首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 商潮 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

越来越多的塔罗师借助AI解读塔罗牌,从业者分成两大阵营

从新晋从业者到资深从业者,越来越多的塔罗师开始借助AI解读塔罗牌。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

塔罗牌风靡大众,AI同样热度高涨。图片来源:Marvin Joseph/The Washington Post via Getty Images

如果你曾借助AI,试图弄清楚如何处理与朋友或同事之间的棘手问题,那么你绝非个例。对许多人而言,AI已成为现代神谕——在迷茫时刻提供指导、情感支持或帮助厘清思路——尽管批评者担心这可能导致人们对技术产生情感依赖。

诚然,向自身之外的力量寻求答案的冲动绝非新鲜事。几代人以来,人们一直通过灵媒、占星图或塔罗牌寻求慰藉。

这类昔日小众的实践如今日益成为主流。根据皮尤研究中心2025年的一项调查,近三分之一的美国人每年至少会进行一次塔罗、占星咨询,这股热潮主要由Z世代与社交媒体推动。

如今,我们看到这两股力量——AI与神秘学实践——正以奇特而引人入胜的方式融合。从新晋从业者到资深从业者,越来越多的塔罗师开始借助AI解读塔罗牌。

这种结合之所以引人注目,是因为解读本身正是塔罗占卜的核心所在。然而,AI在给出建议时,往往对你的个人经历或独特处境知之甚少。

在2026年4月发表的一项研究中,我们调查了塔罗师将哪些工作环节交由AI处理,以及这项技术如何重塑他们的解读方式。

观察塔罗师将这一重要的解读环节交给AI时会发生什么,或许能让我们窥见实用型AI指导可能是什么样子,以及它可能在哪些方面出错。

神秘学实践的主流化

塔罗牌正迎来复兴。

塔罗牌最初并非灵性或占卜工具。它起源于意大利文艺复兴时期的一种流行纸牌游戏,随后传遍欧洲。

随着时间推移,塔罗师和神秘学家将源自卡巴拉、埃及学、数字命理学及其他神秘与象征传统的神秘符号融入牌面。20世纪初,英国出版商William Rider & Son公司推出莱德-韦特-史密斯牌,成为英语世界中最受欢迎的塔罗牌。

20世纪70年代初,市面上仅有几种塔罗牌,而如今流通的塔罗牌和神谕牌已达数千种。一副标准塔罗牌包含78张牌,每张都有其独特的象征意义。塔罗师利用这些牌来解答棘手问题,小到复杂的人际关系,大到国际事件:我该离开伴侣吗?这份工作值得坚持吗?唐纳德·特朗普和霍尔木兹海峡的局势将如何发展?

抽牌后,牌义解读需结合问卜者的问题、处境和人生经历。

例如,有人咨询感情问题抽到了塔牌,可解读为关系即将破裂,也可理解为错误假设终于被纠正。哪种解读更为贴切,取决于其他牌面、具体问题以及塔罗师对问卜者自身状况的了解程度。

这与AI形成了鲜明对比——即使完全不了解你当下处境和背景的种种细节,AI仍倾向于给出看似笃定的答案。

AI在塔罗牌占卜中的应用

在本次研究中,我们采访了12位塔罗师,了解他们在占卜时如何运用AI。

受访者分为两大阵营。

一方面,他们经常在自我反思过程中向AI寻求明确指引。借助AI解读牌面,他们可以避免针对所提问题解读多张牌面的挫败感。

假设有人在咨询职业转型时抽到了“愚者”和“权杖十”。“愚者”预示着踏入未知领域,而“权杖十”则暗示着身心俱疲和难以承受的负担。

但牌面究竟在说:“离开吧,你已筋疲力尽,更好的机会在等你”?还是在说:“即便离开,新工作压力同样大”?

与其纠结于这种模糊性,一些塔罗师直接让AI给出解读结论。

对于更具挑战性的解读,AI的“迎合式回答”能让塔罗师愈发笃定自己的解读。无论是参与者先抽出实体塔罗牌再用AI解读,还是直接使用AI模拟塔罗占卜,情况都是如此。

AI的这些应用场景极具诱惑力,它们让自我反思变得不再那么费神。但在更广泛的塔罗社群中,我们发现不少人批评AI,担忧这项技术一味迎合的特性可能会削弱人们的直觉和推理能力。

AI作为批判性思考的工具

另一方面,我们采访的塔罗师也将AI作为挑战自身偏见与假设的工具,以此发现占卜中的盲点,或是那些在解读牌面时忽略的细节。

基于此,他们利用AI生成不同视角的解读,以便对比不同解读,从而判断哪种解读更能引起共鸣。有人甚至要求AI对牌面进行“客观解读”,因为AI似乎没有利益纠葛,不受个人偏见或动机的影响。

许多塔罗师在不愿“打扰”或“麻烦”朋友帮忙解读时会这样做。他们依赖聊天机器人建立能提供情感支持的单向互动关系——这正是学者们所称的“拟社会互动”的典型例证。

部分受访者甚至将AI生成的怪异内容或“幻觉”视为颇具深意的启示,恰恰是因为它们具有随机性和非预设性——这与随机抽取的一张塔罗牌仿佛蕴含着秘密信息别无二致。

这对AI的未来意味着什么?

AI本身正成为强大的新神谕。

在最新调查中,研究人员发现,高达87%的生成式AI用户将其用于“个人用途”,包括为人际关系冲突和心理健康问题寻求建议和情感支持。

有时这些聊天机器人确实能提供帮助。但与此同时,寻求建议者也可能产生情感依赖。有些人依赖这项技术获得陪伴和指导,而非亲朋好友。研究还发现,聊天机器人会助长妄想,甚至导致自残行为。

与此同时,从律师到心理治疗师,甚至牧师,那些经常提供指导的专业人士也在实践中运用AI。教皇利奥十四世最近告诫牧师们,切勿借助AI撰写布道词。

我们认为,至关重要的是不能将这项技术视为全知全能的真理来源。它固然能帮助用户开拓思路,但应成为助力自我反思的工具,而非取代自我反思。

在某些情况下,受访的不少塔罗师正是如此运用AI。他们借助AI挑战自身的偏见和假设,从而激发自我反思。这也为AI的发展指明了全新方向——技术不再直接给出答案,而是引导人们主动探索、寻找答案。(财富中文网)

齐夫·爱泼斯坦(Ziv Epstein):麻省理工施瓦茨曼计算学院博士后研究员;法尔纳兹·贾汉巴赫什(Farnaz Jahanbakhsh):密歇根大学电气工程与计算机科学助理教授;瓦娜·戈布洛特(Vana Goblot):伦敦大学金史密斯学院媒体、传播与文化研究讲师

本文根据知识共享许可协议从The Conversation转载。

译者:中慧言-王芳

如果你曾借助AI,试图弄清楚如何处理与朋友或同事之间的棘手问题,那么你绝非个例。对许多人而言,AI已成为现代神谕——在迷茫时刻提供指导、情感支持或帮助厘清思路——尽管批评者担心这可能导致人们对技术产生情感依赖。

诚然,向自身之外的力量寻求答案的冲动绝非新鲜事。几代人以来,人们一直通过灵媒、占星图或塔罗牌寻求慰藉。

这类昔日小众的实践如今日益成为主流。根据皮尤研究中心2025年的一项调查,近三分之一的美国人每年至少会进行一次塔罗、占星咨询,这股热潮主要由Z世代与社交媒体推动。

如今,我们看到这两股力量——AI与神秘学实践——正以奇特而引人入胜的方式融合。从新晋从业者到资深从业者,越来越多的塔罗师开始借助AI解读塔罗牌。

这种结合之所以引人注目,是因为解读本身正是塔罗占卜的核心所在。然而,AI在给出建议时,往往对你的个人经历或独特处境知之甚少。

在2026年4月发表的一项研究中,我们调查了塔罗师将哪些工作环节交由AI处理,以及这项技术如何重塑他们的解读方式。

观察塔罗师将这一重要的解读环节交给AI时会发生什么,或许能让我们窥见实用型AI指导可能是什么样子,以及它可能在哪些方面出错。

神秘学实践的主流化

塔罗牌正迎来复兴。

塔罗牌最初并非灵性或占卜工具。它起源于意大利文艺复兴时期的一种流行纸牌游戏,随后传遍欧洲。

随着时间推移,塔罗师和神秘学家将源自卡巴拉、埃及学、数字命理学及其他神秘与象征传统的神秘符号融入牌面。20世纪初,英国出版商William Rider & Son公司推出莱德-韦特-史密斯牌,成为英语世界中最受欢迎的塔罗牌。

20世纪70年代初,市面上仅有几种塔罗牌,而如今流通的塔罗牌和神谕牌已达数千种。一副标准塔罗牌包含78张牌,每张都有其独特的象征意义。塔罗师利用这些牌来解答棘手问题,小到复杂的人际关系,大到国际事件:我该离开伴侣吗?这份工作值得坚持吗?唐纳德·特朗普和霍尔木兹海峡的局势将如何发展?

抽牌后,牌义解读需结合问卜者的问题、处境和人生经历。

例如,有人咨询感情问题抽到了塔牌,可解读为关系即将破裂,也可理解为错误假设终于被纠正。哪种解读更为贴切,取决于其他牌面、具体问题以及塔罗师对问卜者自身状况的了解程度。

这与AI形成了鲜明对比——即使完全不了解你当下处境和背景的种种细节,AI仍倾向于给出看似笃定的答案。

AI在塔罗牌占卜中的应用

在本次研究中,我们采访了12位塔罗师,了解他们在占卜时如何运用AI。

受访者分为两大阵营。

一方面,他们经常在自我反思过程中向AI寻求明确指引。借助AI解读牌面,他们可以避免针对所提问题解读多张牌面的挫败感。

假设有人在咨询职业转型时抽到了“愚者”和“权杖十”。“愚者”预示着踏入未知领域,而“权杖十”则暗示着身心俱疲和难以承受的负担。

但牌面究竟在说:“离开吧,你已筋疲力尽,更好的机会在等你”?还是在说:“即便离开,新工作压力同样大”?

与其纠结于这种模糊性,一些塔罗师直接让AI给出解读结论。

对于更具挑战性的解读,AI的“迎合式回答”能让塔罗师愈发笃定自己的解读。无论是参与者先抽出实体塔罗牌再用AI解读,还是直接使用AI模拟塔罗占卜,情况都是如此。

AI的这些应用场景极具诱惑力,它们让自我反思变得不再那么费神。但在更广泛的塔罗社群中,我们发现不少人批评AI,担忧这项技术一味迎合的特性可能会削弱人们的直觉和推理能力。

AI作为批判性思考的工具

另一方面,我们采访的塔罗师也将AI作为挑战自身偏见与假设的工具,以此发现占卜中的盲点,或是那些在解读牌面时忽略的细节。

基于此,他们利用AI生成不同视角的解读,以便对比不同解读,从而判断哪种解读更能引起共鸣。有人甚至要求AI对牌面进行“客观解读”,因为AI似乎没有利益纠葛,不受个人偏见或动机的影响。

许多塔罗师在不愿“打扰”或“麻烦”朋友帮忙解读时会这样做。他们依赖聊天机器人建立能提供情感支持的单向互动关系——这正是学者们所称的“拟社会互动”的典型例证。

部分受访者甚至将AI生成的怪异内容或“幻觉”视为颇具深意的启示,恰恰是因为它们具有随机性和非预设性——这与随机抽取的一张塔罗牌仿佛蕴含着秘密信息别无二致。

这对AI的未来意味着什么?

AI本身正成为强大的新神谕。

在最新调查中,研究人员发现,高达87%的生成式AI用户将其用于“个人用途”,包括为人际关系冲突和心理健康问题寻求建议和情感支持。

有时这些聊天机器人确实能提供帮助。但与此同时,寻求建议者也可能产生情感依赖。有些人依赖这项技术获得陪伴和指导,而非亲朋好友。研究还发现,聊天机器人会助长妄想,甚至导致自残行为。

与此同时,从律师到心理治疗师,甚至牧师,那些经常提供指导的专业人士也在实践中运用AI。教皇利奥十四世最近告诫牧师们,切勿借助AI撰写布道词。

我们认为,至关重要的是不能将这项技术视为全知全能的真理来源。它固然能帮助用户开拓思路,但应成为助力自我反思的工具,而非取代自我反思。

在某些情况下,受访的不少塔罗师正是如此运用AI。他们借助AI挑战自身的偏见和假设,从而激发自我反思。这也为AI的发展指明了全新方向——技术不再直接给出答案,而是引导人们主动探索、寻找答案。(财富中文网)

齐夫·爱泼斯坦(Ziv Epstein):麻省理工施瓦茨曼计算学院博士后研究员;法尔纳兹·贾汉巴赫什(Farnaz Jahanbakhsh):密歇根大学电气工程与计算机科学助理教授;瓦娜·戈布洛特(Vana Goblot):伦敦大学金史密斯学院媒体、传播与文化研究讲师

本文根据知识共享许可协议从The Conversation转载。

译者:中慧言-王芳

If you’ve ever turned to artificial intelligence to try to figure out how to handle a tricky situation with a friend or colleague, you’re far from alone. For many, AI has become a modern oracle – a source of guidance, emotional support or clarity in moments of uncertainty – though critics worry that they could lead to emotional dependence on the technology.

Of course, the urge to seek answers from forces beyond ourselves is hardly new. For generations, people have turned to psychics, astrology charts or tarot cards for reassurance.

Once fringe, these practices have increasingly become mainstream. According to a 2025 Pew Research survey, nearly 1 in 3 Americans consult tools such as tarot or astrology at least once a year, interest that’s thought to largely be fueled by Gen Z and social media.

Now, we’re seeing these two forces – AI and occult practices – meeting in strange and fascinating ways. An increasing number of tarot readers, from novices to seasoned practitioners, have been turning to AI to help make sense of their tarot readings.

What makes this pairing so striking is that interpretation is the whole point of tarot. And yet AI often brings little knowledge of your history or your unique situation when it dispenses advice.

In a study published in April 2026, we examined which aspects of the practice that tarot readers were delegating to AI, and how the technology was shaping their interpretations.

Watching what happens when readers hand that important interpretive step to AI may offer a glimpse of what helpful AI guidance could look like – and where it could go wrong.

The mainstreaming of occult practices

Tarot cards are experiencing a revival.

Tarot did not start out as a spiritual or fortune-telling tool. It began as a popular card game in the Italian Renaissance, before spreading across Europe.

Over time, readers and occultists layered the cards with mystical symbolism drawn from Kabbalah, Egyptology, numerology and other mystical and symbolic traditions. In the early 20th century, the British publisher William Rider & Son released the Rider-Waite-Smith deck, which became the most popular tarot deck in the English-speaking world.

Whereas only a handful of tarot decks were being published in the early 1970s, today thousands of tarot and oracle decks are in circulation. A standard tarot deck contains 78 cards, each carrying its own symbolic meaning. Practitioners use the cards to sit with hard questions, which can range from difficult relationships to world events: Should I leave my partner? Is this job worth it? What’s going to happen with Donald Trump and the Strait of Hormuz?

After cards are pulled, their meanings are interpreted through the lens of the reader’s question, circumstances and life history.

Someone asking about a relationship and drawing the Tower card, for instance, might read it as impending rupture, or as false assumptions finally giving way. Which reading fits depends on the other cards, the specific question and what the reader already knows about their own situation.

This stands in contrast to AI, which is primed to produce a seemingly definitive answer, even when it’s unaware of the nuances of your situation and context.

The adoption of AI in tarot reading

For our study, we interviewed 12 tarot practitioners about their use of AI in readings they did for themselves.

They generally found themselves pulled in two directions.

On the one hand, they often sought explicit guidance from AI in the process of self-reflection. By using AI to interpret the cards, they could sidestep the frustration of interpreting many cards in light of the question asked.

Say someone drew the Fool and the Ten of Wands for a question about a career change. The Fool points toward a leap into the unknown, while the Ten of Wands speaks to burnout and an unsustainable load.

But do the cards say, “Leave, you’re exhausted and something better awaits”? Or “Leave, and the new job will be just as demanding”?

Rather than sit with that ambiguity, some readers simply ask the AI for the meaning of the reading.

An attendee at Google’s 2025 I/O developers conference wears Android XR glasses with Gemini AI, which she’s using to interpret a tarot card. Camille Cohen/AFP via Getty Images

For more challenging readings, AI’s “yes man energy” helped them feel more confident about their interpretations. This was true for cases where participants both drew physical tarot cards and then interpreted them with AI, or used AI to directly simulate tarot readings.

These uses of AI are seductive. They make the act of self-reflection less demanding. But within the broader tarot community, we found a lot of criticism of AI, and there were concerns about how the sycophantic nature of the technology could undermine people’s intuition and reasoning.

AI as a tool for critical engagement

On the other hand, the tarot readers we interviewed also used AI as a tool to challenge their own biases and assumptions – blind spots in their readings, or what they might be missing in their own interpretation of the cards.

Along these lines, they used AI to generate alternative perspectives so they could compare the different interpretations and see which resonated more. And some even asked for an “objective reading” of the cards, because AI appears to have no skin in the game and be unburdened by personal biases or motives.

Many readers did this when they didn’t want to “bug” or “pester” their friends for help with a reading. Instead, they relied on chatbots in a one-sided relationship that feels supportive – an example of what scholars call parasocial interaction.

Some interviewees even treated bizarre AI-generated outputs or hallucinations as meaningful precisely because they were random and unintended, the same way that a card drawn at random feels like it carries a secret message.

What does this mean for the future of AI?

AI is becoming a powerful new oracle in its own right.

In one recent survey, researchers found that up to 87% of generative AI users are consulting the technology for “personal applications,” which includes advice and emotional support for relationship conflicts and mental health struggles.

Sometimes these chatbots are genuinely helpful. But at the same time, advice seekers can also become emotionally dependent. Some rely on the technology for companionship and guidance instead of friends and family. Chatbots have also been found to nurture delusional beliefs and even lead to self-harm.

Meanwhile, professionals that regularly give guidance are using AI in their practice, from lawyers to therapists and even priests. Pope Leo XIV recently urged priests to resist the temptation to use AI to write sermons.

We think it’s important to make sure the technology isn’t seen as an all-knowing source of truth. It can certainly open up users to new ideas, but it should be a tool to enhance self-reflection, rather than one that serves as a substitute for it.

In some cases, that’s what the tarot readers in our study did. They tapped into their own capacity for reflection by using AI to explicitly challenge their own biases and assumptions. This points to an alternative blueprint for the future of AI – one in which the technology doesn’t simply hand you answers but keeps you actively engaged in the process of finding them.

Ziv Epstein, Postdoctoral Associate, Schwarzman College of Computing, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); Farnaz Jahanbakhsh, Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Michigan, and Vana Goblot, Lecturer in Media, Communications and Cultural Studies, Goldsmiths, University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开