Certification

[edit] For certification

[edit] NON-certification

[edit] Considerations in favour of registration or certification of readers

Some have argued that with the growth and social acceptance of tarot readings, standardisation of aspects of tarot readings, and fitness of inter-personal communication skills of the reader, can be assessed and recommendations made for more formalised registration. This would also provide some protection for the public as well as raise the profile of the professional tarot reader.

Some in favour of certification have claimed that Tarot has substantive knowledge that can be tested, and that it may be reasonable to expect a minimal knowledge base of practitioners. Some may argue that the only reason to fear fair, logical testing of basic tarot knowledge and skills is because of personal incompetancy or unethical conduct, and those who know their deck and truly serve the clients in a professional and responsible way having no fear of being legitimized by standardization. Many major objections to certification and industry regulation (limitation of freedom, impossible to measure good tarot etc.) can be addressed by standards and testing that are broad enough to be inclusive and non-limiting, and yet establish a very basic baseline of "good" tarot-reading practice. Otherwise, what is to protect the client from a false reader who genuinely knows nothing about tarot and simply sees it as a quick and easy scam? Moreover, what is to protect legitimate readers from their general reputation being tarnished by these fakes?

Certification advocates claim that legitimate practitioners have nothing to fear from a certification process set up by a group of their peers whose opinion they largely agree with. Of course, a legitimate concern about certification is that the certifying body/bodies must be made of a wide group of legitimate practitioners who are voted in by their peers in a non-profit group with very clear governing rules to prevent favoritism or subjective testing. Luckily, there are existing models for this type of fair industry-governing organizations. It would be quite simple to set up certification on these models.

Other industries are seen to have raised their status by implementing a quality, professionally run certification body and professional organization like chiropractors, naturopaths, psychotherapists (in some states or countries), massage therapists, astrologers etc.. In turn, chiropractors and naturopaths in communities that once saw them as somewhat illegitimate have seen their practices legitimised, their services altered from being obscure to sough-out, and their fees go up and their practices flourish. Interestingly, in other practices like yoga, reiki and therapeutic touch practitioners, who have far broader views amongst their professionals as to the merit of certification, have tried to regulate their industries without a tight certification process have seen what some have described as market saturation with an abundance of yoga teachers and reiki practioners, some rather inexperienced and irresponsible, or calling themselves "master" after minimal training and experience whilst others experienced, responsible teachers and practitioners being lumped into the same category. The lack of certification and a professional governing body is seen by some to hurt the industry and legitimate practitioners, both in reputation and in billable rate per hour/session (perceived value). Tarot and other divination tools and forms of applied intuition (psychic ability) have all seen increased media attention and public acceptance. The time is considered ripe by some for the industry to move from being seen as "fringe" and illegitimate, and certification is seen as having a legitimizing role in that process.

[edit] Considerations in opposition to registration or certification of readers

In the first place, questions arise as to what certification is supposed to actually certify. If it is whether a person has a grasp of its historical development, its structure, or the ability to write either reviews, articles, or even books, then the certification makes no claim as to the practice of reading tarot.

The narrative or reading a spread of cards displays a wide variety of ways in which these may be interpreted, and manner in which they are understood. For some, it will be the divinatory aspect that may involve reading into the future; for others something more akin to a psychoanalytical session (without actually being such); for others still images out of which exploratory discussions arise. In each case, what is of greatest import is the situation-at-hand.

With each of these, there may be no standard meanings suggested. For any example given, the situation may suggest a meaning totally unrelated to the same card or cards presented in a antecedent situation. This is something that mitigates against certification if such wishes to assign 'standardised' meanings.

Other problems with certification arises from the suggestion that a current or prior 'state-of-being' that reflected the reader being in a divinatory state will somehow guarantee or ensure that a future event will similarly see the reader in a similar state. Unlike professions that certify or qualify an individual for that profession, tarot readings are generally of such a nature that the present session is all that can be legitimately assessed (and even that often until much later).

As well, certification may actually prove to be misleading. A reader who has picked up a deck and worked for a year on the certification course has one year of experience and a certificate to say they are 'qualified'. Yet a reader who has been working with the Tarot for 25 years who does not have a certificate is not seen as 'qualified'. In this all too common scenario, certification gives the public an incorrect reflection as to both what is presented and how one reader compares to another. Certification makes the mistake of assuming that doing a certain number of readings, or answering a certain number of questions correctly, makes a good reader. Readers with many years' experience may not even wish to submit to any assessment of their reading for the purposes of certification. Furthermore, in a number of instances, an excellent reader may be excellent as reader with little knowledge of the structure, history, or development of tarot, and even with little written skill.

Genuine concerns about certification have also been raised from past activities in the area. 1) It means that some self-appointed person or organisation thinks they are able to judge other people's ability according to their own personal standards; 2) Certification requires payment ... and questions have been raised about the connection between the collection of fees and the worth of the offered certificate; 3) it eventually leads to a lack of freedom and a removal of liberty.

Protection of the public is often one of the justifications given for certification. Protection of the public, where an issue, can be done at the business licensing level (city or county). Such, however, has nothing to do with being able to acquire a certificate, which a person seeking to deceive is as able to obtain certification as someone genuinely working with tarot. In that sense, certification becomes no more than a farce that masks the distinction that the public may otherwise protectively discern.

Who is qualified to judge and mark someone's readings? Who can appoint themselves Judge and hand out certificates? In whose name do they do this? These are some of the past contentious questions surrounding the issue of certification of Tarot readers.