Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for insects as well as for the stars. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper.”
Albert Einstein
The “official definition” of synchronicity is vague and filled with concepts even more nebulous - concepts that lie at the foundation of the Western world’s core reality construct. A core reality construct (CRC) is comprised of concepts describing how we think the phenomenal world operates.
It is how we explain the how, when and why of what happens, has happened or will happen to entities or between entities.
Welcome to the tenuous world of causality or cause-effect. Synchronicity speaks about events that do not follow the linear cause-effect reality model upon which the classical Western worldview is built.
Synchronicity defined as an acausal (not having a direct observable cause) occurrence begins to wreak havoc on the linear model of Western cause-effect thinking.
Carl G. Jung was dismissed as a mystic and his synchronicity model was considered insufficient for the rigors of scientific testing. But that does not dismiss the phenomena of coinciding events which seem meaningful in some way to the observer.
Jung’s definition does not explain synchronicity. His explanation is only a definition of what characterizes a synchronistic event. Certain other psychological frameworks attempt to explain the phenomena according to the human propensity for certain cognitive biases.
In either case, neither the scientific dismissal nor the psychological treatment explain away every instance of synchronicity. There are some instances that simply fly in the face of a “rational” explanation. The argument of last resort for the “classical rationalist” is chance coincidence according to the “law of large numbers” which states that almost anything is possible given a large enough field of play and enough time.
No comments:
Post a Comment