I was surprised to find a long dissertation about ethics posted on a website for self-designated psychics. [UPDATE: The link that I originally supplied here no longer works.] The post itself was also full of surprises, such as the revelation that there is a “Tarot Certification Board of America’s Client Bill of Rights,” which declares, among other things, that…

“Tarot readers are not qualified to give medical advice unless they are physicians. Tarot readers are not qualified to give financial advice unless they are qualified financial advisors. Tarot readers are not qualified to give legal advice unless they are attorneys.”

This is all good ethical advice. Notably missing, however, is the statement that “Tarot readers are not qualified to tell individuals what the future holds in store for them since it is impossible to discern this from reading novelty playing cards.” For the vast majority of psychics who are frauds and know it, a professional code of ethics is an oxymoron, a sham, and quite possibly a marketing and public relations device, itself part of the deception. But what about the rest of the professional psychics, those who are frauds but who don’t know it? Is it possible to mislead and deceive people ethically if you don’t realize that’s what you are doing?

It is. If atheists are correct in their assumptions, this is what ministers, priests, rabbis and other religious officials do on a daily basis. They may be unwittingly deceiving trusting believers about the source of their wisdom and guidance, but they are still capable of giving good and helpful assistance in an ethical manner. Similarly, sincere people who call themselves psychics interact with people in an environment of trust, and what they do can be done more or less ethically. A code of ethics is one way to push them toward more rather than less. It is not as effective a way as convincing them to take up another profession, like professional bowling, but it is better than nothing at all.

The article had another surprise in store, however. The proposed Psychic’s Code of Ethics wasn’t a code of ethics at all. It was, instead, an endorsement of subjective ethics, providing some guidance about how to refine them. “Decide how you will handle this situation!” the article says, again and again. Think about what you consider the right thing to do! For example…

“Make an agreement with yourself now about where you stand with honesty, and what you will do when your boundaries are pushed. Write this in your personal code of ethics.”

And if your agreement is, “I will lie my head off whenever it suits my purposes,” I guess this is all right.

The article is not without value. It touches on many ethical issues that a real code must cover, such as bias, conflicts of interest, and confidentiality. The problem is that it elevates integrity to the only truly essential ethical value. The important thing, the author believes, is not what a particular psychic’s ethics are, but whether the psychic has thought about them in advance, and consistently applies the same standards.

It isn’t only psychics who think about ethics this way, unfortunately. That is why real ethics codes are so important. A profession needs to have consistent standards of conduct, and agree on what it considers right and wrong. Those who deal with the profession need to know what their trust and reliance are based upon; those who enter a profession need to know what kind of conduct is expected of them. A professional ethics code that says, in essence, “do what you think is right” is using inspiring words to provide false guidance.

Just like psychics.