the time I go back and delete it thinking I'm ridiculous.
 

EmceeDirector

I agree. What I find a little awkward though is that sometimes we get into conflicts over differing perspectives when in actuality we are all coming from an imaginary narrative....our own. There is something kind of strange in that for me, and I'm just wondering if anyone else felt it.

Ruby you are a God-send. I was very frustrated last night due to the fact that I answered someone's question very specifically (regarding how the question was phrased). Someone else posted that my intention was somehow wrong...that in many cases we need to look outside the question. I do agree but in this case I was simply answering the question that was provided to us to give the querent the specific answer they were looking for. I left feeling very upset that in some way I had been judged. So this is something that I have been trying to work with myself.
 

Thirteen

when in actuality we are all coming from an imaginary narrative....our own. There is something kind of strange in that for me, and I'm just wondering if anyone else felt it.
No...and yes! :D If it's totally imaginary--and we all agree on this--then there is no discussion to be had. I make up my own definition of the cards and you do the same and discussion comes down to: "I see the Fool as someone committing murder..." and you say "Oh, I see the Fool as meaning I'll soon make tons of money..." And we both say, "interesting definition." :joke: Rather like discussing fairy tales we've made up. But we are working with cards that do have a kind of system (majors, minors, etc.), historical symbolism, etc. These cards have also found their way, in certain instances, into religious beliefs, spirituality, and faith that holds them as "fact" not mere imagination. What all this means on the kinda-sorta "no" side of the argument is that we can have agreed upon meanings for the Fool. Nothing we, ourselves, made up or imagined. Like "Means being Foolish."

On the very decisive "yes" side, however, these meanings have as much range as human experience and knowledge. If they didn't, we wouldn't be able to read them for, well, anyone in just about any circumstance (not every appearance of the Fool means the person is being foolish, right?). So we *can* say "The Fool can stand for becoming an astronaut." It certainly works for someone who does that, even though the Fool was created before anyone even imagined such a profession. Even though it's not written down anywhere in the pre-20th century history of tarot as a possible interpretation. The cards have astonishing flexibility, mailability, adaptability and, yes, rely a lot on our imagination.

Also on the yes side is the fact that our personal experiences inform how we read certain cards. Some would say, our personal decks "know" how to get a certain messages across to us, only. So, I might say, "Every time I get the Fool, I know I'm going to be traveling," whereas you might say, "Every time I get the Fool, it's a warning that I'm procrastinating." Both interpretations are fine. They're not in agreement, and yet they do agree with the basic and classical definition of the Fool card.

The upshot of all this is that, absolutely, we readers have to be flexible and imaginative, open minded and courteous with each other. Especially because to some the tarot may be rooted in deep faith, spiritual beliefs and religious convictions. So yes, it is strange that we should be in conflict, as the tarot is so vast and able to accept so many differing points of view, as many as we can imagine. But there will be disagreements because the card interpretation isn't *only* "pure imagination." It is historical meaning and symbolism, and agreement between readers on certain basics. So, not so strange, so long as those disagreements remain polite and respectful.
 

Ruby Jewel

Ruby you are a God-send. I was very frustrated last night due to the fact that I answered someone's question very specifically (regarding how the question was phrased). Someone else posted that my intention was somehow wrong...that in many cases we need to look outside the question. I do agree but in this case I was simply answering the question that was provided to us to give the querent the specific answer they were looking for. I left feeling very upset that in some way I had been judged. So this is something that I have been trying to work with myself.

Oh good...you are a Godsend yourself. Thanks. Ruby
 

Ruby Jewel

No...and yes! :D If it's totally imaginary--and we all agree on this--then there is no discussion to be had. I make up my own definition of the cards and you do the same and discussion comes down to: "I see the Fool as someone committing murder..." and you say "Oh, I see the Fool as meaning I'll soon make tons of money..." And we both say, "interesting definition." :joke: Rather like discussing fairy tales we've made up. But we are working with cards that do have a kind of system (majors, minors, etc.), historical symbolism, etc. These cards have also found their way, in certain instances, into religious beliefs, spirituality, and faith that holds them as "fact" not mere imagination. What all this means on the kinda-sorta "no" side of the argument is that we can have agreed upon meanings for the Fool. Nothing we, ourselves, made up or imagined. Like "Means being Foolish."

On the very decisive "yes" side, however, these meanings have as much range as human experience and knowledge. If they didn't, we wouldn't be able to read them for, well, anyone in just about any circumstance (not every appearance of the Fool means the person is being foolish, right?). So we *can* say "The Fool can stand for becoming an astronaut." It certainly works for someone who does that, even though the Fool was created before anyone even imagined such a profession. Even though it's not written down anywhere in the pre-20th century history of tarot as a possible interpretation. The cards have astonishing flexibility, mailability, adaptability and, yes, rely a lot on our imagination.

Also on the yes side is the fact that our personal experiences inform how we read certain cards. Some would say, our personal decks "know" how to get a certain messages across to us, only. So, I might say, "Every time I get the Fool, I know I'm going to be traveling," whereas you might say, "Every time I get the Fool, it's a warning that I'm procrastinating." Both interpretations are fine. They're not in agreement, and yet they do agree with the basic and classical definition of the Fool card.

The upshot of all this is that, absolutely, we readers have to be flexible and imaginative, open minded and courteous with each other. Especially because to some the tarot may be rooted in deep faith, spiritual beliefs and religious convictions. So yes, it is strange that we should be in conflict, as the tarot is so vast and able to accept so many differing points of view, as many as we can imagine. But there will be disagreements because the card interpretation isn't *only* "pure imagination." It is historical meaning and symbolism, and agreement between readers on certain basics. So, not so strange, so long as those disagreements remain polite and respectful.

Well said, Thirteen, and I agree with all of it. I am often astonished when I come up with an interpretation for a card and I have no clue where it came from..., but it fit the situation and presented itself to me. I figure this is the spirit world sending their message through me.....and then I realize their vocabulary and meanings are timeless....which says the same thing about the deck of cards.....there's a reason we love them and believe in them. Yes....kindness is important.
 

wheelie

Such a great thread!

Thanks for sharing the insights, everyone.

It's very illuminating and meaningful.

Someday I hope to find a good analogy for what you all were saying here towards the end, that there is common ground in the center of town and houses of divergent ideas around the edges

or

There is a inner core of personal experience and perspective (growing like the rings of a tree) but outer branches, leaves, and fruit that interact with the whole biosphere

or

a little of both
 

Maru

Cards are a meant to be interpreted creatively so I think it is ultimately up to the reader. No matter how representational we attempt to make them, there will always be some subtle subconscious or outside the box meaning that slips through. So it really just depends on how you individually respond to the card(s).

Much like old classical paintings of the medieval era are chock full of symbolism, particularly spiritual references, that have taken very educated people hundreds are years to research and study. Individuals in those days didn't have easy access to literature, much less were they able to read, so paintings and symbols took the place of reference manuals back then.

Now, people are paid big cash to get expensive degrees in these subjects and there is still argument to this day about some of the meanings of these paintings, much less the basic stuff like /when/ /why/ and /who/ painted them.

Every once in a while you will have some whosawhatsit comes in with some crazy new theory that goes against the grain of the traditional societal meanings of heavily studied paintings. That person is both applauded or blasted for disregarding years of tradition and evidence and not treating prior theories as established "fact".

This doesn't even include the people who see Illuminati symbols dating back to cave paintings, etc. This is just somebody paid to speculate essentially doing what they are paid to do... study and solve the mysteries behind historic artwork.

Whose to say the artist (or the universe) doesn't occasionally throw curve balls occasionally to keep us on our toes? There's no definitive way to know what entirely is going on in the background because even though it's a window, it's 1-way glass.

Now try combining multiple paintings in a very particular geometrical configuration on a table and watch sparks fly. Tarot for intellectuals is like art analysis on steroids.


On the subject, picking which card is worse, the Tower or 3oS... is like choosing which artist' work. Caravaggio, Van Gogh? Most depressing musician? Fiona Apple, Depeche Mode, Cat Power? With regards to art, that answer for me is a difficult and delicate one, but with music, I'd have to say Nickelback not only sounds like someone designed to torture but is torture to my ears... if I worked for the CIA, I'd suggest they add it to their interrogation playlist.

As for which cards are worse for me, I'd say we're missing the Death in this OP that would complete the trifecta of despair. Tower and Death I do well with as I adapt relatively well to sudden changes. 3S probably creates the most acute anxiety for me, but it's occasional and not really so much the more painful aspects of as much as the inevitable cycle of empathic overload that inevitably comes in once those knives hit... it is terrible as a reader to pick up when reading for others, much less for myself when I am reading the off-boarding of emotions in situations. I make sure I have my protective gloves before I start to handle that uranium.
 

Ruby Jewel

Thanks for sharing the insights, everyone.

It's very illuminating and meaningful.

Someday I hope to find a good analogy for what you all were saying here towards the end, that there is common ground in the center of town and houses of divergent ideas around the edges

or

There is a inner core of personal experience and perspective (growing like the rings of a tree) but outer branches, leaves, and fruit that interact with the whole biosphere

or

a little of both

Maybe there is a common denominator that allows differences in experience and perspective to bear fruit, and if I were to choose a tarot card for that thought, it would be Temperance......