Originally posted by Byrd
It's not synchronicity -- it's linguistics.
Maybe I'm off base, but I find it odd that someone who usually posts things so conventionally by-the-book and materialist would even entertain the
idea of synchronicities, which was used by Carl Jung himself to justify things like classical tenets of astrology. If you don't mind my asking, do
you even believe in synchronicities as proposed by Jung?
I read his first real exposition on the subject, and Jung said his theory was inspired by Einstein's ideas of the dimension of time having its own
shape to it that is variable depending on the frame of reference (Einstein and Jung were friends, coincidentally). By elevating one's emotional
energy, for example, one's own consciousness can approach a singularity with time that allows one's mind access to more and more archetypal forms
from which the universe is generated from a moment-to-moment basis. Thus access to "psychic" insight. Jung did experiments that proved that
emotional excitement and novelty increased subjects' ability to accurately "read" cards being shown in another room or at even greater distances,
and all this data is presented in the same book. As time went on and the subjects became bored with the experiment, their accuracy dropped, though
they weren't aware of it. This was a general trend that he noticed repeatedly and that defied random chance by the statistics, which would expect
only 25% accuracy (only 4 different cards were being drawn). One of his subjects achieved 100% accuracy in one session of testing, and the chances
of that randomly occurring were calculated as being astronomical.
It's a very interesting field of research and very easy to see why both the US and Soviets have spent so many resources investigating ESP and remote
[edit on 23-12-2008 by bsbray11]