Synchronicity

A Meaningful Coincidence

            Synchronicity is a universal concept. Bolan (1979) says, “As a concept, synchronicity bridges East and West, philosophy and psychology, right brain and left” (p. 7). Peat (1988) calls it a bridge between matter and mind. Jung (1973a) writes:

I chose this term because the simultaneous occurrence of two meaningfully but not causally connected events seemed to me an essential criterion. I am therefore using the general concept of synchronicity in the special sense of a coincidence in time of two or more causally unrelated events which have the same or a similar meaning, in contrast to “synchronism,” which simply means the simultaneous occurrence of two events. Synchronicity therefore means the simultaneous occurrence of a certain psychic state with one or more external events which appear as meaningful parallels to the momentary subjective state--and, in certain cases, vice versa.”  (p. 25)

            The simplicity of the idea is described by Bolan (1979): “To appreciate a synchronistic event, one needs the ability to note an inner subjective state, a thought, feeling, vision, dream, or premonition and to intuitively link it with a related outer event”

(p. 18). He concludes that “synchronicity suggests that the outer world really does reflect the inner world, not just that it seems to” (p. 59) and just as important: “synchronicity holds the promise that if we will change within, the patterns in our outer life will change also” (p. 61).

            According to Jung (1973a), synchronistic events are associated with the archetypes and “seem to rest on an archetypal foundation” (p. 24). He suggests that they are often generated by heightened emotions. Emotions lower consciousness while strengthening the unconscious (e.g. emotions will raise the horizontal dividing line shown in Figure 4). When this occurs, “the conscious then comes under the influence of unconscious instinctual impulses and contents” (Jung, 1973a, p. 30). 

When this emotionally charged archetypal level is active, then dream images of great intensity and symbolic meaning may arise, and synchronistic events are more likely to occur. Both dreams and synchronistic events are expressed symbolically, which shows their common connection in the collective unconscious” (Bolen, 1979, p. 19).

            Both dreams and synchronicistic events are expressed in symbols rather than words. Jung (1973a) defines synchronicity as comprising two parts:

Synchronicity therefore consists of two factors: a) An unconscious image comes into consciousness either directly (i.e., literally) or indirectly (symbolized or suggested) in the form of a dream, idea, or premonition. b) An objective situation coincides with this content. (Jung, 1973a, p. 31)

            This is a very loose definition which critics feel is too broad. Aziz (1990) writes:

Jung’s presentation of the synchronicity concept was greatly obstructed by the fact that he never developed a theoretical framework that would provide him with the means to discuss his position systematically....I would like to submit, therefore, that the term synchronicity be used specifically to describe the acausal connecting principle in the space-time world of the archetype. I would like also to propose that the conscious counterpart to this acausal connecting principle be termed the synchronistic experience or event. As explained here, then, whereas synchronicity is a phenomenon of the microphysical space-time world of the archetype, the synchronistic event, in contrast to this, takes place in the space- and time-bound macrophysical world of ego-consciousness. (pp. 58-59)

            Aziz (1990) also argues that we should recognise two types of synchronistic experiences. The first is one in which the compensatory activity of the archetype is experienced both inwardly and outwardly. The second type is one in which the compensatory activity of the archetype is only experienced outwardly. Speaking of this compensatory activity, Aziz (1990) says:

When, for example, the conscious attitude is in conflict with the unconscious as a result of a particular position it has assumed, the unconscious becomes activated to compensate this position. What then follows is a dialogue in which both sides exchange points of view. This exchange continues until a compromise that takes both positions into account is reached. In this way, a third, transcendent position is attained”. (p. 25) 

            Jung (1969) called this ability to compromise with a new third position the transcendent function. He devised the method of active imagination as a means to develop the trancendent function.

Whether or not the compensatory activities of the constellated archetype are, in connection with synchronistic events, experienced both inwardly and outwardly or outwardly only, it should be emphasized that for Jung the meaning that one encounters, and often feels overwhelmed by, is an objective meaning, a transcendental meaning present in nature itself.  (Aziz, 1990, p. 176)

            Jung (1969) believed that every person is, through the unconscious, coextensive with the totality of existence. In the deepest levels of our psyche, for example, lies the presence of an “absolute knowledge” which, moving into consciousness, provides us with insights into the events of outer reality, past, present, and future. According to Aziz (1990):

That the individual is conjoined with the totality through the unconscious is indeed one of the fundamental concepts of the synchronicity theory....With synchronistic experiences of “absolute knowledge,” then, both the inner and outer synchronistic events perform very precise and specific roles in what we might characterize as the compensatory strategy of the constellated archetypal pattern.  (p. 112)

            Jung (1978) believed the self to be much older than the ego and stated:

The self does not become conscious by itself....Since it stands for the essence of individuation, and individuation is impossible without a relationship to one’s environment, it is found among those of like mind with whom individual relations can be established. The Self, moreover, is an archetype that invariably expresses a situation within which the ego is contained. Therefore, like every archetype, the Self cannot be localized in an individual ego-consciousness, but acts like a circumambient atmosphere to which no definite limits can be set, either in space or in time (Hence the synchronistic phenomena so often associated with activated archetypes).  (pp. 167-168)