Aiachismo

by Carol Brauer

Nota do Editor: Não me perguntem como, mas Carol lê mesmo mãos. Anos atrás, ela fez uma leitura da minha mão que provou ser correta muito tempo depois.

Often, people tell me that palm-reading is nonsense because I am “making it all up”. This is obviously odd for someone who studies fiction to hear. Is fiction so worthless, or have we not instructed ourselves from it for centuries?

So we make stuff up, using guesswork or “intuition”, which science has shown to be no magical thing, but a series of calculations faster than the conscious mind can process or even detect.

Is that guesswork so worthless, or do we really have so little faith in our poor heads?

Admittedly, palm-reading is nonsense. For one, none of the books agree with each other. There are a number of features, characteristics, and shapes to look for in a palm, all of which, depending on who you read, correspond to certain personality features and tendencies. There is, however, no established method. And then given that Eastern and Western “methods” of reading are completely different, it can generally be said that palm-reading is nonsense, and there is no set of reliable rules for reading, nor is there scientific evidence or grounds for any of it.

But if we agree to enter the suspension of disbelief that fiction also requires of us (we’re not going to tell Cinderella that she is full of shit, are we? Pumpkin carriages exist for the purposes of her story), we can agree to those arbitrary correspondences between meanings and signs on our palms.

Even so, all we have is a map. Every reading is an interpretation: every individual is unique, and how the characteristics combine and interact with each other as a whole is far more important than giving a separate reading of each feature. Actually, it’s somewhat impossible to read one aspect without looking at the rest of the hand… not unless you want a truly erroneous reading.

And then palm-readers begin saying things that they may or may not be able to explain or justify. They just say them. That’s actually the most important characteristic of a palm-reader: being able to say something even though your rational side disagrees with it. It is surprisingly accurate, this picture you build of someone.

Let’s say there is an explanation, or several: that people are willing to believe anything said about them (try reading a couple of hands and you’ll find this to be far from true); that what are you reading is the persons gestures or behavior (still, we do this all the time and it is generally reliable). Let’s say it’s all just purely unscientific psychobabble.

Like, fiction. Like, poetry. Like, painting. Like, fables. Like… etc.

I think there is something important to be said for palm-reading: there are two sides to us – the irrational and rational side. Our subconscious mind escapes us, yet controls more of us than we are willing to admit. Why are we then so afraid of delving into a fictional world where someone is able to tell us who we are based on a couple of lines and shapes? Isn’t there something to learn from letting go?

Or are we such snobs to believe that our heads are capable of explaining everything? And do we believe our explanations? Such silliness. It’s much more noble to be willing to believe something foolish than to debase ourselves by clinging to calculations that have strong correlations with events in nature. One of our greatest priviledges is that we can invent our own worlds, believe them, and still stand firmly and upright on the ground beneath us. We can live in two worlds at once, or more if you’re brave.