Natural truth is essentially a phenomenon supported by causality, repeated often enough to be empirically validated. This excludes many phenomena that cannot be measured empirically due to their rarity or the difficulty in observing them repeatedly. This “tyranny of causality” demands that nature, to validate itself, must reproduce the same phenomenon countless times.
The absolute validity of natural laws is simply statistical truth, confirmed only when observing macroscopic phenomena. But when examining smaller quantities, predictions become less reliable, as the microcosm does not always conform to known natural laws. Events of this kind are sporadic, unique, and ephemeral, making them unsuitable for empirical science beyond mere documentation as often as possible.
The reality of non-causal events is apparent, as a given event may be the result of an individual’s psyche; however, wider research can reveal similar occurrences elsewhere. Therefore, “synchronicity” can be understood as the manifestation of a psychic event coinciding with an external physical event, which defies simple “chance” or “coincidence” when supported by numerous observations, though not enough to be admitted into the “sacred temple” of scientific statistics.
Often, what is believed to be coincidental may in fact be causal. Synchronicity is thus distinct from coincidence. The synchronistic phenomenon appears to arise from the emotional influence of the observer. In experiments on ESP (extrasensory perception), the strong emotional engagement necessary for synchronous events seems essential. When a subject’s interest wanes, the frequency of synchronistic events decreases, yet when another subject joins, the occurrence of these synchronistic events rises.
ESP studies show that distance does not limit the experiment’s outcome. Differences of hundreds of kilometers seem irrelevant, and the temporal order of events also appears to be unaffected. ESP experiments suggest that, for the mind, space and time are “elastic.” As the unconscious takes “control” of the conscious, time and space seem to lose their conventional meaning, especially when we consider time as a mere unit of measurement for our perception of the mutable world around us.
Synchronicity phenomena make sense if we acknowledge the existence of a “collective unconscious,” though, personally, I do not believe it to be “entirely unconscious.” Archetypes, responsible for the results in ESP experiments with images and numbers, are pure mental abstractions and thus qualify as archetypes. These archetypes produce an “emotional” effect, lowering the level of rationality and allowing the unconscious to occupy this cognitive space.
Outside of ESP, documented synchronicities link unconscious activity to the physical events involving the subjects. The notion that strong emotions or feelings can influence synchronistic phenomena is not new, even appearing in ancient ceremonial magic texts (Avicenna, Liber Sextus).
To summarize: synchronicity is the unconscious image that enters our symbolic awareness and coincides with an objective situation for which we lack direct information, thus defying the tyranny of causality, and by the extent of its connections, cannot be attributed to mere coincidence.
This synchronicity also appears to connect with astrology, and its alignment with the psychophysiological configuration of individuals. Jung, in Synchronicity, states, “Statistical material showed an improbably coincidental combination, both in theory and practice, with extraordinary alignment to traditional astrological theories. Its occurrence is so improbable that no one would have dared to predict it. It seems as if statistical material was arranged to yield a particular result.” Jung attributes this “coincidental quality” to the investigator’s interest in obtaining specific results, thereby causing a certain synchronicity. In my opinion, Jung may have overlooked the fact that he is studying third parties rather than himself, although he does accept Rhine’s ESP experiments.
Regarding mantic (divinatory) experiments, Jung links their effectiveness to the emotional component, often necessary for synchronicity. On the collective unconscious, Jung states (p. 84): “The collective unconscious cannot be localized, as it is either complete within each individual or the same everywhere. One can never be sure if what seems to occur in one individual’s collective unconscious isn’t also happening in other individuals, organisms, things, or situations.” He then illustrates synchronicity and adds on p. 85, “For the unconscious psyche, space and time seem relative; that is, knowledge exists in a continuous space-time medium where space is no longer space, and time is no longer time.”
Jung persistently seeks rational explanations for his experiments, even though he provides ample material that might lead in another direction, eventually conceding only “a hidden relation or meaningful connection between natural events” (p. 87).
In chapter three, Jung references Chinese Taoism as a philosophy of the divine, implicitly bearing synchronicity as the Signifier of things. This suggests a connection between Tao and the Hermetic concept of the All. He then cites other thinkers and philosophers—many with similar ideas regarding a kind of knowledge unconnected to ego, unconscious yet self-existent. In this part, the Hermetic maxim “as above, so below; as below, so above” is subtly present, alongside the notion of a unified humanity, as expressed by Hippocrates (p. 97), Philo (p. 98), Theophrastus (p. 98), Plotinus (p. 99), Pico della Mirandola (p. 99), Agrippa von Nettesheim (p. 101), Paracelsus (p. 105), Kepler (pp. 106-108), and many others.
In chapter four, the conclusion of Synchronicity, Jung concedes that he can advance no further hypotheses and that it may be necessary to abandon the idea of the psyche as solely connected to the brain. He revisits ancient philosophers not to claim their ideas as his own, but to present them, quoting Geulincx and Leibniz, who consider the coordination of the physical and the psychic as a divine act of a non-empirical, and therefore transcendental, nature (again, I recommend reading the book). Jung shares an experience of this nature (p. 122) involving a detachment of the psyche during a critical experience (astral travel?). He speculates that the secondary nervous system, distinct from the spinal brain, may have its own psychic processes. Later, he reiterates that synchronicity relates to unconscious nervous processes, that “magical” processes are subjectively convincing yet difficult to demonstrate statistically.
Jung, despite himself, sees the collective unconscious as the personal capacity to create similar abstractions among people but does not concede that it might connect the entire human species. He avoids positing that some part of our psyche (or soul, or spirit?) could serve as an entryway to knowledge shared among thousands of people with similar mindsets, experiences, and knowledge, as this would require handing these studies over to metaphysics, which would explain synchronicity but lacks empirical or statistical grounding.
To me, Jung ultimately appears to be a “closet” metaphysician/occultist/pagan (in modern terms), subtly hinting at numerous pieces of evidence without directly involving himself. Or, as someone famously said, “What you see, you don’t question”.
