Your take on reading for a third person : ethical or not ?

Onaorkal

I've been reading for over 20 years, I do trust my reading ability. I'd still never compare it to reading a diary, journal, text messages etc etc. it's not just a bit of an exaggeration, it's a huge one.

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but in the end I believe the decision would belong to the affected person. And some would still consider it invasion of their privacy. But of course that's legal anyway. It comes down to personal ethics.
 

prudence

Well we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, but in the end I believe the decision would belong to the affected person. And some would still consider it invasion of their privacy. But of course that's legal anyway. It comes down to personal ethics.

Who in this scenario is affected? Barleywine made a very good point about this earlier, here

There seems to be a sense of perspective missing from this debate. Reading about an absent, unknowing third party does nothing to harm that person that I can see as long as they remain "blissfully unaware." It's like making meaningless, derogatory remarks behind their back that they're never going to hear. It says more about you than it does about them. On the other hand, if your querent takes what you say and uses it to "sandbag" the presumably innocent third party ("Aha! Gotcha!") I would consider that a violation of client-reader trust. I see no reason to put that kind of weapon in someone's hands.

Repeating myself here, but if Tarot readings actually gave us the same kinds of graphic, detailed information and deepest darkest secrets that are typically held in private diaries, I'm sure most of us in this thread would have personal ethics about third party readings very akin to yours, Onaorkal. Some people might believe Tarot readings can do all of that, but it doesn't make it true.

While I do think many third party reading topics are fine, there are of course plenty of them I wouldn't touch. I realize some folks feel that any form of third party reading is against their ethics. I see it (the broad topic of third party readings) as shades of gray, rather than black and white, it's also likely a very curvy line in the sand, rather than a straight one, as far as my personal ethics are concerned.
 

DownUnderNZer

Reading on a "third party" can be dangerous if the person asking is a detrimental obsessive type.

Also, an unborn child is kind of third party and not giving permission so what if a reader predicts a boy and the woman in question miscarries. Not very good for that woman and heartbreaking plus it has happened thus "disclaimers" and "insurances" where available.

Discernment is all that is needed and why someone is asking.

Where children are concerned it is a responsible parent that does everything within reason to keep her/his child safe, so the invasion of privacy is not an intrusion especially when it comes to the internet.

DND :)
 

gregory

There seems to be a sense of perspective missing from this debate. Reading about an absent, unknowing third party does nothing to harm that person that I can see as long as they remain "blissfully unaware." It's like making meaningless, derogatory remarks behind their back that they're never going to hear. It says more about you than it does about them. On the other hand, if your querent takes what you say and uses it to "sandbag" the presumably innocent third party ("Aha! Gotcha!") I would consider that a violation of client-reader trust. I see no reason to put that kind of weapon in someone's hands.

Who in this scenario is affected?
<snip>
While I do think many third party reading topics are fine, there are of course plenty of them I wouldn't touch. I realize some folks feel that any form of third party reading is against their ethics. I see it (the broad topic of third party readings) as shades of gray, rather than black and white, it's also likely a very curvy line in the sand, rather than a straight one, as far as my personal ethics are concerned.
Yes indeed, grey lines. BUT - when we read about people we know without their knowledge - that is likely to affect our relationship with them in some way. Read about your child having trouble at school- you are going to want to do something about it. And at once the reading affects that child. Read to see if your friend's husband is cheating and the cards are unequivocal - are you going to tell your friend ? Even if you don't - you aren't going to be the same around her husband... Only readings about distant celebrities are entirely "safe" on the unaffected scale.

Not wishing to stir - I've said my piece, but just sayin' :)
 

Barleywine

Yes indeed, grey lines. BUT - when we read about people we know without their knowledge - that is likely to affect our relationship with them in some way. Read about your child having trouble at school- you are going to want to do something about it. And at once the reading affects that child. Read to see if your friend's husband is cheating and the cards are unequivocal - are you going to tell your friend ? Even if you don't - you aren't going to be the same around her husband... Only readings about distant celebrities are entirely "safe" on the unaffected scale.

Not wishing to stir - I've said my piece, but just sayin' :)

This is turning into a subtle and fascinating topic. I'm not enough of a "true believer" to think that everything I see in the cards MUST be true (although there is almost always a glimpse of truth there, if we can only see it). But I'm convinced that most human beings are flawed, either in large or small ways (even those who seem the most "perfect" will tell us that), so nothing that shows up in the cards surprises me or draws much of a reaction from me.

I've been doing occasional readings on our neighbors (he would be mortified if he suspected his fishing buddy is a tarot reader; she would be intrigued) because they have a rather "challenging" relationship that we've been trying to figure out and "match speeds" with for the sake of friendship. They seem starved for friendship but not really sure how to keep one going. We know they have some long-standing relationship problems (she left once, years ago, and came back) - he's a bluff alpha-male Leo type and she is a really anal Virgo - and they constantly butt heads over their overly-dependent adult daughter. (He's the "Daddy's little girl" type and she's the "hard-nose.") His wife is always whining to mine about him, while he's completely oblivious.The glue that holds them together appears to be money, which both have from their own entrepreneurial pasts.

So . . . do we do anything intrusive about this, beyond learning where the boundaries are so we don't over-commit ourselves and become "enablers" or "patsies" in their marital drama? I shouldn't think so; if we don't like something they're doing, we just don't engage, and come back later when the dust has settled. I use tarot in all of this to gauge the present dynamic when it seems worthwhile to do so. I've seen enough already to recognize the "lay of the land," and this fills in the background for our first-hand experience with them.

Is this unethical (other than the fact that I'm telling you about it)? It seems more like wisdom to me, and a valuable tool in understanding human relations.
 

Onaorkal

Who in this scenario is affected? Barleywine made a very good point about this earlier, here

I used the word 'affected' because I could not for the life of me find the word I needed in English. In French we would say ''la personne concernée'' which seems to translate to ''the concerned person'' but to me 'to be concerned' in English means 'to worry about' so I didn't want to use this word. So I opted for 'affected'. But you're right, there is not necessary any 'effect' per se on the person.

To put it short, I simply meant to say ''I think the decision would belong to the person who has a reading done on them without their consent.'' (Deciding if it's an invasion of their privacy)
 

Barleywine

I used the word 'affected' because I could not for the life of me find the word I needed in English. In French we would say ''la personne concernée'' which seems to translate to ''the concerned person'' but to me 'to be concerned' in English means 'to worry about' so I didn't want to use this word. So I opted for 'affected'. But you're right, there is not necessary any 'effect' per se on the person.

To put it short, I simply meant to say ''I think the decision would belong to the person who has a reading done on them without their consent.'' (Deciding if it's an invasion of their privacy)

I would interpret "concerned" in this context as "involved" rather than "worried." I realized from this thread that I'm fairly sanguine about the subject, since I see it as more about "intent" than actual "impact" in most instances. As long as it stays at the theoretical level and doesn't descend into "malicious gossip" or "drastic action" territory, I'm not seeing much amiss with doing it. I think our governments spy on us all the time and know far more than any tarot reading is likely to expose.
 

Onaorkal

I would interpret "concerned" in this context as "involved" rather than "worried." I realized from this thread that I'm fairly sanguine about the subject, since I see it as more about "intent" than actual "impact" in most instances. As long as it stays at the theoretical level and doesn't descend into "malicious gossip" territory, I'm not seeing much amiss with doing it. I think our governments spy on us all the time and know far more than any tarot reading is likely to expose.

Involved!!! That's the word I was looking for! I can't believe my translator wouldn't come up with it! Thanks!

The philosophical debate between intent and impact is an interesting one in general I think. I remember learning about it in Humanities class and being very confused as to where I was standing about the whole subject. Then I learned that in real life, nothing is ever black or white.

In this conversation I'm merely stating what I 'believe' to be right/wrong, but it doesn't even mean I always do as I say! I can't remember a specific example, but I wouldn't be surprised if I myself did a reading about a 3rd party.
I still stand by what I said in my first post, i.e the biggest problem lies in the fact that some people will take in the information and commit to drastic actions without using their own logic and communicating properly with the involved (!) party.
 

gregory

This is turning into a subtle and fascinating topic. I'm not enough of a "true believer" to think that everything I see in the cards MUST be true (although there is almost always a glimpse of truth there, if we can only see it). But I'm convinced that most human beings are flawed, either in large or small ways (even those who seem the most "perfect" will tell us that), so nothing that shows up in the cards surprises me or draws much of a reaction from me.

I've been doing occasional readings on our neighbors (he would be mortified if he suspected his fishing buddy is a tarot reader; she would be intrigued) because they have a rather "challenging" relationship that we've been trying to figure out and "match speeds" with for the sake of friendship. They seem starved for friendship but not really sure how to keep one going. We know they have some long-standing relationship problems (she left once, years ago, and came back) - he's a bluff alpha-male Leo type and she is a really anal Virgo - and they constantly butt heads over their overly-dependent adult daughter. (He's the "Daddy's little girl" type and she's the "hard-nose.") His wife is always whining to mine about him, while he's completely oblivious.The glue that holds them together appears to be money, which both have from their own entrepreneurial pasts.

So . . . do we do anything intrusive about this, beyond learning where the boundaries are so we don't over-commit ourselves and become "enablers" or "patsies" in their marital drama? I shouldn't think so; if we don't like something they're doing, we just don't engage, and come back later when the dust has settled. I use tarot in all of this to gauge the present dynamic when it seems worthwhile to do so. I've seen enough already to recognize the "lay of the land," and this fills in the background for our first-hand experience with them.

Is this unethical (other than the fact that I'm telling you about it)? It seems more like wisdom to me, and a valuable tool in understanding human relations.
For me it isn't even about whether the reading is "correct"or not or whether it can pick up on stuff (though I still feel - and I get that feeling when reading - that we need something from the sitter - and if the sitter isn't involved, what do we have.

For me it's more about doing something that the other person doesn't know about. I just don't like it. It feels icky to me. Just as it does when someone prays for me - it may not AFFECT me, but I really don't like it. True, I will only know about it if they tell me, but still. And with a reading - as you say yourself, Jabberwock - it is about how to act with your friends. So it does actually affect them.

YMMV, and most people's does. That's fine by me. (I'd avoid being patsies without needing to turn to the cards, though. You actually suggest you do that in your own post !)
 

magicjack

I'm not very ethical. I will pull cards for any question. I am a card reader. I do not choose the cards that I pull. It is a random draw. What comes up comes up. They might not even talk about is X having a relationship. They tend to go a little deeper than that anyway. I might ask why do you think you need this information? Will it make your life better? The cards might say mind your own business. Whatever they say, people have the choice to believe them or not. The Celtic Cross spread has a position about a person's environment. It sometimes tells what people think of you on the outside or How you appear to others. That would be getting in the mind of a 3rd party.