The Tarot Skeptic Part Six

This is part one of a series of seven short films introducing the subject of scepticism and tarot.

I set out to give an overview of what there is to be sceptical of regarding tarot cards, why we should be should be sceptical, and why sceptics have both justification and obligation to persue these. Over the course of the series, I shall look at some of the responses to scepticism, make a case against reading, and suggest a course of action for sceptics to take.


While my new web site is still under construction, I hope that you will take a look and find material there that might be of some use to you...

http://www.gameoftarot.com

My old site is still available, though there are some errors (which are being corrected in the new one)...

http://www.tarocchino.com

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Tarot
• tarock
• tarocchi
• card
• games
• scepticism
• skepticism
• occult
• fortune
• telling
• history
• divination
• reading
• myth
• debunking
• superstition
• knowledge
• epistemology
• philosophy
• critical
• thinking
• playing

[greenelf12]

can I just say that I think that sceptics shouldn't really use james randi as an argument as it never convincies anyone but the sceptics.

[ANIideas]

@greenelf12 It is worth wondering why. After all, James Randi is under a legal obligation to test fairly and with objectivity. Although his tests are often claimed to be biased, someone has only to publish an account of the methodology they were subject to for Mr Randy to be in very hot water indeed. That doesn't happen.

[greenelf12]

@ANIideas well if i'm not mistaken the odds are very high ( 1million to 1 apparently) there are also chalenges that other world views can point to support their veiw like victor zamit's one and the queater million doller creationist challenge in that light I don't find that type of argument convincing, also people just don't like him. I feel a study conductied by somone who dosen't apear to lean to any side would have more weight.

[ANIideas]

I recall that Zamit define's his terms in a way that precludes any attempt at their prize. The JREF prize is not subject to the same kinds of conditions - just science.

We can disregard Randi though. There have been many studies by such bodies as the SPR that have, where their method is sound, failed to either show significant results or (as importantly) repeatable results. The point is that a phenomenon has yet to be demonstrated under scientific conditions by Randi or anyone else.

[greenelf12]

@ANIideas but if you would like to make that point it is best to stay away from Randi, trust me ;o)

[Oudler]

"Grail Twaddle" LOL Sometimes I love the screen shots YT selects for us.