Frege's Puzzle

Teheuti

Historical research is not a democracy determined by popular vote, in which hype and folklore are time-honored methods for getting to the result. As faulty as it is, science and history are among the last bastions of Platonic ideals in which a council of educated wise men and women determine the course based on methodologies involving clear reasoning and, a later development, analysis of evidence. However, the wisdom of the populace does serve to direct the gaze of science in places it was too blind and circumscribed to look. A groundswell of people who see intelligence and emotion in animals helps turn science from inhumane experiments into studying animal communication, which gives us clues how to communicate with the autistic and how to create artificial intelligence machines (which in turn needs the lore of fiction-writers to remind us of consequences).

Personally, I find the debates stimulating and they often lead me in interesting directions. I've recently been involved in a personal discussion with Christine Payne-Towler on her theory that an esoteric tarot can be traced back to Jacob Boehme, if not earlier. While I can't say that either of us convinced the other of our own perspectives, I did learn quite a bit about the 'Kabbalah' of Boehme (very rudimentary and confused),and I got a much better look at the 'stream' of gnostic esotericism that developed via Agrippa, Paracelsus, Postel, Boehme, Swedenborg, Pasquale, Saint-Martin and many others — major influences on the tarot of Eliphas Lévi, Oswald Wirth and Papus. One of the problems is that we don't have a forum for discussing this esoteric stream (with its many tributaries, bogs and byways). Christine is one of the few English-language tarotists who is truly interested in it.

But, when someone pushes us to respond to one of these 'fringe' areas, we get some great research (like the material on the Frankenberg/Postel Key—thank you, Michael), which educates us a little more on the mindset that framed assumptions about what tarot is.

Sure, we can get stuck in discounting that there was an esoteric tarot before de Gébelin (as historically valuable as that may be to do), but we rarely examine how these Ideas infused the tarot that we know today—especially the Marseille-style decks. A discussion is further confused by those who are only informed by the popularizing New Thought movement that came to dominate American tarot and has since spread around the world.

It is unfortunate that we descend into name-calling, but I respect those who are willing to put their 'wild' theories up for critical evaluation. We all benefit when sharply-honed minds and clear methodologies are focused on what possibilities do exist.

Last year there was a discussion of how much was Sigismundo Malatesta involved with the spread of the Neoplatonic ideas of Gemistus Pletho (did he even meet Pletho?) as his 'Pagan Temple' of Neoplatonic motifs clearly shows. And this year we discover (thank you, Ross, for the report) that a deck of Triumphs was ordered for him in 1440—one of the earliest mentions of the cards and the first that hints of tarot production in Florence and possibly Bologna. Not only that, but Malatesta's first two wives were from the d'Este and Sforza families who we know were playing Tarocchi. Perhaps by following some of Malatesta's visual motifs and interests we might understand the tarot allegories a little more?

I think we could all benefit from realizing that most of tarot lore are popularizations of the more serious stream of esoteric ideas that have always been part of Western culture. And, that the history of these ideas is what makes up the esoteric tarot and influences beliefs about it.

There are no esoteric secrets! Or, I should say that the so-called secret knowledge is easily available—although clothed in arcane languages and the styles of time, place and intention—which can make them appear more mysterious than they are. The secret wisdom (another thing entirely) comes from applying this knowledge. It is 'secret' because the experience can only be described in metaphor. It stands outside of factual knowledge and its methodologies.

Historical Research is a discipline that deals with only a limited part of human experience. It examines facts by using very specific methodologies. One HAS to use both facts and methodologies for it to be historical research.
 

Huck

Less than 1 percent of the posts of ATF are in the Historical Research Forum. A quick count this morning gave the following figures: 2,190,849 total posts (Subscriber's area excluded, which would add another 600,000), excluding Historical Research. Historical Research had 14,020 posts. That means that 0.64 percent of ATF is devoted to Historical Research.

... :) ... this isn't really a fair calculation. Contributions to the historical forums have usually more text.
You find easily 10-posts-pages in other forums, which have as REAL CONTENT about 2-3 kb.

Frege post 1-9 has about 16 kb real content
Frege post 10-19 has about 16 kb real content.

I could show a 9-post-page (historical research), which has about 90 kb real content.

A change in the counting method easily leads to the insight, that the historical forum has a little more than 0.64 percent ... :)
 

Debra

The point being, Santa Claus IS real. There's many of him at any Christmastime, and there's at least one throughout much of history. He changed his name a lot but he's recognizable.
 

Teheuti

The point being, Santa Claus IS real. There's many of him at any Christmastime, and there's at least one throughout much of history. He changed his name a lot but he's recognizable.
It is just this kind if analogy that shows the difference between historical research and lore. I have an esoteric tarot deck with Egyptian-based art. Does that constitute proof of an Egyptian origin of tarot? No, it doesn't.

Historical research is not as simplistic as you've made it out to be. It has methods of inquiry so that statements like the one above don't become the standard for determining what is true and what is not. It is historically true that at some point in time people began dressing up like a mythical figure known as Santa Claus. It's not clear from what you say above if we are then supposed to accept as fact that the many Santa Clauses all live at the North Pole, fly through the sky in a sleigh pulled by reindeer and come down chimneys on Christmas Eve.
 

gregory

But debra's right. St Nicholas - to name one of many Santas - WAS a historical figure who did nice things for kids.
 

Debra

The reality of now and the reality of history is not a one-to-one correspondence between a name and a physical thing. I don't think Santa Claus reduces to "lore" and I don't think that tarot reduces to a game.

Here's the question. It seems that people added trumps (with imagery common to the age) and queens to existing card models (Mam-luk). Why?
 

Teheuti

But debra's right. St Nicholas - to name one of many Santas - WAS a historical figure who did nice things for kids.
Exactly, that's part of my point. However, I don't know the details of what he did and I doubt if he flew a sleigh drawn by reindeer through the sky.
 

Titadrupah

... A groundswell of people who see intelligence and emotion in animals helps turn science from inhumane experiments into studying animal communication, which gives us clues how to communicate with the autistic and how to create artificial intelligence machines (which in turn needs the lore of fiction-writers to remind us of consequences)...



That was beautifully put.
 

Teheuti

The reality of now and the reality of history is not a one-to-one correspondence between a name and a physical thing. I don't think Santa Claus reduces to "lore" and I don't think that tarot reduces to a game.
The whole point was that none of it should be reduced (although I do think that the sleigh in the sky drawn by reindeer is more lore than truth). Historical Research is part of the discipline that investigates people and events using very particular methodologies. Here's an analogy: history is an apple and you want to know why it can't be an orange, acting as if it were some kind of unfair discrimination on the part of apples.

BTW, I don't think that tarot reduces to a game, either. History's methodologies can only come up with stories that involve evidence and probable scenarios based on that evidence. Therefore, it is limited in scope, and can therefore be wrong when evidence that would 'right' the picture is missing. Historical research is not going to reveal the whole story - especially going back 550 years and dealing with a topic about which few people wrote then and few researchers are looking for now.

Here's the question. It seems that people added trumps (with imagery common to the age) and queens to existing card models (Mam-luk). Why?
While your question could best be served by its own topic rather than as "Frege's Puzzle," I will comment as regards the discussion: The "why" question can't be answered by historians until a document or other evidence is found that tells us the purpose of the person who added the trumps and the queens. I could speculate, but for a speculation to be seriously considered by a historian there needs to be some pretty clear support from similar issues and other supporting evidence.

What if I said: "The Queens were added because Ginerva d'Este Malatesta wanted a portrait of herself holding a Cup to be part of the deck (she always wanted to be a Queen anyway), and she decided to add her three sisters, too." How would you know if what I was saying was the truth or not? Would my answer be equally as true as any other answer?
 

Debra

So, the Mam-luk cards come from Arabia, a close neighbor to Egypt. I don't know about the historical intersections of those cultures, but it seems to me this suggest a grain of truth (maybe a small grain) in the "Egypt origins" story.

The history of events uses one sort of evidence--you can leave the kid feeling foolish that he ever believed in Santa and the 8 flying reindeer. The study of myth uses some of the same sort of evidence, but it uses other methods as well. Mythology lies at the peculiar and shifting intersection between history (conceived as a social science) and the humanities. It's still a form of history.

When Yyg suggests that the "well-established use [of trionfi as a card game] cannot sufficiently exclude the possibility of a meaningfully coherent design in tune with esoteric tradition"--I think he's right. This belief in itself is not stubbornly and perversely unreasonable. Like closrapexa, I don't see the evidence for the "esoteric tradition" involving alphabetical/numerical/kabbalistic coherence (if I understand her point correctly). But I share Yygdrasilian's interest in a "meaningfully coherent design" with old roots, older than the specifically Christian symbols on the cards.