Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

popehat.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 231 posts

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#111

Post by eimrine »

metadaemon wrote: post #78
kortilla wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> tool... But without any of the science. There is no science to tarot reading. There may be a well-defined methodology, but that doesn’t make it a science because it’s not testable and doesn’t make any predictions falsifiable more so than chance.

Hypothetically, wouldn’t the presence/absence of statistical significance (in reference to tarot-derived predictions) count as testable?

I would believe in that kind of stat significance only if it has been obtained by a double-blind method. BTW I afraid that tarot predictions are too vague for being translate-able into language of strict facts (no precise dates, sometimes no precise people, and always different results after repeating the game each time).

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#112

Post by rippercushions »

glandium wrote: post #105
niemandhier wrote: post #84

Interestingly the statement that “ defamation requires a provably false statement of fact “ is not true in all jurisdictions. German law makes a distinction between „Verleumdung“ which is indeed like defamation and “üble Nachrede“, which only requires a statement to not be probably true.

In Japan, defamation doesn't require falsehood. Yes, you can be punished for defamation for having told the truth!

As an individual, yes, but for "reporting in the public interest" truth is a defence in Japan.

That's the theory, anyway. In practice, the Japan Sumo Association won a major defamation suit against a tabloid claiming matches were being rigged, despite there being incontrovertible proof that matches were being rigged and the Sumo Association itself expelling a dozen wrestlers for their part in the scheme.

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#113

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

a9h74j wrote: post #66
tptacek wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea here is that it is at least conceivable, if not especially likely, that you could generate some evidence that the Tarot reader just made things up on the fly, claiming to have read something in Tarot cards completely inconsistent with normal Tarot interpretation or their own previous readings; there might just be evidence that they deliberately made it up (we know they made it up, but you might find evidence…

I've seen broad instructions to the effect that would-be tarot readers should spend time gradually developing their own set of meanings or associations for their deck of cards. Didn't read the article, but any hint of an "it is merely entertainment, not to be believed" element of defense?

Ironically the same defence used by Fox.

https://www.quora.com/Did-Fox-News-say-that-No-one-should-be...

To be fair I'd trust a Tarot reader more than I'd trust any news channel owned by Rupert Murdoch.

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#114

Post by dmix »

mind-blight wrote: post #45
saurik wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some things that are bad are not so bad that we should make them impossible to do. Just because you might be a jerk to do something, doesn't mean it should be enforceable by armed people with guns. Is it really insufficient (or somehow so difficult) for us to simply dislike people who are jerks rather than try to put them in jail / fine them?

It gets complicated when a jerk has a platform that reaches a bunch of other jerks, some of whom go on to do things like stalking, harassment, and death threats. That's why Alex Jones was fined a billion dollars.

That's not why he was fined.

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#115

Post by chmod775 »

ejb999 wrote: post #109
alkonaut wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that you said “any wealthy person” is telling. That you expect that the law is a tool available to the wealthy. Why would it be like that? As for the defamation itself, it’s no more “anything” that can be defamatory even though there is no requirement of falsehood. The intent to defame is still required. Most publications will fail that test (any journalism/public interest etc).

>>That you expect that the law is a tool available to the wealthy. Why would it be like that? Its really not that complicated - wealthy people can hire lawyers to sue someone, poor and middle-class people not so much.

Someone who can't afford a lawyer can probably not be considered middle-class. That would mean they have no discretionary income to speak of.

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#116

Post by savolai »

kukkeliskuu wrote: post #103

I would ask the Tarot reader if he/she believes he/she is telling a fact or an opinion. First would make him/her liable, but second would probably hurt their business. Tarot cards are very interesting by the way. Jung’s archetypes are based on major arcana cards, and as most personality tests (such as MBTI) are based on Jung’s theories, actually the HR department is kind of playing Tarot when they make you take perso…

I'd like to have an experiment on how HN the crowd evaluates the following claims/observations.

- personality tests - why not tarot, enneagram, astrology, human design, etc

The most functional way to see these systems, I believe, is not as descriptive systems that need to be empirically proven to be useful. Instead, they can be used with a phenomenological attitude.

Instead of objective, they are useful as pedagogical tools, as constructive learning environments, as something to reflect one's immediate subjective experience against. What is there in human experience others before me have observed, that by just directing my attention to it, I can find new points of view, new discoveries about my own way of perceiving myself and reality?

If I continue to observe the phenomena with sustained presence in my embodied experience, what can this make visible in the whole of my emotional-mental-social-bodily experience that I'd not noticed before just because I had not happened to be present to see it?

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#117

Post by Retric »

chmod775 wrote: post #115
ejb999 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>That you expect that the law is a tool available to the wealthy. Why would it be like that? Its really not that complicated - wealthy people can hire lawyers to sue someone, poor and middle-class people not so much.

Someone who can't afford a lawyer can probably not be considered middle-class. That would mean they have no discretionary income to speak of.

Being able to pay a professional for to do significant amounts of work which is likely to result in zero value for you is a high hurdle.

Many possibly most lawyers can’t afford to employ lawyers to sue someone.

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#118

Post by bowsamic »

system2 wrote: post #85
bowsamic wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why?

Tiktok is aimed at 13 year-olds or younger people who waste 8+ hours on their phone. Lot's of screaming, cringy repetitive video creations (same video recorded by millions), people proudly admit the algorithm of tiktok is the best because it keeps the user's dopamine levels high. And on top of that, blatant Chinese data collection with likely evil intend. I will not say more than this because whenever I criticize tik…

Have you tried using it? If not, you'll be surprised how quickly the algorithm manages to give you a constant stream of content that is genuinely deeply interesting to you. I won't argue your other points, but to me it would be more surprising if HN people weren't using it, rather than were

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#119

Post by bowsamic »

system2 wrote: post #87
bowsamic wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think you’re adding anything to anyone’s comment with that. Do you think they aren’t constantly told this?

Since the parent comment mentions science maybe I can get a response to my scientific observation. I do not think they are constantly told this. This is my first interaction with a tarot believing person online. I wrote my comment with the hope that I can learn their scientific approach to tarot. If not, what makes them believe it is even remotely real.

I don't see where they mentioned that tarot is scientific. I think you misinterpreted their English

Re: Can a Tarot card reading be defamatory?

#120

Post by WastingMyTime89 »

savolai wrote: post #116
kukkeliskuu wrote: post #103

I would ask the Tarot reader if he/she believes he/she is telling a fact or an opinion. First would make him/her liable, but second would probably hurt their business. Tarot cards are very interesting by the way. Jung’s archetypes are based on major arcana cards, and as most personality tests (such as MBTI) are based on Jung’s theories, actually the HR department is kind of playing Tarot when they make you take perso…

I'd like to have an experiment on how HN the crowd evaluates the following claims/observations. - personality tests - why not tarot, enneagram, astrology, human design, etc The most functional way to see these systems, I believe, is not as descriptive systems that need to be empirically proven to be useful. Instead, they can be used with a phenomenological attitude. Instead of objective, they are useful as pedagogica…

The issue with most personality tests is not their objectivity per se. It’s that most have provably none despite being extremely prescriptive, asserting they do state truth and being used by other to make decision about you as if they were truthful. It’s even more infuriating because actually valid personality tests exist but are not used because they are marketed less and are more nuanced in what they state.

There is a famous precedent for a divination tool becoming a major piece of philosophy through being commented. It’s the I Ching. If you read it, you will see that the predictions it makes are always very vague. The value is in the large body of interpretations which extract from the text and its symbolism some always applicable precepts.

Post reply on HN