Tarot for decision making: criteria, two paths and the blind-spot card

Tarot for decision making is most useful when it does not issue an order. A difficult choice becomes more workable when you first state the decision in one sentence, define the criteria and red lines, separate facts from assumptions, and only then compare two paths. A good spread should show the benefit and cost of each option, the blind spot shaping your comparison, a possible third route, and one reversible test. The cards cannot identify a path that is objectively “meant for you.” They can expose the assumptions carrying your preferred answer and point to information that must be collected before a decision date.

For a long time, I asked a question that was almost too convenient: “Which option is right?” It let me avoid a less pleasant truth. Sometimes neither path is right in every respect; each protects one value and charges a different price. I remember a composite reading about a secure position and a more independent offer. The cards looked strongly favourable toward change, yet the notes contained no emergency-fund figure, no draft contract and no answer to what would happen if the new role ended early. We spent longer building the fact sheet than reading the spread. The sheet, not the impressive cards, made the decision clearer.

Put the decision into one sentence

A question such as “What should I do with my life?” contains too many decisions. Use a sentence with a deadline, two real options, one value and one boundary:

By [date], decide whether to choose [option A] or [option B] in order to preserve [main value] without crossing [red line].

Examples:

• by 15 September, decide whether to remain in the current role through the end of the year or accept a twelve-month contract in another city;
• before the next conversation, decide whether to continue a relationship in its current form or propose a specific change in boundaries;
• before paying for a course, decide whether to enrol now or first complete a free introductory unit and test the weekly workload;
• before the lease renewal date, decide whether to stay or look for a home closer to work.

The sentence does not flatten the choice. It shows what is actually being decided. When it contains a job, a city, a relationship and a financial plan at once, divide the problem. One spread cannot responsibly settle four separate decisions.

Before the cards: facts, assumptions and missing information

Create three columns. This simple distinction prevents an emotionally satisfying interpretation from being mistaken for evidence.

A card can bring attention to an assumption, but it does not move it into the fact column. The Seven of Swords does not prove deception. The Sun does not confirm a contract, mutual interest or future income.

Criteria: what does “better” mean here?

“Better” has no practical meaning until you define it. Choose four to six criteria that genuinely distinguish the options. For work, those might be:

• financial security;
• skill development;
• workload and health;
• autonomy;
• quality of management;
• effect on close relationships;
• reversibility;
• alignment with a long-term direction.

For a relationship, the criteria could be safety, respect for boundaries, willingness to have a conversation, compatible expectations and observable reciprocity. For relocation, they may include budget, legal status, housing, support, work, access to care and the ability to return.

Give each criterion an importance from 1 to 5. This is not a scientific score. Its purpose is to expose contradictions. You may say security is the most important value while repeatedly choosing on novelty alone.

Red lines: when an option leaves the table

A red line is not simply fear or discomfort. It is a condition that violates safety, law, consent, a central value or the maximum loss you can bear.

Examples include:

• resigning before receiving a signed offer;
• investing money you cannot afford to lose;
• being asked to hide material information from a partner or professional adviser;
• lack of consent around the body, personal data or property;
• moving without legal status, housing or a basic reserve;
• a relationship in which a boundary is met with threats, stalking or punishment;
• signing terms you do not understand and cannot have reviewed.

Write red lines before the draw. Otherwise a desirable card can become an excuse for making “just one exception.”

The Two Paths and Blind Spot spread

A useful question is:

“What do I need to see and verify in order to choose between option A and option B by my decision date, according to my criteria and red lines?”

Lay eight cards:

1. The central criterion. What must not disappear from view.
2. The resource in option A. What this path can genuinely provide.
3. The price of option A. Its risk, limitation or responsibility.
4. The resource in option B. What the second path may open.
5. The price of option B. Its risk, limitation or responsibility.
6. The blind spot. The assumption, wish or fear distorting the comparison.
7. The third route. A combination, negotiation, pause or different option not yet named.
8. The reversible test. A low-cost way to obtain new information before an irreversible move.

The decision date is not a ninth card. You set it from real deadlines. Legal, medical, financial and safety questions still require documents, data and appropriate professional help.

Complete example: stability or a one-year contract in another city

This is a composite case. Nina works for a stable company. She has an open-ended contract, a familiar team and a twenty-minute commute, but her work has barely changed for two years. Another company offers a role with greater responsibility, about 25 per cent more pay and relocation. The contract lasts twelve months. They need an answer by 15 September.

Facts before the spread:

• the present income covers costs and allows a modest monthly saving;
• Nina has roughly five months of normal expenses in reserve;
• the new company has sent a summary email, not a draft contract;
• relocation and a rental deposit would cost about one and a half months of expenses;
• she has no close friends or relatives in the new city;
• the new role includes project leadership, something she has wanted to learn;
• the workload is expected to be heavier, but the schedule is unknown;
• her current manager is willing to discuss an internal project but has promised nothing specific.

Her one-sentence decision is:

By 15 September, decide whether to remain in my current role until the end of the year or accept the twelve-month contract in another city, while keeping at least four months of reserve and not resigning without a signed agreement.

Red lines: no signed contract; savings below four months after moving; unclear duties or probation; pressure to resign before terms are settled.

The illustrative cards are:

1. central criterion — Justice;
2. resource in A — Four of Pentacles;
3. price of A — Eight of Swords;
4. resource in B — Three of Wands;
5. price of B — Ten of Wands;
6. blind spot — Six of Cups;
7. third route — Two of Wands;
8. reversible test — Page of Pentacles.

Reading one: option B may work after strict verification

Justice returns Nina to written terms and her own criteria. “At last, movement” is not enough. The Four of Pentacles represents a real strength of the current role: stability. Yet the Eight of Swords may show that stability has become constricting, particularly if Nina has not tested whether internal development is possible.

The Three of Wands supports a hypothesis of expansion. The new role may provide scope, experience and a wider professional network. The Ten of Wands points to the price: relocation, adaptation and management responsibility may arrive at the same time. The useful question is not “Is this a good job?” but “What workload, support and settling-in period are written into the offer?”

The Six of Cups in the blind spot could describe attachment to the familiar. It also allows a second possibility: Nina may be underestimating the material value of nearby support. Facts about housing, remote onboarding and the ability to visit home are needed to choose between those readings.

The Two of Wands suggests a third route. Nina does not have to choose between instant refusal and immediate relocation. She can ask for one month of remote onboarding, a later start date or a short office visit before signing. The Page of Pentacles turns this into a test: obtain the draft agreement, build a weak-scenario budget and live one week on the assumed schedule.

Reading two: the desire to leave may be an attempt to end stagnation at any price

The same cards support another interpretation. The Eight of Swords may not describe an objectively closed path. It may show Nina’s belief that development is only possible through resignation. The Three of Wands then represents an attractive distant prospect about which she has little concrete information. The Ten of Wands suggests that she may be romanticising overload as proof of serious growth.

The Six of Cups can be a resource rather than avoidance: established relationships, local knowledge and practical support. The third route may be to obtain a time-limited internal project while continuing negotiations with the new company. If the current employer cannot name authority, scope and a decision date, that becomes a new fact rather than a reason for another reading.

Do not choose between the readings by selecting the one that sounds more inspiring. Verify four conditions:

1. Is there a written contract with clear duties?
2. Does the budget survive relocation and a weak scenario?
3. Can simultaneous strain be reduced through a later or remote start?
4. Is the internal project real, with authority and a date, or only a hopeful conversation?

The blind spot may be in the wording, not the options

People often compare “security” with “freedom,” although the actual choice is known risk versus unknown risk, recognition in a familiar system versus learning in a new one, or postponing conflict versus having a difficult conversation now.

Ask yourself:

• Which outcome have I decided is the only acceptable one, and why?
• Whose approval am I waiting for before I permit myself to choose?
• Which cost am I calling temporary even though it may become permanent?
• What would I advise a friend who had exactly these facts?

A blind spot is not always a character flaw. It may be information that is simply unavailable. In that case, the most accurate reading is “there is not enough data yet,” followed by an action to obtain it.

A third route must change the structure of the choice

A third route may be:

• negotiating terms;
• running a limited pilot;
• delaying with a fixed decision date;
• sequencing the choice as “test first, decide second”;
• combining parts of two options;
• rejecting both;
• choosing a temporary bridge that preserves resources for the next move.

It is not “do nothing and hope.” “Request the contract by Friday, test the budget on Tuesday and decide on 15 September” is a route because it has actions and a deadline.

The seven-day reversible test

A reversible test does not recreate the whole future. It checks one important assumption at a limited cost.

Nina’s test contains four actions:

1. request the draft agreement, role description, probation details and termination terms;
2. calculate relocation costs and three weak months;
3. live seven days on the expected schedule, including domestic work and learning time;
4. have one direct conversation with the current manager about the project, authority and decision date actually available.

The success criterion is concrete. By the end of the week, Nina has written terms, a budget that preserves four months of reserve, an estimate of tolerable workload and a specific answer from her current employer. If a red line is crossed, the option is excluded without drawing again.

A matrix after the test

Score each option from 0 to 5 only after obtaining the new evidence. You can multiply the score by the weight, but a high total never cancels a red line.

The figures are illustrative. The value lies in challenging them. Why is development in option B scored five before the duties are written? Why is workload in option A scored four when stagnation already affects wellbeing? A matrix makes unsupported confidence visible.

A decision tree

1. Does the option cross a red line? If yes, stop considering it. If no, continue.
2. Is a critical fact unknown? If yes, set one action to obtain it. If no, continue.
3. Can the main assumption be tested reversibly? If yes, run the test. If no, reduce the stake or seek professional advice.
4. After the test, does one option perform better on the central criteria? If yes, choose it and write the first action. If no, consider a third route or consciously choose the cost you are prepared to carry.
5. Has the decision date arrived? Decide with the evidence available, or formally move the date and state exactly which missing fact justifies the delay. Do not let the deadline drift indefinitely.

Common mistakes

Asking the cards to choose for you. Responsibility disappears into interpretation, and later the spread is blamed for the consequences.

Comparing the dream version of B with the lived reality of A. Compare like with like: contract with contract, budget with budget, observable behaviour with observable behaviour.

Treating anxiety as proof. Anxiety may signal risk, old experience or exhaustion. Translate it into a question and a check.

Changing criteria after each card. A pleasing card makes a criterion suddenly important; an uncomfortable one makes it irrelevant. Write the criteria first.

Using the third route as indefinite delay. It needs an action, a criterion and a date.

Repeating the spread until the answer improves. Without a new event, another spread adds interpretations rather than evidence.

One practical action

Divide one page into four boxes: facts, criteria and red lines, two interpretations, and reversible test. End the reading with one line:

My current conclusion is [option or open question]. By [date] I will do [one action]. The result is sufficient if [criterion]. I will decide on [date] using [named evidence].

Do not turn the exercise into a list of ten tasks. One completed test is more useful than a long plan that preserves the feeling of progress without changing the decision.

Short answers

Can tarot tell me which option is correct?

Not as an objective fact. A spread can compare resources, costs, assumptions and boundaries, but the choice remains yours.

What if both options look bad?

Check whether they cross red lines, then formulate a genuine third route: negotiation, a dated pause, a pilot, a combination or refusal of both.

Should reversed cards be used?

Only if you chose that method before the reading and use it consistently. A reversal need not mean “no”; it may show delay, internal conflict or a resource being applied poorly.

Can I read the decision for another person?

It is more useful to examine your own sphere of influence: what you know, what you need, which boundary you will set and which conversation you will have. Cards do not verify another person’s thoughts or intentions.

When should the spread be repeated?

After the review date or a real event: a contract arrives, a conversation occurs, a test is completed or the budget changes. Do not repeat it merely because the first reading was uncomfortable.

A difficult decision becomes less foggy when it has a single sentence, criteria, red lines, two honestly described prices and a date. Tarot can reveal a blind spot, but the test of usefulness is not how elegant the interpretation sounds. It is whether you obtained new information, ran a reversible experiment and made a choice whose consequences you are prepared to own.

Open a decision spread and save the action with its review date in Reflecta

— Daniel Aster, Official Author at Reflecta