Coincidence and Synchronicity

Do you believe in synchronicity? Do you believe there are only concidences? Bit of both?

I started this on my wall but I think perhaps discussion might be better in a proper topic.

My own personal view.. I used to see synchronicity everywhere.. but now I think if you expect to see synchronicity, you will see synchronicity. So now I tend to assume coincidence.

If you always expect to see the number '33', you're going to see '33' and the number of events that have '33' associated with them is going to be large simply because of the number of things that happens in the world.

That said, I am not averse to the idea that things may be purposefully synchronistic, I just don't know how you would know either way. Although I did see something that seemed quite synchronistic this week.. so who knows.

http://tylervigen.com/

Indeed : P

'Correlation does not imply causation'

Hmm, funny you mention seeing numbers because you're looking for them...

A while back my favorite football team(american football, the REAL football :lol: ) won the championship, which was superbowl 37, interestingly enough, the final game of the season they won 30-7 (total combined points- 37), both of their playoff games each ended with a total combined score of 37...synchronicity? Coincidence? Or providence?

"Where others see coincidence, I see providence" -morpheus-

Its not unlike the number 23, or 27

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/23_enigma

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/27_Club

Expanding on what Khaos wrote, this is one of my favorite pages on the 23 enigma:
http://yiri.maniac.com/23.html

I observe synchronicity in my life regularly and use it as a gauge for (among other things) whether or not I'm moving in a direction that's right for me at a particular time. The number 23 (in contrast to the common interpretation) signifies a positive direction for me.

Synchronicity works as a sort of language that allows me to communicate with my subconscious mind and other mental, emotional, or physical aspects of myself to which I don't always have direct (or immediate) access. I believe there's an additional element to synchronicity that isn't currently scientifically verifiable, but I don't think a belief in anything other than the psychology of synchronicity is necessary to utilize it as an effective tool.

For me, the line that separates the truth of synchronicity and its fiction isn't relevant. I've found synchronicity immeasurably beneficial and useful over the years. My feeling is that it's pointless to concern yourself with whether or not your encounters with synchronicity are simple coincidences. It's not likely coincidental that your mind chose to focus on specific signs or symbols, and there is often something meaningful to take from that realization alone.

These are just my thoughts and opinions. You are welcome to PM me if you'd like to share some of your own ideas or experiences or want me to go into detail about mine.

Arcade wrote: Synchronicity works as a sort of language that allows me to communicate with my subconscious mind and other mental, emotional, or physical aspects of myself to which I don't always have direct (or immediate) access.

That makes sense to me.. a kind of psychological tool

Edan wrote: Do you believe in synchronicity? Do you believe there are only concidences? Bit of both?

I started this on my wall but I think perhaps discussion might be better in a proper topic.

My own personal view.. I used to see synchronicity everywhere.. but now I think if you expect to see synchronicity, you will see synchronicity. So now I tend to assume coincidence.

If you always expect to see the number '33', you're going to see '33' and the number of events that have '33' associated with them is going to be large simply because of the number of things that happens in the world.

That said, I am not averse to the idea that things may be purposefully synchronistic, I just don't know how you would know either way. Although I did see something that seemed quite synchronistic this week.. so who knows.

Interesting, If you mean it like:

:,, Synchronicity is the experience of two or more events that are apparently unrelated, yet are experienced as occurring together in a meaningful manner. It was first described by Carl Jung in the 1920s.''

:,,A coincidence (often stated as a mere coincidence) is a collection of two or more events or conditions, closely related by time, space, form, or other associations which appear unlikely to bear a relationship as either cause to effect or effects of a shared cause, within the observer's or observers' understanding of what cause can produce what effects.''

How can you be sure it is unrelated? How can you be sure it is unlikely within your understanding, or within your understanding?

Does this mean it is unrelated, if you could believe that the force binds the world?
Does this mean that we understand the physical or mental world?

Both talk about two or more events, about the relation between.. How should we understand relations between two events? How should we understand relations between two events if we can not describe our own perceptions?

Our minds are desperate for patterns... Part of being human means we like to make sense of things (our greatest skill), yet this also causes us to engage in ritualistic and supersticious behaviours... It's all about observations, and the observations are always correct (even if incomplete), it's the conclusions as to what caused an observed phenomenon that may or may not be correct.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uPmeWiFTIw

To use Akkarin's suggestion, What we do know is that when Nick Cage makes more movies people tend to drown more. This is an accurate observation....

But only an individual well-versed in Cage's work would actually ever suggest that the more movies Cage makes the more people accidentally get tangled-up in heavy cast iron chains and fall in swimming pools...
And this remains true until the tendency inverts into "the more movies cage makes the less people fall into pools", at which point it becomes clear that cage is either only partially responsible for the rise or fall of pool deaths, or not at all.

ren wrote: Our minds are desperate for patterns...

In my pattern I think you clarified the thread in more than one way