Posted by
Steve Smith on
URL: http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/Re-comm-was-Re-FW-Re-Emergence-Seminar-BritishEmergence-tp3654051p3695396.html
I'll see your Synchronicity and raise you a double helping of
Confirmation Bias.
I don't know... adding discussions of the meaning of
"synchronicity" to "complexity" and "emergence" would add some exotic
spice to the otherwise "meat and potatoes" of Philosophy. Or if not
Synchonicity at least something that alliterates with it like
"Stigmergy".
It is interesting that Pauli corresponded with Jung (I have the
collection of that correspondence in book form) throughout most of
their careers on this and related topics. He seemed to (want to?)
take Jung and Synchronicity seriously.... Aside from the personal
friendship they struck up, it might have something to do with the
various paradoxes of subatomic physics including quantum effects that
he was wrestling with.
Pauli and colleagues coined the the term "the Pauli Effect" to describe
(tongue-in-cheek I am sure) the coincidence that experiments were prone
to fail in his presence. It is a nice corollary to many of our own
experiences with demos that only work when there is no (important)
audience.
I am no expert on Synchronicity but it has always struck me that there
are a plethora of alternate mechanisms for meaningful relation besides
direct, simple, causality but are nevertheless rooted in a causal
universe. They are generally described as "correlation" and there are
many recognized mechanisms that make sense in a "causal" world but are
not directly, causally connected. Parallel evolution and emergence
seem to be two obvious ones.
Purveyors of Newage and Mysticism often imply (or state directly and
vehemently) that meaningful connections that are not (directly)
causally linked is proof by counter-example that causality is an
illusion or not real or at least not the only way things work. I'm
enough of a "wishful thinker" to not discount possible extra-causal
connections, but I also believe that such phenomena as our own coveted
"emergence" and the ever-popular "parallel evolution" (which are based
in causality) explain *most* and could explain *all* of the phenomena
described by Synchronicity and *not* dismissable simply as
Confirmation Bias.
Sorry Doug, I just couldn't help myself... Coincidence or
Synchronicity? You decide.
- Steve
Nah. Let's go with philosophy. Again.
--Doug
On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Marcus G.
Daniels
<[hidden email]>
wrote:
glen e. p. ropella wrote:
Since
the domain of the operator is not inside the game, it
doesn't really add complexity to the system.
Wouldn't conversations about synchronicity be more fun anyway? :-)
Marcus
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at
http://www.friam.org