4) Libido's Casino: Cosmic Order and Synchronicity In A Chaotic Random Universe/enter Determinism and Probability

"Randomness, Determinism. Probability and Order" This blog provides an understanding of some recent discoveries about how our physical universe operates that have been developed since Jung and Pauli first postulated their concept of synchronicity.

The clearest expression of why it is so difficult to understand randomness was given by Heinz R. Pagels' (the late husband of Elaine Pagels' author of "The Gnostic Gospels") in his book "The Cosmic Code: Quantum Physics and the Language of Nature," 1983, New York: Bantam Books). Heinz tells us:

"Mathematicians have never succeeded in giving a precise definition of randomness or the associated task of defining probability. If you go to a math library you will find lots of books on probability. How is it possible to have so much written about a topic that has not been precisely defined? Why stands in the way of a precise definition? In part the problem of precisely defining randomness, or more specifically a random sequence of integers, is that if you succeed in giving an exact definition the sequence may no longer be random. Being able to say precisely what randomness is denies the very nature of randomness, which is utter chaos--how can you be precise about chaos?" (Pagels: 85, 1983).

In suggesting a metaphor that might describe randomness in nature, Pagels suggested we could conceive of the universe as a giant pin ball machine. Playing pinball requires both concentration and chance; this same combination of skill and opportunity makes us a better player in the game of life. Randomness is thus inherently elusive and paradoxical.

In their book "Order Out of Chaos: Man's New Dialogue with Nature." (New York: Bantam Books), Ilya Prigogine (Nobel prize winner) and Isabelle Stengers offered another view of the paradox of randomness. Whereas Progogine and Stengers point out in a universe that is purely random, philosophers and scientists have expressed their feelings of anxiety about such a world. Lenoble expresses this by asking, "How can we recognize ourselves in this random world of atoms? Must science be defined in terms of [a] rupture between man and nature?" (Progogine & Stengers: 3, 1984).

Jacques Monod has expressed this same feeling of alienation due to the randomness of nature:

"Man must at last awake from his millinery dream; and in doing so, awake to his total solitude, his fundamental isolation. How does he at last realize that, like a gypsy, he lives on the boundary of an alien world. A world that is deaf to his music, just as indifferent to his hopes as it is to his crimes" (Prigogine & Stengers: 3, 1984).

This feeling of alienation from nature and the universe is why psychiatrists like R. D. Laing say the worldview of modern science is schizophrenic. (R. D. Laing, "The Voice of Experience." New York: Pantheon Books, 1982). We want to believe in our science and we also want to have the meaning in our lives that religion offers us. The problem is how do we bring these two perspectives together? I have addressed this question in many of my past blogs and will continue to explore this question in future blogs.