It’s easy to see why synchronicity has mass appeal; it provides meaning and order in an otherwise random universe.
Comment: To me, this is an inaccurate and unduly biased view of Jung’s idea of synchronicity. Any half decent Jung scholar could refute several points found in this article but I’m not a staunch believer in Jung – that is, I’m not a Jungian – so I don’t feel any great need defend his work here.
However, I will say that I find it ironic – almost a joke – that such a biased and spiritually lifeless piece is published on a site called “Live Science.”
For those interested, check out my Ph.D. which argues that Jung was well aware of biased skeptics like we find above. As a result, he introduced the idea of synchronicity with great care and deliberation, almost as a poststructuralist would but before the idea of poststructuralism gained ascendancy over structuralism.
- Short entry about synchronicity I wrote in 2016: https://earthpages.wordpress.com/2016/09/09/synchronicity/
- Another in 2011: https://epages.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/synchronicity-new-age-fantasy-or-face-of-the-future/
- 1997 Ph.D. Thesis, Synchronicity and poststructuralism: C. G. Jung’s secularization of the supramundane: https://ruor.uottawa.ca/handle/10393/9564