Talia wrote:...
But, to apply your principle to for instance tarot reading means that basically the very giving of the reading changes the outcome of the reading.
...
Hello Talia,
Just so I do not get embroiled in any copyrights issues :-(, it is not "[my] principle", but Heienberg's.
That and hair colors and bleach (noxious!) etc aside, you do raise an interesting angle on your favourite pursuit of Tarot. Another gift of symbolism that humans received during their evolution.
Though approaches and techniques differ, widely I presume, between astrology and tarot-reading, one dfference could be that astrology is more passive in a way than tarot. The former generally uses an epoch which has already passed (even in a horary setting) and so the placements of indicators (sun in cancer for instance) and how they will move (progressions and transits) are already cast in stone, in a manner of speaking with the only active part being the analysis, synthesis and interpretation, etc. Here, we can expect more perturbation, movement, fluidity, and hence more room for Messers Heisenberg and Murphy to do their number.
OTOH, tarot seems to be more fluid. The cards (symbols) are actually generated and then the 'arrangements' get analysed, symbols decoded and interpreted for being synthesised into a reading. Understandably, one may argue that the Divine hand (in most cases if not all) is over-seeing the whole sequence from shufflng onwards or perhaps from the seeker approching a reader, but hopefully you can see the fluidity (like movable signs in astrology?) in the Tarot process. I reckon that there is more there that could attract the Ministers of Uncertainty?
None of this hopefully matters to the practitioners, but some of us who are curious about the WHYs and HOWs behind these incredible gifts of evolution and engage in testing and research or find joy in such pursuits might benefit from paying attention to these *angles* and perspectives!
Love and Light and joy (first snow of the season arrived here! WHEEE...!B-)
RR