jung becomes jung

7/27/2019 Jung Becomes Jung

1/6

NeuroQuantology|September2010|Vol8|Issue3|Page354358

LimarIN.,SynchronicityphenomenabyC.G.Jung

354

OpinionandPerspectives

SynchronicityPhenomenabyC.G.Jung:

Perspectivesof

Study

and

Possible

PsychophysiologicalSubstantiation

IgorV.LimarAbstract

Directions of researches, considering in any event the complex of

phenomenaspecified interminologyofanalyticalpsychologyauthor,Carl

G.Jung,assynchronicityphenomena,wereconsidered.Onthebasisof

availabledata

the

original

concept

was

proposed,

which

could

make

it

possibletoprovideatheoreticalbasis,interpretingobservationsoffamous

researchers, including from the psychophysiology position.

Interdisciplinary approach is applied in this material taking into

considerationstateoftheartprogressofthemodernscience.

Key Words: entanglement, synchronicity, psychophysiology,

consciousness,scatteringprocesses,electrostaticinteraction

NeuroQuantology2010;3: 354358

Formulation of the problem1At present, the practitioners of psychologicalservices widely apply variouspsychotherapeutic methods proposed withinthe one or other branches of psychology. Inparticular, the matter concerns personalityapproaches, such as classicalpsychoanalysis, humanistic psychology, aswell as at once so exotic and thriving trend

as so-called transpersonal psychology. Atthe same time, one should state thatpractical application of considerable part ofdiagnostics methods and subsequentpsychological correction passes ahead oftheir theoretical justification. In this respect,

Correspondingauthor:IgorV.Limar

Address:InstituteofInnovativeandPostgraduateEducation(IIPE).

Departmentofcomputerscienceandinformationaltechnologies,

Dvoryanskayastr.,2,Odesa,65026,Ukraine

Phone:+38048725 3687

Fax:+380487116533

email:

[email protected]

Received: April5,2010.Revised:April25,2010.

Accepted:June25,2010.

such trend of depth psychology as analyticalpsychology is not exception, which creatorwas Swiss psychologist, philosopher andpsychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung as is generallyknown. The complex of phenomena defined,as synchronicity phenomena in Jungsterminology is the most mysterious as well askey within Jungian psychology in opinionof the creator of such approach. Specialdiscussing of such trend of researches isdetermined by the fact that possibility ofinterpretation of such class phenomena runscounter to ordinary notion of physicalreality. However, more detailed study ofsome foremost results, obtained by themodern science, affords ground for lessskeptical consideration of synchronicityproblem. Although description of so-calledsemantic coincidences (also called assynchronicity phenomenon) had beenconducted a long time ago (Jung, 1969),

their research became topical just for the lastdecades. Such researchers as Mindell


2/6



355

(2000), Grof (1992) and some others work insuch trend. Breaking of the memoryadaptation theory is one of the mostdetailed researches (Tarlaci, 2006).Therewith other hypotheses were alsoproposed. For example, some theories are

based on comparison of synchronicityphenomenon with quantum entanglement(Carminati and Martin, 2008; Duch, 2002;Martin et al., 2009). Value of otherresearchers investigation S. Grof lies inattempt to provide a theoretical basis, whichprobably will illuminate quite specificmanifestations of mental life, based onhypotheses of Karl Pribram and DavidBohm. As is generally known theseassumptions postulate holographic analogyin attempt to describe psychophysiologicalmechanisms underlying nature ofconsciousness.

At the same time, proposed schemesallow to supplement them and, probably,modify them to some extent from thepsychophysiology positions.

All above-stated creates prerequisitesfor subsequent researches in stated area.

Purpose and formulation of task,research hypothesisBeing the consequence of trends stated inprevious section the purpose of this articleand formulation of task is to find outpossible mechanisms of synchronicityphenomena realization subject topsychophysiological constituent.

It is necessary to go into detail ondefinition and interpretation ofsynchronicity notion.

Synchronicity (by Jung) is thephenomenon, when event in outside world

meaningfully (i.e. semantically) coincideswith psychological condition of one oranother person. In general the Jungs notionof synchronicity comes to the fact that it isacausal connecting principle or class ofevents connected not by the reason, but bysense (i.e. dispersed in time and space).Causality is the philosophic principleunderlying the concept of the law of nature.Such is the methodology of the science.However if the connection between the causeand consequence becomes apparent onlystatistically, and is only relatively true per se,

then the causality principle rather relativelyfits for explanation of some naturalprocesses and therefore assumes existence ofone or some factors necessary forexplanation. One may say that connectionbetween the events under certain

circumstances is of other than causal natureand requires other principle of explanation.

Jung classifies the synchronicitymanifestation in the following way: 1)coincidence of observers mental state withobjective external event, taking place at themoment of such state and corresponding tomental state or its contents, where causalconnection between the mental state andexternal event is not traced, and where suchconnection can not exist taking into

consideration the mental relativity of timeand space; 2) coincidence of psychic statewith corresponding (occurring at the sametime more or less) external event, takingplace beyond the observers perception, i.e.at a distance, whereof one may ascertain onlylater on; 3) coincidence of psychic state withcorresponding but not existing yet futureevent, which considerably distant by the timeand which reality may be also determinedbut later on.

Obviously, that foregoing is

associated quite poorly with ordinary notionsabout determination of events by lawsknown to science. However, the possibility ofconsideration of similar synchronicitydisplays is demonstrated below from thepositions of natural-science approach.

For many years Jung was collectingcorresponding material but he did notpublish the results of his observations andtheir analysis relating to so-called acasualchances. Sometimes Jung made casual

mention of such problem in his papers,however it and phenomena related to it wereso extraordinary, that only in 1951 thescientist made a report On synchronicity,where he stated in general terms hisinvestigations in such area describinginconceivable coincidence. It should benoted that Jungs papers, representing quiteextensive material for general understandingof synchronicity phenomenon, does not seemto be rich in concrete examples. Beingconsidered as classical incident, when the

Jungs patient, having stated the meaning ofher dream, which key character was scarab


3/6



356

beetle, initiated appearance of such insecton sill of opened window in Jungs room,cannot be regarded as the most interestingexample. Really, incidents with correlation ofpeople behavior are far more informativeand demonstrative.

The case deserving attention is thatSigmund Freud described such examples(though in some other terms) more minutelythan Jung. Although the creator ofpsychoanalysis was materialist and strictlyadhered to points of his modern science.Also it is known that rupture between Jungand Freud occurred also in connection withsuch researchers divergence of opinionabout so-called occult phenomena.Specifically Freud described the occult

phenomena in his paper Introduction intopsychoanalysis: Lectures (Freud, 1966). Asis generally known the lectures from 1 to 28were published by the author before 1917.Subsequent sections, including lecture 30,which in fact stated synchronicityphenomena, were published by Freud only inthe thirties. Creator of theory of theunconscious stated the fact when contents ofdream became the event correlating withexternal incident beyond the directperception of such subject. This concerned a

fact when daughter of Freuds patient gavebirth to twins. Two more similar cases arestated further in lectures.

Jung believed that synchronicityphenomenon underlies his hypothesis ofcollective unconscious, which key ideas areso-called archetypes rather than being ofown significance. Jung believed thatsynchronicity phenomena cannot beconsidered in isolation from the structure ofcollective unconscious, having archetypenature. Swiss psychologist expressed his

opinion that some phenomena ofcoincidence or synchronicity are certainlystipulated by archetypes.

As to validity of such conclusions,extremely rich practical material shall betaken into account, whence the creator ofanalytical psychology had the opportunity ofdata deriving. It is known that he (as well asFreud) conducted about 10 analyses of thepatients states every day. At the same timehe found out coincidences, which were so

significantly connected and whichprobability of chance was expressed in

such figure, that they were obviously sensefrom the viewpoint of probability theory. Asit was mentioned above, in Jungs opinionthe semantic coincidences, which shouldbe distinguished from senseless chancegroups, are reposed on archetype basis. At

least all cases in Jungs practice (and therewere many of them) possessed suchdistinguishing characteristic.

Not only Jung appealed to the matterabout possible correlation of mentalprocesses stipulated by connection withsome external substance. Laureate of NobelPrize on physiology, John Eccles (Eccles andPopper, 1977), and Canadian top-rankingneurosurgeon, Penfield (1978) jointly putforward similar hypothesis in their time.

In addition, famous Italianpsychiatrist, Assagioli, appealed tosynchronicity phenomenon in his papers(Assagioli, 1975).

However without providingcorresponding theoretical basis and, surely,subsequent experimental verification, thesynchronicity hypothesis risks remainingonly bold assumption, being of less interestin the course of time.

At the same time, some up-to-date

trends of investigations, representing theforefront of modern science, are able toilluminate a number of problems inpsychology, including synchronicityphenomenon.

In particular, the matter is about suchnew area of physics as quantuminformation science. Such section ofphysical science is also called quantuminformation theory.

Many researchers, including Bohm

(1980) and Pribram (1971), conclude thatmany phenomena similar to synchronicitymay be interpreted within so-calledholographic paradigm. At the same time, it ispostulated that subjects psyche andconsciousness is indivisible part of universeand connected with other individual I in acertain way. According to holographicparadigm, as Grof noted, the consciousnessis the part of continuum in fact. Whereascorrelation of mental processes may bestipulated just by this mechanism.

Thereupon the hypotheses are put forward tothe effect how the mental processes of


4/6



357

different individuals may correlate at anydistance, and attempts of explanation(including of synchronicity phenomena) aremade. Such hypotheses may be based on thelatest achievements of theoretical physics,namely on quantum theory. As is generally

known description of quantum phenomenaby no means conform to our notion aboutthe nature formed during ordinary life. It isnotable that notions of the creator ofanalytical psychology were formed due to hisclose cooperation with theoretical physicist,Nobel Prize Laureate, Wolfgang Pauli, wholaid the foundation of quantum theorytogether with the others.

At the same time, the synchronicityprinciple has the properties capable of

solving mind-body dichotomy. It should benoted that such principles is motivelessorder indeed, or rather semanticorderliness capable of illuminatingpsychophysical parallelism.

It is evident that the character ofphenomena attached to synchronicity andtheir psychophysiology cannot be studiedwithin investigations of electrochemicaltransfer of nerve impulses.

Specific solution of synchronicityphenomena problem apparently may befound by investigation of such phenomenonas quantum non-locality in respect ofbiological objects. Such investigations areconducted by such authors as Duch (2002),Carminati and Martin (2008).

As is generally known quantumentanglement is referred to as quantum-mechanical phenomenon when quantumstate of two or more objects shall bedescribed in mutual interconnection, even ifseparate objects are dispersed in space.

Hereupon the correlations between observedphysical properties of the objects appear.

Described behavior of microcosmobjects is capable of the most functionalappearing as mechanism whereby suchmental phenomena may be realized as thesynchronicity phenomena are. Howeverstudy of synchronicity phenomena supposesto conduct analysis how similar phenomenamay be realized within biological objects andhuman organism in particular.

Many researchers tend to apply tointerpretation of biological processes from

the positions of quantum mechanics. Articleof French researcher, Ogryzko, is of specialinterest therein, since it is the paper wherepossible meaning of such phenomenon asquantum entanglement is considered forprocesses taking place in DNA and its

environment (Ogryzko, 2008).

Key supposition about possiblemechanism of synchronicity phenomenonrealization is existence of quantumentanglement of genetic materials ofdifferent subjects.

Both origination of quantumentanglement because of scatteringprocesses, and quantum entanglementbecause of fluorescence resonance energytransfer (FRET) may be the ways for

realization of such mechanism. Formalismof the first process is described in paper ofMishima et al., (2004), wherein originationof quantum entanglement under electrostaticinteraction is examined. In turn, electrostaticinteraction in DNA is described in paper ofKornyshev and Wyncveen (2009). Asconcerns FRET, origination of quantumentanglement under such mechanism isdescribed in paper of Sekatskii et al., (2003).FRET also occurs in DNA, whereof it isdescribed for example in paper of Ota et al.,

(1998 ).

Solution of the problem ofdecoherence transformation of quantumstates, characterized by quantumsuperposition or so-called pure states, intoso-called mixed states goes beyond thescope of this article. It should be just notedthat one or another solutions of suchproblem are proposed by variousresearchers, in particular, in paper Ogryzko(2008).

Appeal of above-stated hypothesislies in the fact that origination of quantumentanglement between genetic material ofthe parents and descendants seems to bequite realizable. Really, in its time DNA ofdescendants interacted with the samegenotypes of the parents. By extrapolationof such assumption towards the people notof kin, one may assume existence ofquantum entanglement within quite largegroups of individuals. In addition, truth ofsuch extrapolation follows from relatively

recent obtained data about the origin of a


5/6



358

man from one center some hundredsmillions years ago.

It is obvious that within proposedhypothesis it is necessary to reject stereotypenotion about the role of electrochemical

transfer of nerve impulses in determinationof consciousness nature.

The hypothesis is based on theassumption that frame in its way, wherethe material carriers of consciousness arelocated, forms DNA of brain neurons. Inaddition, molecular orbital (electron shells)of nuclear DNA of nerve cells appears ascarriers of consciousness in fact. Thisperfectly conforms to the hypothesis of KarlPribram about holographic principle of brainfunctioning.

Conclusions and perspectives ofsubsequent researchesSummarizing the material given in the articleone may ascertain that study ofsynchronicity phenomenon is quite topical atpresent. First it is conditioned by the up-to-date achievements in the area of theoreticalphysics, namely of quantum theory.

Theoretical substantiation and experimentalverification of quantum entanglement allowsassuming possibility of synchronicityreasoning by Jung. As it was noted, suchpsychological phenomenon obviouslyconforms to stated quantum effect. Quantum

entanglement between DNA of brain cells ofdifferent subjects is proposed aspsychophysiological mechanism in thisarticle. In its turn, the mechanisms ofquantum entanglement origination undersuch conditions may be the processes ofscattering under electrostatic interaction inDNA, as well as fluorescence resonanceenergy transfer.

It stands to reason that perceptivitiesof such researches are defined by the

possibility of their experimental verification.Thereat the publications of such researcheras Thaheld deserve attention (Thaheld,2001; 2004). Continuous improvement oflaboratory equipment and development ofnew methods makes it possible to expectobtaining of acceptable data during the nextyears.

ReferencesAssagioli R. Psychosynthesis. A Manual of Principles

and Techniques. London: Turnstone Books, 1975.Bohm D. Wholeness and the Implicate Order.

London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1980.Carminati G and Martin F. Quantum Mechanics and

Psyche. Physics of Elementary Particles andAtomic Nuclei 2008; 39: 1079-1114.

Duch W. Synchronicity, Mind, and Mater. TheInternational Journal of Transpersonal Studies2002; 21: 153-168.

Freud S. The complete introductory lectures onpsychoanalysis. New York: W. W. Norton, 1966.

Grof S and Bennett Z. The Holotropic Mind: The

Three Levels of Human Consciousness and HowThey Shape Our Lives. San Francisco: HarperCollins, 1992.

Jung K. Synchronicity an Acausal ConnectingPrinciple. Princeton, New Jersey, U.S.A.:Bollingen Foundation-Princeton, 1969.

Kornyshev AA and Wyncveen A. The homologyrecognition well as innate property of DNAstructure. PNAS Early Edition 2009; 106: 4683-4688.

Martin F, Carminati F and Carminati G.Synchronicity, Quantum Information and thePsyche. Journal of Cosmology 2009; 3: 580-589.

Mindell A. Quantum Mind. Lao Tse Press, Ltd, 2000.Mishima K, Hayashi M and Lin SH. Entanglement in

scattering processes. Physics Letters A 2004;333: 371-377.

Ogryzko V. Erwin Schrdinger, Francis Crick andepigenetic stability. Biology Direct 2008; 3. DOI:10.1186/1745-6150-3-15.

Ota N, Hirano K, Warashina M, Andrus A, Mullah B,Hatanaka K and Taira K. Determination ofinteractions between structured nucleic acids byfluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET).NucleicAcids Research 1998; 26: 735-743.

Penfield W. The mystery of the mind. Princeton:Princeton University Press, 1978.

Popper KR and Eccles JC. The Self and Its Brain.Berlin, Heidelberg, London, New York: SpringerInternational, 1977.

Pribram K. Languages of the Brain. Prentice-Hall,

1971.Sekatskii SK, Chergui M and Dietler G. Coherentfluorescence resonance energy transfer:Construction of nonlocal multiparticle entangledstates and quantum computing. Europhys. Lett2003; 63: 21-27.

Tarlaci S. Jung's Error: Synchronicity. A New Theory.New Symposium 2006; 44: 151-156.

Thaheld F. Proposed Experiments to Determine ifThere is a Connection Between BiologicalNonlocality and Consciousness. Apeiron 2001; 8:53-66.

Thaheld F. An interdisciplinary approach to certainfundamental issues in the fields of physics and

biology: towards a unified theory. Biosystems

2004; 80: 41-56.


6/6

Copyright of NeuroQuantology is the property of NeuroQuantology and its content may not be copied or

emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission.

However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

jung becomes jung

Documents