In Tarot Card Readings, seemingly random cards are placed in significant positions in a way in which, when read, tells a narrative about a person and potentially answers a question they have about themselves or their life. Carl Jung, mentioned in this article, believes this phenomenon to be caused, at least partly, by synchronicity – a guiding force in the universe linking objects in a trans-physical fashion similar to the concept of quantum physics. I myself don’t know enough about the inner workings of quantum physics to refute his argument, but I am confident enough in the idea to realize that it has plausible believability to it. I am a stark believer that the future is random and that we have minimal control over what happens to us—but that doesn’t necessarily mean we can’t divine possible futures. What makes the quantum mechanics part of this more interesting, as is mentioned in the article, is that as per the rules of quantum physics, when we observe possible outcomes, the probabilities change.
The I Ching is a similar predictive system developed in ancient China, in which combinations of the seminal yin and yang symbols are read to interpret someone’s future.
In addition to quantum interconnectivity, intuition plays a large role in tarot card readings as well as the I Ching. Since one’s interpretation of the layout of the cards or the hexagram is based largely on the context in which they are being read, the reader must intuit their subject’s circumstances based on the question they’re asking and any other tidbits of knowledge they offer.
Since randomness is paramount in the layout of both Tarot Cards and the I Ching, I’d say that a digital version of either of them can be beneficial or extremely detrimental. On the one hand, randomness in the digital realm can be simulated in a much more reliable fashion than in the physical constraints our world gives us, as illustrated by tools such as www.random.org. On the other hand, a digital likeness of a predictive system would be entirely in the hands of its creator, that is to say, its coder. They could potentially tilt the balance of the “randomness” scales to favor a particular outcome over any other. In addition to this flaw, a digital version of tarot card reading or the I Ching may not hold the same kind of relationship with its user because of a lack of personality – that is to say, a lack of a real person operating its function. For me, that’s where the majority of the experience of being read stems, and that’s why a digital version just doesn’t hold enough sway to be considered optimal.
3 Ideas for Predictive Systems
After asking an open-ended question, a user chooses four cards from a deck of cards with shapes that you put together Carcassonne-style. Their horoscope is what comes up visually when four (or more?) of them are combined. A variant could have multiple decks so as to make sure something visual is indeed coherent.
A set of transparent slides, each with a shape on it. When held together, one can see through them in a way that the shapes are combined and make a coherent image. To predict the future, one should hold three slides together and interpret the image that appears.
An idea for a group of folks not sure what activity to partake in when hanging out: they each draw a random doodle and place them together much like the first Carcassonne-style idea. When they’re put together, they form an image that can be interpreted by a reader. This image, in context of the group, can give them ideas about what to do in their free time.
