response 1 of 27:

Mar 5 18:01 UTC 2008

That's not synchronicity. It's seeing things that are already on your mind.

response 3 of 27:

Mar 6 09:13 UTC 2008

To anyone caring to read this: Come on, people. Is the notion really so boring
that you cannot afford to drop a line or two about it? At least, tell me it is
indeed boring.

Re #1: The point is, I have been living in this world for some time, almost
avidly listening to lots of diverse music during the more active part of it
(say, past 8 years, and I am 23). I had listened to, or at least read about,
almost anything anyone cared to mention to me, even in passing; despite my
incapability to appreciate quite a lot of it. Anything from Scarlatti's Salve
Regina to Bach's Matthaeus Passion, to Arvo Paert's In Memoriam Britten, to
Philip Glass' Akhenaton, to Love Me Tender, to Joshi Juni Gakoubo's lame/light
imitations of classics, to Pink's latest hit song.

And... all this time, I had not heard of one the greatest rock bands ever. I
know my ignorance is not limited to that, but then, this specific case is truly
glaring. Then, by sheer chance, I come to learn about them and like their music
and guess what, in less than two days I get so much of them and similar bands I
cannot even handle.

Sure, I did search for the Grace Slick photo, but I did not put that clearly
persian rug in the background. And I did not even ask a friend for the movie
Persepolis. It came with a batch of DVDs which by another strange coincidence
also contains Oliver Stone's cinematic biography of Jim Morrison and The Doors.
See? I do not think this whole thing is just because I have been more
sensitized to JA material for the past few days. It is more like if you get
involved in something all the paraphernalia somehow attached to your original
cause come flying to you.

Re #2: You are so absolutely right! Though, she is not a "kid" in there, if you
meant that seriously.

response 5 of 27:

Mar 6 13:46 UTC 2008

That never helped me understand the Airplane. I always understood they were
stoners and trippers, but I certainly gained no further insight after doing
the same things myself. OTOH, reading about the whole Haight-Asbury scene gave
me a much better understanding of the music that arose in SF, though I can't
say my rather tepid enjoyment of the "sound" increased very much.

response 7 of 27:

Mar 6 16:34 UTC 2008

   <<< winter agora #385 linked as music #53 >>>

response 9 of 27:

Mar 6 21:04 UTC 2008

  isbn  0-553-34321-1       corpytriter  1987  f. david peat, auth.
  

response 13 of 27:

Mar 7 10:42 UTC 2008

Re #9:

I read about the book you are recommending tsty:
http://www.scimednet.org/bibliography/trans_jungian_synchronicity.htm

It says:

"Peat, F. D. (1987). Synchronicity: The Bridge between Matter and Mind. New
York: Bantam. ISBN 0-553-34321-1.

This is another attempt to relate synchronicity to developing ideas in science.
It begins in a Newtonian universe of mechanism and ends in a Bohmian universe
of limitlessly unfolding and transforming consciousness. The book is thin on
examples and doesn't convey much of the experienced quality of synchronicity,
but it provides some useful theoretical perspectives."

Having had formal education in physics, I was utterly disgusted by the phrase
"Bohmian universe of limitlessly unfolding and transforming consciousness."
Either the person who wrote that paragraph or the book's author is harboring a
hopelessly distorted understanding of quantum mechanics.

Synchronicities provide an interesting subject to talk and think about, I
think. However, I know of no mainstream scientific experiments focused on
proving that they do exist as distinct phenomena and are not simply statistical
oddities or by-products of subjective judgement. Let alone connecting them to a
rather well-known, if not mainstream, interpretation of quantum mechanics (the
Copenhagen school is mainstream today, not without reason).

Re #10:

I actually do not see where the CD versus Vinyl (or digital versus analog)
debate fits in this talk. And, "given how it seems almost fashionable for sound
snobs to rail against digital audio" has very little (or nothing?) to do with
the coincidence I described in #0, or... it does and I am pretty dumb?

Re #12:

"The humans agents do not necessarily be unknown to each other unless you want
to argue that such effects have causality and hence lie outside the true
definition that jung coined."

I want to rule out the probability that two related people may have (quite
innocently) cued me into something they share as a common interest, or have
perhaps talked about quite recently. For instance, you may begin hearing more
and more about a certain band at school/work shortly after being introduced to
their work by some pal of yours and think it to be a synchronicity, when it is
actually a new student/colleague (who happens to be a fan of the band) roaming
around, making new relationships, and sharing their interests.

"I thought you said a friend gave you a stack of CDs that contained related
material."

That "I did not ask a friend," meant I did not talk to anyone about it and also
that it did not come to me by any planned means. The batch of DVDs I received
was not even intended for me. It was my brother who had been making a to-watch
list of movies for some time and then asked a good friend, some weeks ago, to
prepare the batch for him. The batch could have been ready a week later, or a
week sooner, but happened to be ready just less than 18 hours after the talk I
mentioned in #0. There were technical details involved that did not depend on
human interaction (that is, no asking/proposal/offer/by-talk). Hence, a
counter-argument against calling that unifying principle a "subconscious,"
which sounds very human.

"Here's a somewhat similar occurrence that Jung himself had..."

Question is: are you (or was Jung) going to equip the collective subconscious
with a knowledge of future events to account for such occurences? Or would you
drop the concept in favor of another interpretation?

"er...I didn't mean "gnosis", I meant EPIgnosis."

You mean, something "divine" or religious is involved in the LSD experience? I
ask that because you are using a term from the New Testament. Perhaps you only
mean "first-hand experience."

response 15 of 27:

Mar 7 13:05 UTC 2008

"Perhaps you only mean "first-hand experience."

Heh..yes. I'm definitely not advocating LSD usage for a religious
experience. In fact, I think you do well to not have first hand
knowledge. I am just saying that bands from that era ,who were really on
the edge, were all performing and writing  under the influence of LSD.
It's hard to    perceive that aspect of them unless you have been
somewhat exposed to" tripping"  

response 17 of 27:

Mar 7 14:02 UTC 2008

I'm not sure that last sentence is necessarily true. Folks like the Grateful
Dead were known to live an a fairly permanent drug-induced state. I doubt they
sobered up to write and record.

response 19 of 27:

Mar 7 17:04 UTC 2008

and I don't think all the "bands from that era"  were all in drug induced
states of consciousness, adn they certainly didn't all use the same drugs.

The counter culture itself had a major influence on the music world, and 
Phil Spector and his "Wall of Sound" techniques were responsible for a lot
of the sound coming from that period.  (okay, it had nothing to do with the
words, but a lot to do with the sound)

response 21 of 27:

Mar 7 20:35 UTC 2008

"And I probably need to go back in time and lose a parent to WWII to
properly
relate to Pink Floyd."

Only if your basis of relation is based solely on the wall( their second
greaset commerical success)

You would have to be a tripper to relate to "meddle" or "umagumma"

Just about anyone could relate to "wish you were here" and "animals"
anyone in the modern business world that is.  

response 23 of 27:

Mar 8 08:11 UTC 2008

Re #17 and #18:

I always thought being on alcohol or hallucinogens would almost totally disturb
one's capability to function normally. You could probably be inspired by
hallucinations but then you would not be coherent enough to "record" it. Unless
you are being supported by a large crew of people who get you all you need,
somehow sit you in front of the mike, and let you improvise. Syd Barrett's
album The Madcap Laughs was recorded almost in that manner. Although, it does
not represent the best of Barrett; instead, it signals his decadence. The album
contains many unsuccessful takes, and in them Barrett times over leaves the
band behind to improvise or to mock. Those takes are really pitiful.

Re #20:

He is not found guilty of it yet. There is evidence supporting his innocence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Spector#Murder_charges

Re #21:

A Pillow of Winds or Seamus from Meddle seem quite comprehensible to me.
Ummagumma also presented few problems, specially because I had previously
heard The Grand Vizier's Garden Party mixed on a short film that wonderfully
matched the music.

Re #22:

Intersting. Anyone else?