On 11/21/2013 5:08 AM, Brian Swale wrote:
> Moose wrote
>> On 11/20/2013 7:08 PM, Brian Swale wrote:
>>
>> I don't see how this can be mere coincidence.
>>
>> "Mere" coincidence? Carl Jung would disagree.
>>
>> Psycho Moose
> That's possible ( I am familiar with several of Jung / Laurens van der Post
> writings).
Some people read Jung's theory of Synchronicity as though it's some sort of
attractor between events that are
meaningfully connected. Whether that's how the Universe works or not, it's not
Jung's idea. He is specific in defining
it as acasual.
When viewed as 'meaningful coincidence', it's also easy to assume the meaning
comes first, with coincidence somehow
coming out of meaning, which falls into causality again.
Another view is that the Universe is chock full of coincidence, and we only
tend to notice those that are consonant with
inner material. We notice them because the symbolic similarity to inner
material leads us to project it onto the events.
We then have a chance to notice both the event and the meaning consciously,
thus bringing inner, previously unconscious
or misunderstood material into consciousness. The quality of meaning comes from
within, not from without, although it
tends to look the opposite to the ego.
My guess, with your coincidence, is that the synchronicity is already in the
event that happened, not in what it might
lead to. The psychic event has already occurred. The ego tends to look toward
future outcomes as its effect, but
whatever comes of it is another event or series of events.
> I'm checking it out ... Not expecting any miracle.
To the extent that a miracle is a occurrence of synchronicity, it may not be an
expected event.
Swimming In Synchronicity Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|