My mother, before she died, would counsel and advise me. My friends still do. Many pastors have little to no training in counseling, yet still do it.

The difference between them and a reader of an oracle, of course, is the added implied insight of the cards/runes/bones/etc. But having credentials does not guarantee someone is a good source of insight or advice. In the same way, not having them doesn’t mean the person is not a good adviser, counselor, or therapist.

My favorite description of tarot reading was “I use archetypal imagery to assist people in reframing their personal narratives.” Is that such a bad thing, really?

It seems to me that at least one person in this conversation is convinced of how readers do their job without having actually learned directly from a professional how it is done. This can be as accurate as looking to a movie like RED to tell me how the CIA operates instead of asking a family member who actually worked there. The reality in the CIA is much more prosaic than the movie. Which is true of fortune telling as well. When a professional (and several experienced folks who don’t make it their life’s work) try to explain the reality, certain preconceptions are held to as truth.

Patrick

No there are no guarantees in life but when governments recognize educational institutions and accredit them with the task of educating, that's a pretty good start. Certainly beats some guy thinking he knows something because of what he thinks he sees, in pieces of paper with pictures on them. Also it's more the taking money for counseling that I'm talking about, not what a friend or relative might tell you, out of love. And yeah yeah I know that some readers will say they love their clients but if they really did, for anything else other than entertainment purposes, they would send them (their clients) to licensed professionals. Loving somebody is more about what you do without monetary gain, than with it.

And just to be clear, as so many of my posts are misinterpreted or misunderstood, I have nothing against anybody setting up shop at a psychic fair, carnival or new age environment as a reader with a tip jar or charging a small fee say 5euros. My moral compass was sent haywire when one claimed justification, in charging $200 for a reading. Psychologists and social workers average fee is $150 an hour and they go to universities for their education. I also think that when one thinks they are above those with credentials having no credentials, they should be called out for BS. This is of course a moral thread and intonates, a moral perspective.

Is an evangelical pastor a cold reader?

So...
This question raises other great conflicts to prolong this endless discussion.

I understand, but we need can have consider another facts.
I think that the amounts charged should be more related to the capacity of the professional than to their profession.
Exist good psychologists and bad psychologists.
Exist good and bad cold readers.
Exist good and bad doctors.

In my understanding, badness comes true when someone charges a value that is above what his offers to the customer.

The flaw in your logic Mr. Poponi, is that even a so called bad doctor, has been board certified and completed the prerequisite to be a doctor. Same is true of the psychologist. The reader however, need only SAY they know what they're doing, to be in business. No oversight or credentials needed. That's the problem, morally. Especially when charging more than the, licensed professional.

If you know anything about people, you'll discover that it'll take excessive trauma to change a life long belief, so arguing over morality is futile. You should definitely point out when you feel someone is suggesting and doing things that you feel is not right. Express yourself thoroughly and fairly and then leave it. Nothing will change.

I'm understanding you.
However, I think practice has more validity than theory.
Credentials not solve problems, but actions, yes.
If a black belt´s Karate loses a fight to a street fighter (without credentials), the champion trophy goes to the street fighter.
But, of course I'm not belittling credentials.
In theory, those who have studied for years in a college must be qualified to make a good job.
I just think every rules has its exceptions.

UK therapists have to have solo and group therapy for four years, they also have to give 2 or 3 years worth of free therapy to individuals under the wings of a qualified therapist mentor. That's the biggest difference. And a very important one.

Iain, my message was to Senor. I made an error.

It's OK. My point still stands.

Payment is part of the therapy. If you charge nothing the client will put a nothing value on it. This point is made in an excellent book on the tarot called Taromania which I recommend to anyone who wishes to study this ancient and very powerful method of divination. At the beginning of one chapter it produces a quote from someone or other saying "The best psychiatrists in America agree that charging a high fee has a strong therapeutic effect" and of course this is true. If you pay nothing you get a nothing result because you don't respect it. I shall give you an example. A certain jurisdiction has government health care. However, hypnosis therapy for smoking addiction was not included and people had to pay if they wanted to go this route. Anyway one day they brought in a law saying that the therapy was now going to be covered by the government. In other words it was now free. What was the result? A dramatic reduction in the success rate!

If a psychic practicioner gives a satisfactory service and the client is happy with that service he is entitled to be paid on the basis of the sum agreed. If the client thinks the fee is too expensive he or she can go to someone cheaper. There are plenty people to choose from. $200 is NOT out of line for an hour session. At least not for someone of my level. I know of a chap who charges $1500 for the same thing. He is a well known magician and I won't name him. He does mediumistic work which I don't. I run an ethical practice and I am entitled to be paid. I have not had a single complaint in 32 years. Or I should say 30 years since the first couple of years were hit or miss.

A lawyer or other professional charges about the same rate as I charge. And I give value for money otherwise I would not get hundreds of written comments from clients praising my work.

If you went to a doctor for heart trouble, and the doc said "just so you know, I'm self taught", is that OK?

I have always said that it is the doctors who kill you. I strongly suspect my batting average is better than theirs. In fact in Israel the doctors once went on strike and the death rate went DOWN! In fact the Funeral Undertakers Association were so upset by this they petitioned the government to bring in legislation to force the doctors back to work so they could start to earn money again. I have often thought my success rate is better than the doctors. At least I haven't killed anyone yet!

As for being self taught there is nothing wrong with that. I am a *** good magician as well as a psychic and am completely self taught from books. Nobody taught me a *** thing and I can outshine anybody that has take lessons from a magic tutor or mentor. I will concede however that I would prefer my doctors to have professional training and fancy certificates. However, it is not the be all and end all you know. After all Dr Mengele and Dr Crippen had them too.

I previously mentioned that I had a certificate. It cost me $35. It confirmed that I am a minister of some spiritual church or other. It was a certificate for "26 weeks of On Hand Healing training in Rochester, New York" I don't remember ever being in Rochester or doing 26 weeks of on hand healing but I am getting older and my memory isn't what it used to be.

But Mark, its very easy to pick and choose examples and statistics. That's confirmation bias. It's what you've always done.

Now when I do readings I do not claim to be a counsellor or therapist. That is NOT my job so I really don't need any professional qualifications any more than a plumber does to be a therapist. I am a PALMIST AND TAROT READER! Therapy is not part of the job description! If someone derives benefit from the reading that is a by product of the session and I am not going to apologise for it. As Mr Woolery correctly stated, in everyday life people advise all the time without having "qualifications" to do so. I have already stated that I do not advise on specific situations. I do impart counsel on stress and worry and tell my clients how to deal with it. I see them visibly relax in front of me when I do this. I give them techniques to help them make decisions and recommend books that I feel would be helpful to them. The "therapy" is a by product of the session. Am I supposed not to do this and just leave them in distress? Despite what has been claimed my life experience DOES resonate with them! I can see it in their faces. I give them common sense strategies that are distilled wisdom from great minds, (naturally none of whom are on the magic Café).

This is advanced work. If people are not capable of it or don't feel comfortable with it they should leave it alone. It isn't for everyone. Stick to the short entertainment readings. We all have to make our own ethical decisions. I have made mine and sleep well at night. I rest content that I have helped thousands of people. And I will continue to do so.

You tend to listen to family and friends because they tend to know your back story, your history and experiences... So there's a different form of trust in play. And you've also seen them deal with problems and life stuff too so it's entirely different. You know their track record for good and bad.

Recently I watched a documentary on The Oracle of Delphi, in which it was said:

“People often came to Delphi looking for clear-cut, easy answers, or certainty, which they rarely got. The oracle worked by heightening their uncertainty. Pushing it to a deeper level. Forcing them inward, for a key.”

I found this utterly fascinating, and in a way quite reassuring.

“Know thyself” was written above the oracle’s entrance which seemed to be the crux of her approach, not telling people what they wanted to hear, not giving them easy answers, but leading them to find "the answer within".

And also, you want to do this indepth nonsense because you wish someone had said it to you when you were younger.

The way in which readers deliver their reading is often a reflection of the need they had in some point in their life. There's a subtext of "I want to help, I wish I had this back then".

That's interesting. I'm making connections rightly or wrongly, with Stoicism practices with thst term. And it's deeply psychological in nature, right? We need to understand our own motives before we can understand someone else's.