Posted by araucaria
(here)
Carrying on from this post:
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post886200
Wolfgang Pauli’s contribution to Jung’s synchronicity theory occurred through his numerous numinous dreams and their interpretation, and through the highly destructive ‘Pauli effect’. He was notorious for smashing an experiment merely by turning up at a laboratory. Another time he looked up out of a café window to see a red car go up in flames. The same sort of thing happened to Jung in the presence of Freud when the two men were falling out. It is a destructive kind of ‘synchronous synchronicity’ (Remo Roth) which however is not acausal as a true synchronicity would be, since there is a kind of instant short circuit between the mental state and the external reality.
The causal/acausal issue I find somewhat confusing. On one level, the ‘Pauli effect’ itself is not acausal since it seemingly arose out of Pauli’s inability consciously to process the negative energy surrounding his divorce otherwise than by inventing the antineutrino, a particle of antimatter, a week later.
http://www.universetoday.com/51645/antineutrino/
It is easier to understand in terms of willpower. When you switch from the Logos ego (the skull brain) to the Eros ego (the gut brain), you switch off the will and go with the flow of the ‘unus mundus’ as it is called, the big All. Pauli’s taking of Jung’s psychology from metaphysics into the realm of empirical science, by observing observable phenomena, came at the cost of uncovering the metaphysical basis of quantum mechanics itself, since any single atomic decay is spontaneous, i.e. not observable, and hence collectively not observable either. This is highly paradoxical because it is quantum mechanics that places such emphasis on the observer’s crucial role. Hence, any venturing into nuclear mechanics, peaceful or otherwise, could only be through resorting to statistical methods, describing non-observable single decays. This assertion of the ego will is potentially catastrophic. I want to put in context a positive quote I made in the other post (‘Incarnation processes occurring in a few humans (…) could be accompanied by a parallel new creation and incarnation in the whole universe’) (my emphasis):
In the nuclear bomb, as in the nuclear power plants,
the acausal incarnation process of the anima mundi, the production of psychophysical radioactivity, is mimicked by the conscious will of the ego. By artificially producing antineutrinos (psychophysical radioactivity),
the conscious will of humankind would spoil the efforts of the anima mundi and create ‘children’ she does not want to give birth to. Thus the unus mundus would be charged with these destructive products of the sorcerer’s apprentices.
We shall see that the production of psychophysical radioactivity is also a process with an attribute that I call psychophysical nonlocality. In the case of the will-possessed sorcerer’s apprentices, this would mean that
the whole universe is contaminated by the artificial creation of psychophysical radioactivity. This catastrophic perspective could however be compensated by the conscious observation of singular psychophysical radioactive decays in one’s own body. Incarnation processes occurring in a few humans following the multiplication principle could be accompanied by a parallel new creation and incarnation in the whole universe. As these people conten[t] themselves with observing the spontaneous incarnation acts of the anima mundi in their bodies and do not do anything by will, such incarnations are positive and constructive. They could therefore compensate the destruction of the universe by this artificial psychophysical radioactive decay produced in nuclear bombs and nuclear power plants by the will-possessed and inflated scientific ego.
This is why I take my tennis so seriously – not in the sense of winning, but in terms of observing multiple singular spontaneous creative events that can be game-changers, literally in their own tiny local way, but also, since this effort is not scale-sensitive, as a contribution to this macrocosmic picture. No one said anything massively important needed to be done. The beauty of certain tennis shots is that they are
consciously observable (at least by me) as something else than the normal exercise of will in the application of practiced technique. This is crucial because being consciously observed is how they come about. This ‘in the zone’ play is not only beyond the scope of normal skill, it is also beyond the scope of the occasional fluke shot – when allowed to, an invisible hand takes over.
An example I was mulling over on waking up this morning was an occasion about ten years ago, when I was playing rather badly, thinking of my sister who had recently died, and hardly noticing we had a match point to save. For some reason, I suddenly thought ‘I don’t want to die’. What happened next was that my racket somehow made an unplayable return that I couldn’t have done on my own if I tried, and we went on to win the match. What was going on here? Saying ‘I don’t want to die’ sounds like the most extreme expression of willpower, but the double negative is actually on the contrary complete acquiescence in the life force. Life itself was saying that life is all there is, up to and including in the trivial here and now shape of this game of tennis. So, although on the brink, that was a game I simply couldn’t lose – and we can’t lose the big game either.
Now where did I put that cat? 
Fitts and Farrell Secret Space Program Conference San Mateo 2014
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks