> [Krimel] > I have suggested in this forum several times that synchronicity does not > just point to underlying causal connections; it IS causality. Causality > being meaningful coincidences at occur with nearly 100% probability.
[Platt] Unless you ignore the meaning of words, probability (the chance that a given event will occur) is not the same as cause (an agent of change). In other words, probability doesn't make apples fall from trees. [Krimel] The meanings of words hopefully change with increased understanding. No one has suggested that chance is causal but it is descriptive and can help narrow the range of causation. What does "cause" an apple to fall from a tree and at what instant and where and what does it mean? Is it simply the passage of time? A stiff breeze? A bird landing on a branch? A youngster plucking it to hurl at a dog? A person plucking it to eat? In what form is it when it finally hits the ground? Round and red, green and unripened, brown and mushy, broken down as animal waste? Where does it land and on what? What does it mean when it falls? Does it cause the theory of gravity to form in a young Newton's noggin? Does squash a bug that carries a germ that might infect the antichrist and save us all from final judgment? None of this can be "determined" in advance or perhaps even after the event. But probabilities can be stated for all of the above with greater or lesser precision. Synchronicity combines the notion of co-incidence or the temporal relationship of events with their meaningfulness. Thus I would say that causation is a special case of synchronicity. moq_discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
