collapse collapse

* User Info

 
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

* Who's Online

  • Dot Guests: 60
  • Dot Hidden: 2
  • Dot Users: 3
  • Dot Users Online:

Author Topic: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt  (Read 74237 times)

Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #30 on: September 22, 2010, 03:33:57 am »
@ Khesretitui...You  misunderstood me or you didn't want to understand…but, anyway I am glad that you recognize yourself in my words, as I’ve recognized You…and now, be that scientific and read again what I’ve written…
… this is not some Greco-roman philosophy forum, this is kemetic forum…and to quote our Nisut’s words, to be kemetic is to think kemetic, and it means to train ourselves to have a multileveled mind…though i agree with your forelast sentence...not with the last, because ultimate truth is only Netjer...

@ Alman...sorry mister, but you haven't proven that Tarot originated in ancient Egypt...as I've said, any myth or religious symbol can be connected to Tarot since it is so universal...we have to be fair and accept that the people who created Tarot used some egyptian mythology as they did with others, but Tarot is made on the judeo-christian, kaballistic basis...

Ankh em Ma'at!
Isi-senu  
"Two are Ancient"

Sa Wesir her Nit-Nebthet-Seshat, mery Djehuty her Aset-Serqet

Offline Khesretitui

  • Shemsu
  • Country: us
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #31 on: September 22, 2010, 09:29:12 am »
Quote from: Isisenu
@ Khesretitui...You  misunderstood me or you didn't want to understand…but, anyway I am glad that you recognize yourself in my words, as I’ve recognized You…and now, be that scientific and read again what I’ve written…
… this is not some Greco-roman philosophy forum, this is kemetic forum…and to quote our Nisut’s words, to be kemetic is to think kemetic, and it means to train ourselves to have a multileveled mind…though i agree with your forelast sentence...not with the last, because ultimate truth is only Netjer...


As a rhetorician I am not in the business of deliberately misunderstanding anyone. Indeed, I believe I understand your intent all too well.

As for whether anything on this forum has roots in the Greco-Roman tradition, while the material is Kemetic in nature, we conduct the lion's share of this discussion in English.

John Hinds notes that the relative degree of involvement of readers in the construction of meaning in texts both differs as and depends upon the native language of the reader (Hinds 141). Matthew McCool notes as well that the assumptions, strategies, and goals of writing vary according to culture (1).

These cultural distinctions are discussed at length by Edward T. Hall, who asserts that most cultures and their attendant languages can be placed along a continuum and judged as relatively high-context or low-context, meaning that a member of the given culture assumes either that his audience shares certain knowledge with him or that he cannot presume such a shared experience, respectively (6).

Hall further asserts that low-context cultures presume heterogeneity among members of their society, and, as a result, such individuals require detailed contextual information in each discussion (8). As Hall considers speakers of English to be relatively low-context in nature, it is only natural that a member of an English-speaking culture would expect detailed background information when approaching a text.

Moreover, according to Hinds, American English rhetoric, which is strongly influenced by the Aristotelian tradition, places ultimate responsibility for comprehension on the writer (143). Precision of language and the explicit statement of facts, points of argument, and objectives are considered the hallmarks of effective writing, and if the text is not understood, then it is presumed that the writer did not sufficiently explain himself.

According to McCool, this is considered a direct mode of discourse which places emphasis on precision of language and the explicit statement of facts, clarity, and concise wording (2). English texts, therefore, state the purpose of their composition first and then set about justifying this claim through detailed and precise argument. Due to the straightforward nature of such texts the reader is not held accountable if the information is found to be obtuse or disorganized. Rather, the writer is faulted for making his case poorly.

As this is a forum, then, that conducts itself primarily in English (and specifically, in many cases, in American English), the rules of argumentation specific to that language are the default "setting" of debate in the forum. That is fact rooted in linguistics and history, and it cannot be pooh-poohed away with an invocation of the esoteric.

As OP is located in the United Kingdom and conducting debate in English, OP is presumed to at least be familiar with the expectations of English-language discourse, even though there are minor deviations when comparing American and British English and the cultures that inform those languages. This is matter that cannot merely be rejected because it is possibly irritating or inconvenient.

Finally, maintaining a condescending tone is not a productive element of any debate, and I would respectfully request that you refrain from doing so in the future. I have not failed to maintain decorum with you, though I have been to the point, and I therefore expect the same of my partners in debate.


For those interested:

Works Cited

Hall, Edward T. and Mildred Reed Hall. Understanding Cultural Differences: Germans, French and Americans. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press, 1990. Print.

Hinds, John. "Reader Versus Writer Responsibility: A New Typology." Writing Across Languages: Analysis of L2 Texts. Ulla Connor and Robert Kaplan, eds. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1988. Print.

Kaplan, Robert B. "Cultural Thought Patterns in Inter-cultural Education." Landmark Essays on ESL Writing. T. Silva and P.K. Matsuda, eds. Manwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001. Print.

McCool, Matthew. Writing Around the World: A Guide to Writing Across Cultures. New York: Continuum, 2009. Print.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2010, 09:42:24 am by Khesretitui »
Khesretitui
"My Fathers Dispel Evil"

Sat Set her Ra-Heruakhety
Meryt Heru-wer her Yinepu-Wepwawet

I provide writing, editing, and tutoring services in exchange for donations to the House. PM me for details.

Offline Aashemmuti

  • Shemsu
  • Country: 00
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #32 on: September 22, 2010, 09:56:57 am »
I feel so dumb... I know how to carry on a discussion in English, but I know nothing of Greco-Roman rhetorical anything. I did not realize there were these kinds of requirements for carrying on a discussion on this forum. I have been tempted to participate in this discussion but quite honestly, at the risk of making myself sound an idiot, I could barely understand what Khesretitui was saying in the preceding post.

I hope we are allowed to have discussions here without being trained in classical debate or rhetoric or whatever Khesretitui is talking about. Khesretitui I apologize if this post comes off wrong. I respect your great intellect and knowledge of this tradition. But you should know there are some people here who do not know these formal rules of debate. If all discussions must now adhere to traditional Greco-Roman rhetorical whatever, could someone please post a notice for the forum at large, and then inform us what these rules are. I am hoping it will not take a college course or degree to participate in discussion on this forum. Currently I am intensely intimidated by the kind of language being used, and I shall go hide in a corner for a while.
Sat Sekhmet-Hethert her Bast, Meryt Shu her Sokar-Wesir.

Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #33 on: September 22, 2010, 10:03:11 am »
Aashem, I think the bulk of the message is, "if you're going to assert something, the responsibility to make your point clearly and concisely, is soley on YOU, and any misunderstanding means you have muddled your points"....that's my takeaway...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 pm by Ta_Imu_Aset »
Timu

Sat Aset, meryt Wepwawet her Renenutet


Offline Khesretitui

  • Shemsu
  • Country: us
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #34 on: September 22, 2010, 10:05:01 am »
Of course I am aware that most people don't know the minute details. However, as I insist on sources from OP, I believe it would be hypocritical to assert my point without providing my own. If you conduct business in English, you very likely already have a gut sense of what you need or don't need.

These things I have invoked are merely the typical standards to which English discourse is held, as viewed by scholars who make their living analyzing such things. However, even if you can't name the terms specifically, you likely know them by feel.

Most of us, for instance, don't buy things without proof when we're told something dubious. If I told you the moon was made of cheese, you would want me to back this up, and I would not expect you to believe me until I could back it up.

This is merely the "under the hood" explanation as to why, all provided, as I noted, because I expect OP to list his sources and because it has been suggested that my doing so is insensitive.

ETA: Timu has the point precisely. In English, which is the language we use here, that's what is expected of the writer. If understanding fails, it is the writer's responsibility. Because we are all from disparate backgrounds, we cannot assume we all have shared experiences, so background information is extremely important.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2010, 10:12:39 am by Khesretitui »
Khesretitui
"My Fathers Dispel Evil"

Sat Set her Ra-Heruakhety
Meryt Heru-wer her Yinepu-Wepwawet

I provide writing, editing, and tutoring services in exchange for donations to the House. PM me for details.

Offline Aashemmuti

  • Shemsu
  • Country: 00
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #35 on: September 22, 2010, 10:12:58 am »
I can see how this could get into a long discussion of semantics as well, in terms of what is "proof" for each of us. For instance: I may believe that there is proof for the existence of the atom and its subatomic particles. However, I have not actually proven it for myself in a lab. I am merely taking the word of a scientist who I believe is trustworthy, that it has been proven. Ergo I find it can be truly difficult to find ultimate "proofs" for things. When it comes to history we are all looking at sources and it then comes down to which sources are most trustworthy to an individual scholar, and why.

Again, I appreciate the great intellect and intelligence of those versed in said rhetorical tradition and debate. And I appreciate the "under the hood" explanation you have given, but can barely understand what you are talking about. (This is no doubt due to my own ignorance.) I also appreciate the need for backup from the OP in terms of his/her conclusions re: Tarot. As for myself I find it onerous to have to visit another forum to view someone's hypothesis; that is my main gripe.

I find that intellectualism is great and so is scholarship, but sometimes it is also necessary to carry on discussion in a language everyone can understand. Perhaps I am the only one having a really hard time understanding much of what is  being said. I love  Tarot so I am interested in the discussion but it is too hard for my tiny brain. I guess the fact that Tarot works for me will have to be enough, and I will not spend too much time analyzing where it came from... I will leave that for the historians. Sorry if that makes me seem unscholarly. I am after all a practitioner not a professor of Tarot.

Thank you all for the very interesting arguments and comments posted, I appreciate them even the ones that I could not fully understand! I stand in admiration of the great minds at work here.
Sat Sekhmet-Hethert her Bast, Meryt Shu her Sokar-Wesir.

Offline Baket

  • Divined Remetj
  • Country: us
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #36 on: September 22, 2010, 01:58:35 pm »
A'ashem, don't feel bad, you're not the only one having trouble following along. But what a great exercise for the brain, eh? :)
Devotee of the Divine Felines and my darling Loki
http://www.zazzle.com/cattywompus

Offline Aashemmuti

  • Shemsu
  • Country: 00
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #37 on: September 22, 2010, 02:25:05 pm »
Good thing my brain has no muscles or they would be cramping. Lol!!
Sat Sekhmet-Hethert her Bast, Meryt Shu her Sokar-Wesir.

Offline ubenetsenu

  • W'ab Priest - Lay Clergy
  • Country: us
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #38 on: September 22, 2010, 02:52:06 pm »
ashem, you may not know much about the history of tarot, but you also aren't trying to convince people that you do. that's the difference, as i see it. :)
ubenetsenu - "two appear shining"
sat Sekhmet-Mut her Khonsu
meryt Wesir her Serqet-Aset
𓁴𓁳
tarot and heka by request

Offline Khesretitui

  • Shemsu
  • Country: us
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #39 on: September 22, 2010, 04:03:43 pm »
Quote from: Aashemmuti
I can see how this could get into a long discussion of semantics as well, in terms of what is "proof" for each of us. For instance: I may believe that there is proof for the existence of the atom and its subatomic particles. However, I have not actually proven it for myself in a lab. I am merely taking the word of a scientist who I believe is trustworthy, that it has been proven. Ergo I find it can be truly difficult to find ultimate "proofs" for things. When it comes to history we are all looking at sources and it then comes down to which sources are most trustworthy to an individual scholar, and why.


Ultimately, you are correct: standards for adequate proof are different in different fields. There are also different standards for challenging established knowledge than there are with simply sharing one's opinion with no intent to convince others that it is more correct than their own perspective.

In the case of your example about the atom, scientists across many generations have slowly advanced our knowledge on the subject to where we can say with a good degree of certainty that we know specific qualities and natures that atoms possess. However, that knowledge is always subject to modification or rejection, and if convincing, new material surfaces and is vetted, then we must change our perspective. This is because we are still at a level of incomplete understanding. Our knowledge is evolving -- and it evolves through debate and experimentation.

The key to accepting that knowledge, though, is the provision of evidence that supports it, especially when the new theory challenges a very large body of accepted material. The use of questionable sources as a basis for belief, too, would have to be explained if it happened. One would have to look at why a questionable source is considered dubious and then refute *those* arguments first before making one's own arguments.

And you are absolutely correct about trustworthiness in source material. Without a time machine, we'll ultimately never know, but through rigorous research, we can get closer than by mere conjecture.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 pm by Khesretitui »
Khesretitui
"My Fathers Dispel Evil"

Sat Set her Ra-Heruakhety
Meryt Heru-wer her Yinepu-Wepwawet

I provide writing, editing, and tutoring services in exchange for donations to the House. PM me for details.

Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #40 on: September 22, 2010, 06:08:59 pm »
Quote from: Aashemmuti
I find that intellectualism is great and so is scholarship, but sometimes it is also necessary to carry on discussion in a language everyone can understand. Perhaps I am the only one having a really hard time understanding much of what is  being said.


I think essentially Khesret is just saying "back up what you say appropriately."  I'm not scholar of debate either, but it's generally assumed that if you are trying to convince people of something... especially something controversial... you want to:

A. Make your case clearly.
B. Give adequate evidence.
C. Give adequate citations.
D. Adequately address contradictory evidence.

I'm actually having a hard time following along, too.  Don't worry too much about that.  The main problem I see here is that Alman is saying things and not citing his sources properly, therefore we have absolutely no real idea where he's getting his ideas from, and he doesn't adequately address things like, for example, Ubenet's reference to the four evangelists which was a really good point.

Quote from: Aashemmuti
I love  Tarot so I am interested in the discussion but it is too hard for my tiny brain. I guess the fact that Tarot works for me will have to be enough, and I will not spend too much time analyzing where it came from... I will leave that for the historians. Sorry if that makes me seem unscholarly. I am after all a practitioner not a professor of Tarot.


This actually reminds me of learning to flintknap.  Is that weird?  We watched this video by a flintknapping master explaining how one rock breaks another rock and were asked if it made sense.  We all said "Sure, why not?"  It turned out the explanation was entirely wrong, but had been a very popular one for a really long time.

The point my professor had was that you can learn to be extremely good at something without having a clue how it works.  That doesn't mean it won't help, but you don't need to know the history of the Tarot to be able to read it.  You could believe that the Tarot was literally scraped off of Egyptian mummies and then photocopied on a Xerox machine in medieval Japan by Santa Claus and Jesus and still be able to read the cards.  That doesn't mean your history is right, but you can still read it.  So no worries in that regard :)

I'll also reiterate that there's a huge difference between reading Tarot with little, no, or an inaccurate understanding of its origins and arguing an alternative to its origins without properly backing it up.
Son of Set and Wepwawet-Yinepu.
Beloved of Sekhmet-Hethert, Heru-Wer, and Aset-Serqet.

Offline Aashemmuti

  • Shemsu
  • Country: 00
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #41 on: September 22, 2010, 07:29:56 pm »
Quote from: Setkheni_itw

This actually reminds me of learning to flintknap.  Is that weird?  We watched this video by a flintknapping master explaining how one rock breaks another rock and were asked if it made sense.  We all said "Sure, why not?"  It turned out the explanation was entirely wrong, but had been a very popular one for a really long time.

The point my professor had was that you can learn to be extremely good at something without having a clue how it works.  That doesn't mean it won't help, but you don't need to know the history of the Tarot to be able to read it.  You could believe that the Tarot was literally scraped off of Egyptian mummies and then photocopied on a Xerox machine in medieval Japan by Santa Claus and Jesus and still be able to read the cards.  That doesn't mean your history is right, but you can still read it.  So no worries in that regard :)

I'll also reiterate that there's a huge difference between reading Tarot with little, no, or an inaccurate understanding of its origins and arguing an alternative to its origins without properly backing it up.


I appreciate this viewpoint; it says a lot for me. I guess the important thing is honesty, which I try to do in my practice - if I read Tarot for someone and they asked about the history, I would explain that I practice with the cards and it applies to practical issues today, but for history one should go to solid sources. Thanks Setkheni, I feel not such the dullard now.
Sat Sekhmet-Hethert her Bast, Meryt Shu her Sokar-Wesir.

Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #42 on: September 23, 2010, 03:48:58 am »
It is always interesting to me how academic people tend to push themselves above others. This fact is kind of sad to me, because I am also like to view myself as scholar and scientist, but I always thought that I can learn something from anybody, even from the beggar living on the street. Today you don’t need academy to know something, information is free and available, and all this citations are needed only in the circles of academics, this is forum, I am not going to quote on that what I’ve just written. Do I really need to quote the source for what I wrote about the history of Tarot? Or about the origins of cherubims?
Alman was not rude, he was just non-scholarly. And the reaction of some people on that was rude. That’s what I’ve meant…and I agree that when you are trying to prove something to someone, you just need to quote the sources if the proof is not so obvious. In this case, Alman tried to put in front of us something what can only be subjectively explained, as I’ve understood his explanations. And I’ve said to him that he is wrong in a way that I thought is appropriate.
Isi-senu  
"Two are Ancient"

Sa Wesir her Nit-Nebthet-Seshat, mery Djehuty her Aset-Serqet

Offline NiankhSekhmet

  • Shemsu-Ankh
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #43 on: September 23, 2010, 06:30:07 am »
I do not necessarily agree with your thrust here, Isisenu. I am definitely not an academic, but I am an independent scholar - not just of things Kemetic but of occult and folkloric information.  While scholarship and academia is all fine and good, nothing takes the place of hands on, direct experience. You can read all you want about tarot, about ritual, about any subject you care to name, but if the scholar or layerson is not in it, it has all the validity and taste of a piece of cardboard.

Quoting sources is important (to my mind) for the main reason of not proving you are necessarily right but rather showing precedence for a line of thought, and also giving your audience the chance to obtain that resource and reading it for themselves. Part of the knowledge being readily accessible is being able to say, "I read this idea in this specific source and this is the conclusion I have come to."  Not to do this in fact denies others the ability to find out for themselves, reach perhaps a different conclusion based on the source(s) you cited and shuts down discourse.  If that is the case, why discuss anything at all? Why don't we just preach at each other and flat out say, "I really don't care what you think.  I know what I know because I know it, and we are not going to discuss it, you are simply going to take my word for it."

We all think, we all seek knowledge and we all have this desire to know for ourselves. You can respectfully in the discourse tell someone that you disagree with their findings based on your experience and knowledge, however, if they would provide the resources so that they can also be examined, then perhaps convincing the audience that the thesis is a valid one, then that is how knowledge should be shared.  You have to show, who, what, where, when and why you are asserting something. If it is based on personal experience or personal gnosis, then ok, don't be afraid to say so.

We can vehemently disagree because sources tend to not necessarily agree. Disagreement, however, does not equal disrespect. Arrogant commentary on either side is not necessary, and yet, sadly, it has crept through on both sides in this particular thread. If you don't want to present sources because there is some sort of percieved "proprietary information," say so. If that is the case, get an NDA (non-disclosure agreement).  People do it in film, publishing and scholarship all of the time.  Even those sorts of things are not insurmountable.

So my suggestion is to be calm, concise, cite sources if possible and to be mutally respectful. It can be just as easy or just as difficult as anyone chooses to make it.  The choice is up to each individual; just as the choice to either agree or disagree with the information being presented is as well.

Senebty!
« Last Edit: September 23, 2010, 06:53:33 am by NiankhSekhmet »
NiankhSekhmet
Sat Sekhmet-Mut/HetHert
Meryt-Amun (Beloved of Amun)
Heri Seshta Sekhmet-Mut / HetHert

Offline Aashemmuti

  • Shemsu
  • Country: 00
Re: Tarot origins in Ancient Egypt
« Reply #44 on: September 23, 2010, 08:02:30 am »
Personally I feel that an effective argument should be understandable by the majority of the readers/listeners. In this day and age, I don't think most of us are schooled in classical debate or Greco-Roman rhetoric. Hence, an argument steeped in that tradition that is unintelligible to readers may be very eloquent, but ultimately useless to those who cannot comprehend it.

Then, you have the option of presenting your argument in a way that *is* comprehensible in the current day and age, or you can simply realize that most people are not going to be able to carry on discussion with you on that level, and perhaps not proceed with the discussion if other methods of communication are unacceptable to you. Or just stick to talking with those who can participate using the debate methods you prefer, and ask others to not participate. This is kind of what I've gotten from this thread... honestly I can't really understand *any* of the arguments presented here, Greco-Roman or otherwise. Both the OP and the rebuttals presented are equally confusing to me.

What Isisenu wrote really resonates with me, but I must also say that I don't feel the other posters here are coming from a place of ego or self-importance. I think both are trying hard to make valid points and I do appreciate that.

I respect the great scholarship here, but find that scholarship can be useless when it is inaccessible. Whether that is my fault for being uneducated or someone else's fault for coming from a place of obscure intellectualism (and really I'd prefer not to play "blame game" either way), the fact remains that an argument that cannot be understood is not helpful to anyone. This could be applied to both sides of the discussion as I see it here - one side requires me to sign up for other forums to even read the discussion, and the other side says things like: "...low-context cultures presume heterogeneity among members of their society, and, as a result, such individuals require detailed contextual information in each discussion..." which quite honestly might as well be written hieroglyphs as far as I am concerned.
« Last Edit: September 23, 2010, 08:04:06 am by Aashemmuti »
Sat Sekhmet-Hethert her Bast, Meryt Shu her Sokar-Wesir.

 


* Board Stats

  • stats Total Members: 2979
  • stats Total Posts: 286929
  • stats Total Topics: 19447
  • stats Total Categories: 8
  • stats Total Boards: 110
  • stats Most Online: 217
anything