venta | Sceptics wanted

Sceptics wanted

Having just read

leathellin's comments about horoscopes, I am reminded about an experiment I wanted to try.

Tarot cards. I have in the past had several very accurate tarot card readings done for me - however, they have been done by someone who knows me pretty well, and could quite probably have given me good advice without the use of 72 bits of coloured cardboard.

While in New Orleans[*], an acquaintance of

kauket's, whom I'd never before met, did a tarot reading for me. It was pretty accurate, but I'm unconvinced... In general I'm quite happy to believe in the validity of Tarot cards and their ilk. However, I have a little bit of scientist in me which likes to pop up and challenge it. So, I found myself analysing everything that was said, and trying to work out how much could be intelligent guesswork, how much reaction to my reactions, how much was very generalised stuff, etc.

So. I need some people who don't believe in tarot cards to do tarot card readings for me. Basically, I want to see just how well people can bullshit.

Anyone offering to do this will be cooked for/bought drinks/both in return. Must provide own tarot cards, though, unless we can find someone willing to lend a set. I should mention that I have no idea what any of the tarot cards signify, so bluffing convincingly is far more important than getting that kind of thing right.

For obvious reasons, the less well the volunteer knows me, the better. Any offers?

[*]apologies to

lathany (and anyone else who cares) for the failure in appearance of further holiday exploits. Life's been getting in the way.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'd volunteer because then I might get dinner, and i've got cards and everything. I'm not sure i'd help the whole scientific procedure thing though ;-)
Shouldn't you have a set of cards to provide so you can avoid a sample bias based on those who own Tarot cards?

And how dare you have a life to get in the way? ;-)

Not knowing you isn't going to help. Cold-reading can achieve amazing results. It's entirely possible for someone to learn it without realising, and become a very successful palmist, tarot reader, or whatever, honestly but without validity.

Have a quick google on "cold-reading". I'm sure there'll be some very informative articles out there.

Ah, didn't know the phrase 'cold-reading', but that was what I was talking about when I said 'intelligent guesswork, generalisations etc'.

None of the people who've ever read for me have done much in the way of direct question asking, and I always try not to say anything. Even if I think they've hit on something - though of course I can't guarantee that I don't give other non-verbal signals.

Found some interesting stuff on google, though, thanks..

Mmmn. I have a feeling that you explicitly stating that you want to perform this experiment may make it harder for you to take the results seriously - you won't know that someone isn't giving you a reading solely for the purpose of attempting this experiment. It's Schrodinger's Tarot.

As a thought-experiment, I counter-propose a "Faking It" arrangement. You might attend four tarot readers, three of which believe in tarot cards and perform readings, the fourth of which does not believe in tarot cards but still performs a reading. Your goal is to work out if there is one of the four who betrays the fact that they don't believe the cards.

I'm not convinced that that's ideal either - it's more about testing the skills of the readers than anything else. Perhaps it might be more appropriate if you do not know in advance how many readers do or do not believe what they're saying, other than that there will be several readers and it is definitely possible that some or all will believe it and it is definitely possible that some or all will not.

Are you ever still in touch with Andi Lucas? He'd quite probably be interested. I don't know whether he's a true believer or a member of the Bullshit Party. I can put you back in touch with him if you like.

you won't know that someone isn't giving you a reading solely for the purpose of attempting this experiment.

I don't understand. I'm asking people to do readings solely for experimental purposes. I want to contrast their comments with 'real' comments...

It's Schrodinger's Tarot.

It is ?

I respecrfully suggest that anyone would find it difficult to react exactly how they have done in tarot readings that they have had done in the past when they knew there was a chance that the reader might not believe in what they were saying.

If this isn't a factor that concerns you, I'll shut up :-)

I have cards I'd be willing to lend (this is because I have too many sets - see the my desk thread on my journal bloody ages ago - and can't possibly be sentimental about all of them). I'm not sure I'm enough into the 'not believing in them' camp to offer to read them for you, though.

The Gibbon would offer, but The Gibbon does not own a set of tarot cards, and Gibbon tarot decks are remarkably hard to come by. For example, there is no "Tower" card, but there is "Logging" which means something remarkably similar.

...the loan of a set of cards would certainly help with the self-selecting sample :)

If anyone non-card-owner volunteers (or

leathellin, as I'm not sure I can deal with that repellent Giger deck :), please can I borrow some ?

The 'repellent' Giger deck is major Arcana anyway so wouldn't provide the same number of opportunities to bluff on card meaning ;-p
I have the cat deck as well.

<grin> Sure. It'll probably be the Dragon Tarot, unless I own another set I'm so unsentimental about that I've forgotten about it ;-)

Would bullshitting you with runes be acceptable, too?

Blimey, hello. I didn't know you had an lj :)

I'd prefer tarot cards for consistency (I also have far more idea about runes, so might know if you were blatantly making it up :)

Any reason you'd prefer to do runes than tarot ? If it's proper bullshit, surely it wouldn't matter...

I just happen to own a set of stones. I'd been listening to one Current 93 album too many (i.e. one Current 93 album) and was vaguely curious as to how much of it was made up on the spot. Nope, they'd used real runes. (Hagalaz, Nauthiz, Isa and Thurisaz) Maybe runes are easier to make sound realistically grim? "Right, two-fifths of your tribe will have succombed to starvation or cold by Yule, but your ancesters might come back. -They'll probably fall asleep during 'The Great Escape' after the Queen's speech."

You're not going to want your entrails reading either, are you

"So. I need some people who don't believe in tarot cards to do tarot card readings for me. Basically, I want to see just how well people can bullshit."

I have a set of cards and would be happy to do a reading for you.

Assuming that by skeptical you mean "Does not believe in the supernatural" then I qualify spectacularly. I do, however, have some ideas about the science behind Tarot cards... it's not quite all bunk.

Tell us about science! Most of my ideas on this subject add up to "cold reading, clever guesswork, general statements, knowing your client, subject's gullibility/willingness to apply what has been said to their life". I'd be interested to know what other stuff you think could be behind the tarot's seeming success.

Well, approximately speaking (and you can fill in the blanks yourself) it's to do with the fact that the brain works via pattern matching, combined with Ramsey Theory (or some slightly less pure equivalent).

Essentially - if you have enough data, there must be patterns in it.

Tarot is actually rather fascinating to read up on, historically & philosophically. The 'fortune telling' side of it is just one facet.

I'd be interested to hear Dom's thoughts on the science behind it, however, that's possibily something for a separate post rather than muddying the waters of this one...Dom, care to explain further?

C

Um, I hadn't defined properly what I meant about 'not believing'. Trust you to catch me out in sloppy phraseology :)

Might take you up on it, though, if we can ever find a spare time when we're both free and in the same city...

I suspect that my feelings on Tarot are somewhere between a non-skeptics and Dom's so I'm not appropriate for your experiment. However, I have a tarot deck I'll be cutting up soon as part of an art project--you can borrow that for your reading, if you want.

I've thought an experiment of this sort would be a good idea for some time. I have slightly different ideas on how to do them, but would require a budget of millions to accomplish them :)

I'd be happy to give this a try. I can get a set from

frax or take

triskellian up on her offer. I should add that I don't know much about the tarot, yet. I am in the process of doing some reading on the subject, as it happens. Don't know whether this is a problem or not.

Oh, it's so nice to see someone taking stuff you've shown them and applying it immediately ;-)

Oh...the other obvious variant on 'get several people to do a reading' would be to lay out various spreads, record the cards & positions, and get different people to do their interpretations on the same given info.

Of course some people have rules about who can touch the cards & the like, but it sounds like you're breaking thyat one already, so you might as well get the 'scientific' side of giving people the same info.

This could also prevent/moderate the possible differences given out by your body language cues, wince you could write up the results & allow people to respond via email etc - ie no body language available.

I could, but that would test something slightly different...

I want to see how well someone can bullshit a tarot reading, and, although I think I don't give much away, it seems only fair to give them a chance to observe body language etc.

Incidentally, anyone who does think they can do tarot readings is welcome not to tell me, and offer a reading as well :)

Incidentally, anyone who does think they can do tarot readings is welcome not to tell me, and offer a reading as well :)

That's an essential part of a fair test. Your judgement of how accurate the reading is is subjective and unreliable (meaning that you'll have different opinions of the same data on different days, not that you're a total muppet). If you know whether or not the reader "believes in" tarot, your ability to judge fairly may well be shot all to hell.

I think this is part of what jigummy-thingummy was driving at with his "faking it" suggestion.

jigummy-thingummy

:-)

Exactly what you said, sir.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Sceptics wanted

Hmm dinner...

no subject

no subject

no subject

er...

Re: er...

no subject

Gibbon Readings

thanks...

Hmph..

Re: thanks...

no subject

no subject

no subject

Readings

Re: Readings

Re: Readings

Re: Readings

Re: Readings

Re: Readings

Sounds like fun

Re: Sounds like fun

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject