Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Moments of Truth

Expand Messages
  • joseph baxter
    At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote: The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause & effect there is an acausal connecting principle: which he
    Message 1 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
    • 0 Attachment
      At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote:
      The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause
      & effect there is an "acausal connecting principle:" which he dubbed
      "synchronicity". For example, he relates a crucial moment in a client's
      therapy where she was relating a dream about a scarab beetle. At that point
      one flew in the window & Jung asked if this was the insect of her dreams &
      she said yes.

      Some years ago, on a Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court
      announced a decision upholding a conviction where an involuntary confession
      had been used against the accused at trial. It rocked the legal world with
      a stark moment of truth. One of the oldest and tallest pillars of law had
      been felled.

      3000 miles away in a northern California forest, on that same Monday
      morning, one of the tallest trees in the world fell (in a
      storm). According to newspaper reports the awesome tree seemed even larger
      on the ground. Stories high at its base, it stretched for more than the
      size of a football field.

      Jung's story seems to suggest that synchronicity can occur at a moment of
      truth.

      Joe

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jim Bauer
      ... From: joseph baxter To: gthomas@egroups.com Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:13 AM Subject: [gthomas] Moments of
      Message 2 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
      • 0 Attachment
        -----Original Message-----
        From: joseph baxter <joseph@...>
        To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
        Date: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:13 AM
        Subject: [gthomas] Moments of Truth


        >At 03:12 PM 9/30/2000 , you wrote:
        >The thesis entertained here is that besides ordinary cause
        >& effect there is an "acausal connecting principle:" which he dubbed
        >"synchronicity". For example, he relates a crucial moment in a client's
        >therapy where she was relating a dream about a scarab beetle. At that point
        >one flew in the window & Jung asked if this was the insect of her dreams &
        >she said yes.
        >
        >Some years ago, on a Monday morning, the United States Supreme Court
        >announced a decision upholding a conviction where an involuntary confession
        >had been used against the accused at trial. It rocked the legal world with
        >a stark moment of truth. One of the oldest and tallest pillars of law had
        >been felled.
        >
        >3000 miles away in a northern California forest, on that same Monday
        >morning, one of the tallest trees in the world fell (in a
        >storm). According to newspaper reports the awesome tree seemed even larger
        >on the ground. Stories high at its base, it stretched for more than the
        >size of a football field.
        >
        >Jung's story seems to suggest that synchronicity can occur at a moment of
        >truth.

        If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
        could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
        "acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
        are required by science & the scientific method. As I said, the acid heads
        in my dorm were passing the book around. It may be true that you can
        perceive synchronicity. Another friend of mine used to get thoroughly
        descoobied on imported beer & put the Psychedelic Furs on his stereo & The
        Dukes of Hazzard on TV to look for synchronicity. With the brain in a
        severely perturbed state.it seems one could experience it but that doesn't
        prove it actually exists. It seems me to be a recapitulation of an
        ancestral state where cause & effect weren't clearly undestood by the
        perceiving system. This is also one of the biological determinants of the
        existence of religion.

        Jim Bauer
        >
        >Joe
        >
        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        >-------------------------------------------------
        >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
        >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com
      • joseph baxter
        ... Jung called it acausal, but I don t see that as part of the necessary explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So it could
        Message 3 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
        • 0 Attachment
          At 09:31 AM 10/1/2000 , you wrote:

          >--
          >If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
          >could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
          >"acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
          >are required by science & the scientific method.

          Jung called it acausal, but I don't see that as part of the necessary
          explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So
          it could be that two things happening at the same time are the effects of
          causes. By way of example only, one could argue that both efffects are
          sympathetic responses to something larger, as opposed to one being the
          cause of the other. I believe that Jung himself meant something like this.

          Joe


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Jeffrey Glen Jackson
          Regarding synchronicity, I work on compilers, which are computer programs that translate programming languages, such as FORTRAN or C or C++ into machine
          Message 4 of 16 , Oct 1, 2000
          • 0 Attachment
            Regarding synchronicity, I work on compilers, which are computer
            programs that translate programming languages, such as FORTRAN or
            C or C++ into machine language. These programs are themselves
            written in a programming language and so are used to compile themselves.
            (Sorry for the long technical explanation -- I'm getting to the point
            soon). Now, the C compiler is written in C. A new version is compiled
            with an old version of the compiler. Then we recompile it with the
            new version we just compiled. Then, we do it again, and make sure
            this third generation of compilations is identical to the second
            generation. The new compiler compiled with the old compiler should
            generate the same results as the new compiler compiled with
            itself. However, if the new compiler has a bug, it might generate
            incorrect code for some portion of itself, causing the new compiler
            compiled with itself to behave differently than the new compiler compiled
            with the old compiler. More often than is reasonable, the module it
            generates incorrect code for is the module that has the bug that
            caused the incorrect code to be generated in the first place. This
            happens so often its downright spooky.

            Jeff
            http://www.jeff-jackson.com
          • odell mcguire
            ... Joe/Jim Excuse me for butting in, but it seems to me this synchroneity business poses something of a dilemma for the historian. No one trying to do
            Message 5 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
            • 0 Attachment
              joseph baxter wrote:

              > At 09:31 AM 10/1/2000 , you wrote:
              >
              > >--
              > >If you are willing to actually accept synchronicity as real I suppose it
              > >could exist. The problem with synchronicity is that it is purportedly
              > >"acausal". It is very difficult to reject the laws of cause & effect which
              > >are required by science & the scientific method.
              >
              > Jung called it acausal, but I don't see that as part of the necessary
              > explanation. As you put it, it is difficult to reject cause and effect. So
              > it could be that two things happening at the same time are the effects of
              > causes. By way of example only, one could argue that both efffects are
              > sympathetic responses to something larger, as opposed to one being the
              > cause of the other. I believe that Jung himself meant something like this.
              >
              > Joe

              Joe/Jim

              Excuse me for butting in, but it seems to me this 'synchroneity' business poses
              something of a dilemma for the historian. No one trying to do history from
              primary sources can accept the kind of seemingly meaningful coincidences being
              discussed without exhaustively eliminating all possibility of causal
              connection. If he does not hesitate to entertain the idea of simple coincidence
              he will never learn anything about his subject from his documents except what
              their writers want him to think.

              Coincidences happen. But some cannot be swallowed. I keep thinking of
              Jesus bar Ananias. According to Josephus (Jewish War.VI.300ff) this character
              was a peasant, a posessesed lunatic who, some four years before the war began,
              created an incident in the temple by repeating the words of his 'voices' at the
              Feast of Booths: "... a voice against Jerusalem and the temple (NAOS), a voice
              against bridegroom and bride, a voice against all the people" and carried these
              cries into the streets. "Woe to Jerusalem" he kept repeating. He was chastised
              first by 'leading citizens' and finally brought before the Roman governor and,
              when he refused to identify or defend himself, he was scourged 'to the bone.'
              Woe to Jerusalem.' he said. But he recovered and continued repeating his dire
              prophecies until he was finally killed by a ballista bolt during the last weeks
              of the siege in 70 AD.

              A total coincidence that a peasant named Jesus, thought to be crazy, speaking
              with the voice of a spirit, was involved in a temple incident, predicted the
              fall of city and temple before the war, was finally hauled before the Roman
              governor, refused to say who he was or defend himself, and was severely scourged
              -all a few months before Mark composed his tale--??? Some say so. But I smell
              fish, a barrelful. Else I am no historian.

              But I am nowhere near accepting as explanation the theory, currently being
              mentioned favorably by some on the Xtalk list, that Jesus, as Mark portrays him,
              was a Markan midrashic creation. (Partly based on an oral memory of Jesus
              Ananias.)

              What, then? The best I am able to come up with is that there *was* a lunatic
              Jesus Ananias who prophesied the destruction of the city, but probably after the
              siege began, and that he thereby got himself in somekind of trouble with the
              authorities and thus left a trace in the documents that Josephus worked with.
              (So far, an acceptable mass of coincidence; one can easily imagine kooks such
              as this in Jerusalem under siege and Jesus was a very common name; Josephus
              alone deals with some 20 Jesuses)

              But it was not enough by itself for a good Josephan story. (And they *were* all
              *very* good stories) By most accounts, I think, Josephus wrote 'War' in the
              80s. About 10 years after Mark wrote 2G. I suspect that Josephus had a copy of
              Mark's gospel in his library (or its predecessor PN), recognized the real
              parallels, and copied the rest to
              flesh out his story. If this is true, the real historical value of the Jesus
              Ananias 'coincidence mass' lies in the fact that Josephus had access to Mark
              before he wrote 'Antiquities' and the passages lying behind the Testimonium
              Flavianum. Etc. Etc.

              I love a mass coincidence in primary texts. As another Mark wrote about
              Historical Geology:

              "It yields such wholesale returns of conjecture out of a trifling investment
              of fact"
              From *Life on the Mississippi*
              --
              Best wishes, Odell

              Odell McGuire
              omcguire@...
              Prof. Geology Em., W&L
              Lexington, VA
            • Tom Ragland
              All that is being attempted is to abstract concepts and put them into a relational framework and intuitively deduce insights by the construction. This is the
              Message 6 of 16 , Oct 2, 2000
              • 0 Attachment
                All that is being attempted is to abstract concepts and put them into a
                relational framework and intuitively deduce insights by the construction.
                This is the basis for Kaballah (Quabalah, and other spellings), which is
                supposed to be the mystical tradition of Judaism going back to before the
                time of Jesus. Judaism sees three divisions in their tradition. The Bible
                (Old Testament, Torah and Prophets) is the physical set of rules and
                instructions for the physical molding to the covenant. The Talmud (which we
                in Christian tradition may think of the Church Fathers instead) is the
                mental reflection on the covenant, the logical arguments and conclusions.
                The Kaballah is the mystical gnosis, the direct intuitive link as reflected
                to the chosen by the archangel Metatron. There are countless books that
                show evidence of Kaballistic understanding in the writers of the books of
                Ezekiel and Isaiah, thus pushing the tradition back quite a distance. "For
                thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever and ever" ending to
                the Lord's Prayer is an obvious reference to Kaballah to anyone who has
                experienced the Tree of Life. All of this to say that Kaballah is a system
                of rearranging ideas according to themes and studying the relationships of
                these ideas at a level higher than that of rational logic. It is intuitive
                and inspirational and the Jews say that it is angels who guide the awakened
                insights that are received as if by intuition and an experience that cannot
                be put back into words. This is why the Kaballah is not a text but rather a
                drawing. The discussions about the deity in the ancient Gnostic texts prove
                that early Gnostic Christianity was Kaballistic. The "Self Begotten", the
                "Silent One", Christos, Logos, the Virgin Mother, the emanations and
                overflowings, the Sophia who wanted to know the Father and thus gave birth
                to the universe, the Zoe who is the etheric aura that sustains life--all
                relate back to the greatest treasure that Judaism has given to the world.
                It is all confusing contradictory words until placed in the organizational
                structure of the Kaballah. And then it all comes together, but in a way
                that you can't explain in just logical terms. But you can introduce someone
                to the Kaballah and have them come to the same realizations. Sort of a
                holistic reptilian primative understanding that dissipates in the light of
                the almighty logical ego trip. Heart over head once again. Seems to be a
                reoccuring theme of gnosis in general.


                On Fri, 29 Sep 2000 22:39:37 -0600, jbauer@... wrote:


                -----Original Message-----
                From: Andrew Smith <asmith@...>
                To: gthomas@egroups.com <gthomas@egroups.com>
                Date: Friday, September 29, 2000 6:18 PM
                Subject: [gthomas] Re: Saying 45


                >> I take this as another piece of internal
                >> evidence for the jigsaw puzzle theory, according to which the
                >reader
                >> is intended to rearrange parts of GoT - even to remove parts of it
                >-
                >> to form a different, more perfect, structure than appears at first.

                This sounds like the "Bible codes" which are so popular with
                Fundamentalists
                now. Just in case you're unsure what I mean, they do things like read
                every
                fifth word & then pretend some meaningful insight to what's really
                nonsense.
                The jigsaw puzzle is probably equally eroneous unless you can show how
                using
                Thomas this way actually produces any more coherent view of the whole. I
                think finding such "meaning" is probably of the same order as the meaning
                of
                dreams in the psychoanalysis game. Dennet used it in _Consciousness
                Explained_ (the title of which historian of science Bob Richards said
                should
                be followed by a question mark).

                Dennet uses it as an explanation of hallucination. The game consists of
                sending one of the party members as a dupe to leave the room while the
                remaider of the party concoct a dream for him to analyze. It is to be
                related to him by his asking the remainder yes-no questions When the dupe
                is gone the remainder agree that they will answer yes if the last letter
                of
                the last word is in the first half of the alphabet & no if otherwise. In
                short, the dupe concocts a dream out of the questions provided him. I'm
                afraid any attempt to break Thomas down into a code or jigsaw puzzle
                probably has you asking the same kind of questions & getting the same kind
                of answers.

                Jim Bauer
                >>
                >>
                >-------------------------------------------------
                >To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
                >To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com


                -------------------------------------------------
                To post to gthomas, send email to gthomas@egroups.com
                To unsubscribe, send a blank email to gthomas-unsubscribe@egroups.com



                Tom Ragland --> tomragland@...
                http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/8219/centuries/





                _______________________________________________________
                Say Bye to Slow Internet!
                http://www.home.com/xinbox/signup.html
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.