Tarot College Course – Tarot 101 Part 1

25 réponses à Tarot College Course – Tarot 101 Part 1

  • snager80 dit :

    Romani are AWESOME.

    i say playing cards were invented in China for sure and that they should be the experts, since china gave alot of it’s culture to Japan and we all know how hyped-up on playing cards Japan is. Nintendo was originally a trading-card company.
    just like the Tarot, Pokemon cards have often been persecuted, accused of being evil, and banned. this explains why i often dream i’m useing pokemon cards for tarot, i guess. but not why i’m better at reading pokmon in the dreams..

  • ANIideas dit :

    @GaleZMe – No, please don’t scrap tarot cards! Whatever your beliefs about the occult, tarot cards were invented in 15th century Italy for playing card games – games that continue to be played throughout much of continental Europe today. These games are very, very good so, by all means, scrap the occult but let’s keep the cards.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    Alright, listen: the cards can be considered a form of Artistic expression ongoing from the 15th Century through to today. I have no problem with that at all. What I attack is using the cards as an authority which can provide advice and guidance. Obviously, they don’t « work »…..its the BELIEF that they « work » which causes self-fulfilling readings. People BELIEVE ( what the Thinker part of consciousness Thinks, the Prover part of consciousness Will Prove ).

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @ANIideas This is where people get screwed by Astrology, Numerology, Spell Casting, Tarot / I Ching / Mo / etc. readings, and all the rest of the malarky. It forms Priest Craft where promoters who insist these swindles have special « powers » manage to make themselves a nice living by leading fools along the garden path and actually taking decision making capacity away from the fools and interfering with their lives for fun and profit.
    The cards themselves are just artistic expression.

  • karlkarlkarl1234 dit :

    I bought a book on Tarot because I am certain it would be an incredible aid in writing literature and poetry.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe someone read prometheus rising

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 I read Wilson – almost all his works – DECADES AGO. I don’t need Robert to tell me how to look at things. By the way, I don’t BELIEVE in, or follow, Wilson or his views…..or Hyatt’s…….or Duquette’s……or any of the other New Falcon crowd’s views on anything.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe awesome. that was quite some response for my simple little remark. i only stated that because you borrowed the phrase  » what the thinker thinks, the prover proves » from wilson. you asserted this phrase
    with emphasis, so it seemed it was a reasoning you identified with.
    anyway, if you read these books decades ago, which i don’t doubt; that would put you in your mid thirties to just getting over the hill………

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe you may say you don’t need « robert » to tell you how to think, but you did at some point because you read almost all his works. just give the dude his credit, he helped shape your mind. you didn’t do it all alone. even if you read his work and didn’t follow it, which is hard to argue when you use his statements; you must admit he helped you assert what you do believe by helping you identify with what you don’t. even non-belief is belief.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 they fall for some idea that anything outside themselves is the source of power ( any external authority ) such as systems, techniques, ceremonies, philosophies, objects ( Talisman, Oracles, etc. ) and so on. Nevertheless, for any external entity to produce an effect in someone’s reality ( predict an outcome, cause a manifestation ) the user / observer must BELIEVE in it and its capacity to do so.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 As for R.A.W, I can give him credit to a certain extent for at least wanting to step outside the box confining his generation of people – his age group. Which, when you think about it is quite something because most people of his age were really well-programmed, unoriginal zombies.
    However, he did fall into those same pitfalls when it came to his own health, even though he experienced something that didn’t fit his generation’s paradigm when he was young and it worked.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 Wilson, in other words, seemed to go as far as he was able but he hit a limit and stuck there. However, his concepts today aren’t all that great. They’re surface-scratching stuff, I think.
    What gets me is this Groupie syndrome. Hyatt, Wilson, Crowley, Leary, etc., all seem to have groupies who think that they are the be-all and end-all « last word » on everything ! That’s the really amazing thing to me.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 How do you know I was « assuming » that about you? And don’t blame me if you can read hostility into typed sentences. There’s very little space and limited characters available for expressing one’s self here, and I think that if I want to make a point in a time-efficient manner, I have to be blunt. Otherwise it requires repeated postings just to answer the same person on the same point.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe ok. i never asked for any of that information and it isn’t a response to anything i’ve presented. i really don’t care what you think of wilson. have i written you paragraphs explaining what i feel or don’t feel about him or anyone? no, it’s really as simple and telling as that. to reiterate, i only chose to converse with you by way of noticing your use of RAW’s phrase. never did i elicit your declaration of how you feel about him or anything.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe also, if you feel it necessary to assert that the phrase is misleading and inaccurate; then simply don’t use it to affirm your points.
    you seem like a person who likes to hear their own voice and i guess you assume others do too. lastly, please don’t say that space is limited and that you have a hard time expressing yourself when clearly you have no problem typing long responses on youtube. i can read your posts.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe …and being blunt doesn’t connotate contradiction or hostility, especially when spawning from a very ambiguous and unbiased initial comment. to deny your abrupt and perhaps rude response is childish.
    perhaps you have a hard time answering people on the same points because you can’t talk your way out of nonsense. i can now understand your problem with belief, being that you are full of such simple contradictions. peace out man.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 RELAX for heaven’s sake. 🙂 You’re waaaaay too serious, you know. Forget about all this and go on your way – don’t get your blood pressure up 35 points and spend days on it.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe relax says the dude in capital exclamation! man, all i’ve done is ask for a simple bit of reasoning from your retarded responses. if being serious means i enjoy rational conversation i guess i’m guilty as charged.
    you have to be the dumbest « trying to sound smart » person i have ever had the misfortune of conversing with.

  • GaleZMe dit :

    @littlesteviev9x9 This shows just how much and well you’ve been paying attention. I’m not a « Dude », dude. But never mind. You enjoy a « rational conversation », you say? Yup, okay. Whatever you say.

  • littlesteviev9x9 dit :

    @GaleZMe nothing in our conversation eluded to or was based upon our genders. there was no need for me to pay attention to that fact. i was however paying attention to what mattered, the topic at hand., and clearly you have made every effort to ditch any sort of reasonable response. diversion in debate is evidence of insecurity and inferiority. trust me, it was better when i assumed you were a 40 year old dude… cause when you write things like « yup, okay » i reduce you to a 14 year old girl.

  • Chirno9Icefall dit :

    Esto es aburrido y mentiroso…

  • tara8686 dit :

    college…..tarot….in college???

  • Chirno9Icefall dit :

    @tara8686 This Tarot ‘College Course’ is boring and mentirous.. False information and pure especulation

  • Gangly1 dit :

    Please explain to me how it could be, that if I have a first reading and then a second reading 10 minutes later, the results are entirely different?

    Errmm…I suspect that you can’t!

    Or is that where the first lie ends and the new lie begins?

    Get a life.

  • Octiferrous dit :

    Why is a pilgrim telling me about this?

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse de messagerie ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *

*