Archive through October 18, 2000
The ClubHouse: The Game - Discussion Room: General :
Do you believe in Synchronicity?:
Archive through October 18, 2000
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 10:21 am  Synchronicity is the mysterious phenomena of strange things happening for supposedly 'coincidental' reasons -- which may in fact be due to the forces of synchronicity. Let me tell you a story -- the Death Thread started me thinking about this. Many years ago, a man grew up in Nova Scotia and across his lifetime became a famous writer. When he became famous he traveled far and wide. But when he came home to Nova Scotia to visit, he always told his loved ones, "I want to be buried here, in our little village by the sea, in Nova Scotia, because I love it here so much and it has been so important to my formation as a human being." He always believed and understood that this would happen. Years later, a worldwide influenza epidemic is causing literally millions of deaths. Our writer from Nova Scotia is traveling in Texas on his many cultural engagements. He catches influenza and dies. So many people were dying, and the disease was so contagious, that victims had to be buried where they died. The Nova Scotia writer was buried along the Gulf Coast of Texas, far from his homeland. Flash to many years later -- during hurricane season -- the wind picks up and waves crash on the Texas coast as a hurricane arrives. The storm surge crashes on shore, and across the many hours of the hurricane's landfall, the local cemetery is inundated with water. Towns people are horrified to find that graves have burst open. Some of the coffins are watertight, and float away, out of sight. The Nova Scotia writer's coffin meets such a fate. Two years later, in Nova Scotia, in the writer's beloved little village by the sea, a young woman walking along the beach is startled to find a coffin on the sand. It is the writer's coffin. For in death, the writer had clung to his wish and had returned home to be buried. === This is a true story, well-documented. If you have trouble believing it, go to your local library and look up 'synchronicity' -- you are more than likely to find a book on the subject containing this mysterious and perplexing event. |
Katie | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 10:54 am  Nice story Ocean. lol |
Sandyc | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 11:03 am  I've always believed synchronicity to be when two or more unconnected things happen at the same time and end up being for the same purpose. Coincidence is when two unconnected things happen at the same time. Add in the purpose and it becomes synchronicity. Sort of like fate getting things together in order to create a happening or understanding or state of being. The difference in understanding synchronicity seems to be the time factor. But yes... the writer ending up where he wanted to be... fulfilled his purpose. I always thought of synchronicity as being created by 'God' or 'Cosmic Consciousness' or whatever you call it. If that is so than there must be a reason 'cosmically' why his body needs to be there. Doesn't Jung have something to say about synchronicity? I can't quite remember. But I digress from my live feed duties. Great topic. |
Wcv63 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 11:16 am  Syncronicity has been called the root of coincidence. And yes SandyC, Jung became facinated with syncronicity and tried to prove the existence of odd but related coincidences with mathematical equations. "Portable Jung" I believe. Syncronicity can be described as seemingly totally unrelated events that all come together in one huge incredible coincidence. |
Sandyc | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 11:32 am  I looked it up in my encyclopedic dictionary: "Synchronicity -- coincidence that is felt to be significant or meaningful; especially, in the philosophy of CG Jung, the simultaneous occurrence of two or more events that seem to be linked in a meaningful or significant way without apparently being causally related, as, for example, the sudden stopping of a clock at the moment of a person's death in the same vicinity." Which reminds me of a such an occurrance in my life... My three finches died at the same time as my brother died suddenly and unexpectedly. Within the same hour. Strange stuff. |
Digilady | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 12:03 pm  Absolutely. !!! |
Adven39 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 12:56 pm  I'll offer a contrary view just to be obtuse. Also because I'm cynical and haven't had lunch yet. The world is full of millions and millions of random, unconnected events that happen every second. The odds of there seeming to be a synchronistic connection from time to time between any two events, in mathematical terms, is pretty good considering the sheer magnitude of human activity and our capacity for drawing parallels. Any significance we draw from them, however, comes from our perception of the events, not the events themselves. In other words, if the lifespan of a monkey was a billion years and you put a billion of them in front of a billion typewriters, at some point, one of them would, by pure chance, write "Hamlet". We would be astounded if it was the first monkey on the first typewriter, but less so if it happened after a few million years of typing. It is the conclusions we draw from the circumstances under which something improbable happens that makes it appear mystifying. |
Vasix | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 01:00 pm  I agree with Adven. Unless in the next two minutes the song Synchronicity starts playing on all our radios... |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 01:09 pm  The monkey at the typewriter idea has been statistically disproven, but it makes a nice story. A monkey might type some words, but Hamlet? No. Here's another incident of synchronicity: A man and a woman were very good friends, but not lovers. Due to the circumstances of life, they married and moved some distance apart from each other. Being convinced of each other's worth, however, they did manage to meet, not for trysts, but for the purposes of friendship, on a regular basis, across many years. They liked to meet in a town situated between where they lived, and this town overlooked the ocean. It was their favorite place, especially a certain hill overlooking a bay. At one point, the woman said, "My husband has been transferred overseas, we're moving and I don't know when we will be able to see each other again." They promised to meet in five years, at that very same spot. They realized the unlikelihood of their being able to accomplish this but at the same time they were determined. As it happens, after a couple of years, the woman was killed in an unfortunate accident. To honor their friendship and the memory of his very good friend, the man went to the spot on the hill five years from the time they made the promise. As he stood on the hill overlooking the water, his eye caught a piece of paper on the ground, just a scrap. He picked it up. His friend's first name was printed on it. They both had kept their promise. |
Adven39 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 01:42 pm  Ocean, I don't agree that the monkey/Hamlet suggestion has been statistically disproven. If one of them is capable of writng a few words purely by chance, as you acknowledge under this scenario, then, reasoning exponentially, they are capable of a few more words or a lot more words. The number of words or the possible combinations that might arise are not finite, therefore, any combination is not only possible, it is a statistical certainty that all combinations of words will eventually be typed - including Hamlet. It is just a matter of time multiplied by the number of monkeys. Besides, whether that arrangement would ever translate into Hamlet is irrelevant. If the first monkey only wrote a few words, we would tend to be astounded and draw a larger inference from it than actually existed. |
Sandyc | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 01:54 pm  Adven39 -- "Any significance we draw from them, however, comes from our perception of the events, not the events themselves" and "It is the conclusions we draw from the circumstances under which something improbable happens that makes it appear mystifying." 'Our perception of events'. Seems to me that that is what shapes our lives. Each of us will see an event in a different way. Just because it's through different eyes, into a different brain. But who, because each of us are different, can say that their perception is the right one.? And can our collective unconscious not exist? Our conclusions are drawn to demystify the event. They lead us to our faith, our spirituality. Not necessarily a good thing, seeing as it could all be just imagination, or lead to a form of hell, if we let it. Yet, I believe in Karma -- as you sow, so shall you reap. With the above quote in mind, I would like to know if you believe that all of our being is shaped by our thoughts. That is to say - If we change our thoughts we can change our feelings and our physical state therefore. And from that, that each of us is responsible for our own feelings -- meaning that no one can hurt my feelings unless I choose to feel hurt. Are we getting convoluted here or what? |
Adven39 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:11 pm  SandyC, you make some valid points and I do have a rebuttal, but, I think, you're right, this is getting convoluted and maybe not of much interest to anyone other than you, I and Ocean - and I think we're rapidly losing him. If you'd like to take this off the board and e-mail me directly, I always love a philosophical debate, even if it resolves absolutely nothing. |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:16 pm  Absolutely not -- don't do that, others might want to join in, that's what the board is for. Adven, I'm sorry but what you were saying is pretty much gibberish. Your drawing inferences to possibilities is the exact fallacy I'm addressing. And SandyC, why are you quoting the Bible to justify a belief in Karma -- which appears nowhere in the Bible? |
Adven39 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:21 pm  Possibly, Ocean, but what is synchronicity, if not an inference? |
Elitist | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:24 pm  OK since I have been lambasted for only posting in the Banish Vykin thread, I thought I would add my thoughts here (and then you may wish me to go back). Synchronicity - nice definition, nice stories. But lets get to the root of what we are talking about here. Synchronicity is one of the bastions of New Age spirituality - i.e. there is no such thing as coincidence, that there is always a "purpose" behind everything that happens, and that "enlightened" beings can perceive and manipulate their environment such that they create favorable coincidences. Unforunately, this lies in the same realm as ESP, UOFs, and ghosts. Though a majority of people will tell you they believe in them, there is really no evidence that they exist. And truthfully unless there is hard evidence, it is more likely that these things are our minds doing what it tries to do best - trying to make order out of chaos. Now saying that, I try to keep an open mind. I have had experiences that I would like to say were ESP or UFOs or ghosts or synchronicity. But when I look at them critically, I am certain they were my mind organizing and explaining events that really had no order or explanation. Back to my hole. |
Sandyc | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:29 pm  Ocean - I didn't realize it was a bible quote. Is it? I was trying to explain what I meant by Karma. Maybe what the bible says is 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' - but that seems a limited explanation as to what karma means to me. And 'justify'? |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:33 pm  It is actually a theory. |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:35 pm  Further on the Monkey Hamlet issue, here is an article which will help you understand why you are wrong: "The Mathematics of Monkeys and Shakespeare" http://www.nutters.org/monkeys.html |
Adven39 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:37 pm  All theories are inferences until they become accepted as fact. |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:41 pm  If ever. I hardly said Synchronicity was fact. |
Resortgirl | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:42 pm  WOW, you guys are really smart! |
Adven39 | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:49 pm  I've read it, Ocean, and I'd have a lot more confidence in it if it came from a recognized academic journal and not someone who refers to what he has to say as a "constrained rant". Elitest and Vasix, get your collective asses back here. |
Elitist | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:51 pm  Theories are never facts. They are constructs that are put together to explain current observed phenomena and knowledge. Once a theory has been postulated, it is then subject to scrutiny by experimentation that either proves, disproves, or modifies the theory. So where is the experimentation on this "theory"? All I see is a bunch of anecdotal references trying to prove it is a universal concept. And please point me to a reputable source for discussion on this - a quick web search brings up sites ranging from new age to magic - nothing I would consider an authoritive source. |
Ocean_Islands | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:54 pm  Well, I just found that bit just now. I've seen more supported, similar articles elsewhere but I can't remember where. But if you look at the principles involved I think you'll see that they are sound. The universe has not existed long enough to produce this monkey creation. lol. But let's go back to Synchronicity. Have you ever telephoned someone, and after you compose the number you are surprised not to hear a ring. There's no dial tone either. You say hello, and your friend is there. He had just picked up the phone to dial you! Why did this happen? |
Elitist | Wednesday, October 18, 2000 - 02:54 pm  Also your Nova Scotia story is nice, but sounds too much like an e-mail scam for me to believe. It only needs "Send this to everyone you know" to make it perfect. Can you give me a source for it also? |
|