RE: MD On Faith and coincidences

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Oct 24 2004 - 20:13:29 BST

  • Next message: David Morey: "Re: MD On Faith"
  • Next message: David Morey: "Re: MD is god real?"

     

    -----Original Message-----
    From: Erin
     I am a fan of Jung and do enjoy his writing on synchronicity. Although I
    wish he lived longer because I don't the term was fully explored and is
    still too vague right now for me to be happy and am patiently waiting for
    the next genius to work clear it up. Although synchronicity for me is
    'evidence' that everything is connected and notice the rate of them in my
    life changes with how connected to that idea I am. Although experiencing a
    synchronicity, mystic experience is lumped under faith for some and lumped
    under experience as others, which just furthers my confusion :-)
    If somebody dismissed every mystic experience you have had as 'faith'
    nothing more, even though for you it was an experience is a main problem
    with understanding people's distrust of this word. I can not provide any
    "proof" of synchronicities but I feel I have experienced them, regardless of
    whether you lump it as due to faith in them or not.
     
    dmb says:
    Right. Jung's synchronicity is not a precise idea and some further
    elaboration sure would be nice, but I suspect that such things are very
    slippery beasts that no amount of study can capture them entirely. And I
    whole-heartedly agree that its evidence of the underlying connectedness of
    'things'. Its one of those moments when the illusion of separateness suffers
    a glitch and we get a brief chance to see through it. As far as proof goes,
    the difficultly stems from cultural bias more than anything else. It doesn't
    fit into the paradigm and so there is not YET a body of experiments,
    reports, comparisons, etc., BUT there is no real reason why such an
    investigation could not be done. If fact I wouldn't be too surprized if
    somebody at Esalen or the Jung Institute has already begun. And finally, I
    think this is the kind of "evidence" that really does count as evidence in
    Pirsig's MOQ, with its expanded empiricism.
     
    Thanks.

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 24 2004 - 20:29:25 BST