How to explain synchronicity?

[Brian Wachter]

Frequent coincidences of the meaningful variety have haunted me for years. But maybe not so much any more thanks to relational quantum mechanics. If interactions are the ontological primitive, rather than objects, my interaction with my surroundings has room for such happenings as, say, a cat food commercial popping up the instant I mention the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment.

I suppose mind at large has an explanation for synchronicity, as well, but I haven't encountered it in my reading of Kastrup. Do any of you know BK's take? And what's your thinking?

[Soul_of_Shu]

Frequent coincidences of the meaningful variety have haunted me for years. But maybe not so much any more thanks to relational quantum mechanics. If interactions are the ontological primitive, rather than objects, my interaction with my surroundings has room for such happenings as, say, a cat food commercial popping up the instant I mention the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment.

I suppose mind at large has an explanation for synchronicity, as well, but I haven't encountered it in my reading of Kastrup. Do any of you know BK's take? And what's your thinking?

I expect that BK's take on synchronicity would be in line with Jung's. You may have already read it, but in Decoding Jung's Metaphysics, he dedicates Chapter 4 to that topic.

[Brian Wachter]

I expect that BK's take on synchronicity would be in line with Jung's. You may have already read it, but in Decoding Jung's Metaphysics, he dedicates Chapter 4 to that topic.

I have DJM but must admit I find it cringeworthy and haven't read far in it. While I felt liberated by "The Idea of the World"—my inspiration for visiting this board—it is perhaps both my wide familiarity with Jung and BK's effort to formalize Jung philosophically that turned me off to DJM. I was expecting a Jungian primer, not a Jungian lexicon. Perhaps I'll give it another chance, thanks to you.

[DandelionSoul]

My sense is that it's basically as you say -- our environment and we ourselves are steeped in an interconnected web of meaning, so unexpected points of contact within that web follow pretty naturally. RQM would not deny the web of meaning, only its grounding in a preexisting, singular, unified Mind.

[DandelionSoul]

As a followup, from a perspective where there is a singular, unified M@L, Freya Mathews writes in For Love of Matter pretty extensively on the poetic way in which the world-consciousness communicates with individualized consciousnesses -- synchronicity is a part of her whole theory of eros.

[Brian Wachter]

As a followup, from a perspective where there is a singular, unified M@L, Freya Mathews writes in For Love of Matter pretty extensively on the poetic way in which the world-consciousness communicates with individualized consciousnesses -- synchronicity is a part of her whole theory of eros.

That's interesting. I've always had the intuition I was being communicated with through these events. I just couldn't figure out what the world-consciousness was trying to say

[AshvinP]

Frequent coincidences of the meaningful variety have haunted me for years. But maybe not so much any more thanks to relational quantum mechanics. If interactions are the ontological primitive, rather than objects, my interaction with my surroundings has room for such happenings as, say, a cat food commercial popping up the instant I mention the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment.

I suppose mind at large has an explanation for synchronicity, as well, but I haven't encountered it in my reading of Kastrup. Do any of you know BK's take? And what's your thinking?

I am not sure why you disliked DJM so much but, as Dana pointed out, you won't get a better analysis of the MAL-idealism connection with Jung's synchronicity concept than what BK wrote there. I thought DJM was very approachable for people well-versed in Jung and those new to him alike. Great footnote quote by the way!

[SanteriSatama]

My sense is that it's basically as you say -- our environment and we ourselves are steeped in an interconnected web of meaning, so unexpected points of contact within that web follow pretty naturally. RQM would not deny the web of meaning, only its grounding in a preexisting, singular, unified Mind.

Yep. Synchronicities can be uncomfortable in many ways when they start bubbling up. Overabundance of meaning can be quite "psychotic". But in time you can get used to them, and find your balance.

[Brian Wachter]

I am not sure why you disliked DJM so much but, as Dana pointed out, you won't get a better analysis of the MAL-idealism connection with Jung's synchronicity concept than what BK wrote there. I thought DJM was very approachable for people well-versed in Jung and those new to him alike. Great footnote quote by the way!

I'm not sure either In picking up basically where I left off—right at synchronicity coincidentally—I have a much more favorable impression this time. His exposition of the QM foundations of Jung's theory is detailed and clear.

[Jim Cross]

Frequent coincidences of the meaningful variety have haunted me for years. But maybe not so much any more thanks to relational quantum mechanics. If interactions are the ontological primitive, rather than objects, my interaction with my surroundings has room for such happenings as, say, a cat food commercial popping up the instant I mention the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment.

I suppose mind at large has an explanation for synchronicity, as well, but I haven't encountered it in my reading of Kastrup. Do any of you know BK's take? And what's your thinking?

Cat food commercials are fairly frequent on television so the odds are good if you mention the Schrodinger's Cat thought experiment a commercial for cat food could follow.

You need to look at the Law of Truly Large Numbers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_tr ... ge_numbers