coincidences

probability

at its extreme end, one might call them miracles. allow me to propose an intuitive definition: “the occurrence of an extremely unlikely event which lacks (an apparent) causal connection”. surely such a definition must also involve a discussion about probability, but how unlikely is sufficiently unlikely?

if you had to estimate it, what would you say? one-in-a-million?

inevitability

if you would, then consider the following. if you are awake for 8 hours per day, and during that time, experience one event per second that may give rise to a miracle, then on average, you should experience a miracle once every 35 days¹.

but surely a miracle experienced at that frequency would more readily classify as coincidence, and either miracles cannot exist, or we’ve made a mistake in our estimation.

acausal connectivity

whatever name you ascribe to these events, what is ultimately interesting about them either spiritually or probabilistically is when they start to pile up, as if entangled. i have previously written about chance and randomness: what i am interested with herein is their meaning, if indeed there is any.

connexity

chance encounters in foreign streets? perceived relevance in each other horoscopes? remote work arrangements? unprovoked photos of undisclosed apartments? olives?

synchronicity

to jung, these kinds of subjective experiences are a legitimate function of a healthy mind (or at least up until what conrad describes instead as apophenia).

i guess it remains to be seen if i will am due to descend into paranoid schizophrenia. with any luck, we’ll soon find out whether it is delusion, quantum intervention, fate or a statistical certainty.