“. . . does precognition perceive the actual future, the one that must occur, or does it perceive a probable future, a future that might occur? And how can we tell which is a better explanation?”
– from Real Magic by Dean Radin

AUTHOR’S NOTE: When I read the cards for another person, I typically avoid binary choices or black-and-white distinctions regarding what will or won’t happen in the querent’s future. Flouting this rule is one of the fastest ways to shoot ourselves in the foot because the tarot is often more contrary than agreeable. For example, it will give us a “bad” card in a “good” spread position or vice versa and expect us to figure out what that portends for the seeker as an opportunity or challenge, or it could perversely serve up an inaccurate answer if we don’t ask the question in the right form.

While there are ways to finesse the conclusion so that there is little chance of making a glaring error when two options are present (although “fudge factor” and “weasel-words” don’t qualify), the fact remains that one or the other must occur if the sitter’s query was appropriate and the cards don’t just retreat from providing a coherent answer. How and why it might happen is open to interpretation, and that’s the task set before the diviner.

The cards pulled will generally offer one of three narrative arcs. They will:

– Convey a strong likelihood that the predicted outcome, whether favorable or unfavorable to the seeker, will come to pass;

– Just as vehemently declare the improbability of it transpiring (again, “for good or ill”);

– Withhold a “vote of confidence” that either one will prevail as shown by an array of cards that veers first one way and then the other, producing an inconclusive result.

This tripartite disposition is the realm of the divinatory “tap-dancer” who must step lively and lightly between the incentives and impediments, looking for insights that will aid in judging the message to decide whether it delivers a blessing or a curse, and then select which outlook to emphasize.

Because fully one-third of the 78 cards (26 of them) are “maybe” cards in my personal binning system, it is quite possible that ambiguity will dominate the reading. Then I have to begin splitting hairs to come up with advice to motivate the querent in turning “maybe” into either “definitely” or “no way.” Given that my clients usually come to me seeking guidance for dealing with pressing issues, it would do them no good for me to say “Looks like you’ll be sitting on the fence for the next month. Come back later for another reading.”

Still, should a definitive forecast not be forthcoming, it would be prudent to give them a couple of plausible “mights” that have at least some chance of developing into realities rather than one halfhearted “must” that offers no wiggle-room. So yes, it’s much safer for the tarot reader to talk about tendencies and steer clear of certainties even if that waffling isn’t what the client wants to hear. An emerging trend won’t require that they jump in with both feet while an imperative doesn’t offer the luxury of choice. Plus, exploring “what-if” scenarios gives us a chance to flex our storytelling muscles.