On November 19, 1911,
the New York Herald reported that Sir Edmundbury Godfrey had been savagely
done to death at a place called Greenberry Hill. The three convicted
murderers were arranged to be hanged at Greenberry Hill. Now, it
was not unusual for a man to be executed at this location. It wasn’t
even unusual for three men to be executed at Greenberry Hill. However,
the execution of these men, in particular, was rather strange. Their
names: Green, Berry, and Hill.
Was it just a coincidence?
Perhaps: But some believe it was something more.
Have you ever experienced
a coincidence so incredible that it left your mind reeling? If so,
then you have taken a step into the astonishing world of synchronicity.
Synchronicity can
be most simply defined as a “meaningful coincidence” (Vaughan, 1979, p.211).
It was termed acausal because there are no conceivable physical energies,
which might account for these events (Hopcke, 1997, p.36). When we
say something is meaningful to us, generally we are indicating one of two
things: Either we are saying that something has importance to us
because of certain values that we hold—in other words, it means something
because it is valuable to us—or we are saying that something has had a
significant impact on us—that is to say it means something because it has
affected our lives in a major way (Hopcke, 1997, p.38). Obviously
something can be meaningful in both of these ways.
A synchronistic event
is a coincidence that holds a subjective meaning for the person involved
(Hopcke, 1997, p.30). Like all things subjective, what one person
finds meaningful—that is to say valuable and/or significant in its effect—another
might very well find meaningless. Such subjectivity makes it easy
to scoff at, dismiss, or make fun of other people’s synchronistic events.
In fact, according to Alan Vaughan (1997), some stories of synchronicity
may remind a person of a time when almost the same thing happened to him/her,
while to others, it will seem trivial, uninteresting, or forced (p.77).
In some coincidences,
the extreme improbability of the event or the uncanny parallel between
internal state and external occurrence will be the most salient feature
(Anderson, 1995, p.47). For example, consider the following:
Mrs. Willard Lovel,
of Berkeley, California, found herself locked out of her house when her
front door accidentally shut behind her. She stood there for about
ten minutes, pondering her next move, when the mailman arrived with a letter
from her brother Watson Wyman of Seattle, Washington, who had stayed with
her recently. The letter contained the key spare key to her front
door that he had borrowed during the visit (Anderson, 1995, p.186).
Now, this may strike
some people as no more than a chance occurrence, while others may relate
the coincidental situation to a personal experience.
Synchronicity is
an idea that has existed almost since the dawn of human culture.
The term was coined by Swiss psychologist Carl Jung (Vaughan, 1979, p.14).
Jung, unlike many psychologists today (who argue that synchronicity is
simply those “meaningful coincidences”, ventures to say that synchronicity
examples include ESP, psychokinesis, astrological horoscopes, prophetic
dreams, omens, and déjà vu. Jung’s most influential
contribution was that he observed that synchronistic events almost always
have three distinct characteristics (Hopcke, 1997, p.25).
The first, which
I have previously mentioned, is that such events are acausally connected,
rather than connected through a chain of cause and effect. Second,
such events always occur with an accompaniment of deep emotional experience,
usually at the time of the event itself. Third, the content of the
synchronistic experience, what the event actually is, is always symbolic
in nature (Hopcke, 1997, p.26).
An illustration of
a synchronistic event in which all three characteristics are present is
the true story of Henry Ziegland.
In 1893, Henry Ziegland,
of Honey Grove, Texas, broke his engagement to his longtime girlfriend,
who then killed herself. Her brother tried to avenge her by shooting
Ziegland, but the bullet only grazed his face and buried itself in a tree.
The brother, thinking he had killed Ziegland, committed suicide.
In 1913, Ziegland was cutting down the tree containing the bullet—it was
a tough job, so he had to use dynamite, and the explosion sent the old
bullet through Ziegland’s head—killing him (Vaughan, 1979, p.26).
Research and surveys
have found that after becoming aware of synchronicities like this one,
people may soon begin to recognize coincidences in their lives as synchronicities,
rather than simple, every day coincidences. In this way, they have
found that the best way to get an understanding of what synchronicity is,
is through examples (Anderson, 1995, p.73). Some researchers, I have
found, believe that after identifying a personal synchronistic experience,
a person can then utilize it to improve his or her life, or make necessary
changes in life style. However, the procedures and opinions about
this process do seem to vary greatly.
Synchronicity continues
to be studied today, and psychologists all over the world search for answers
to those strange coincidences. Is there meaning or reasoning in this
seemingly random world? That is a question that may never be clearly
answered, because while the subject continues to be researched, there continues
to be many different opinions and views about it.
Oh, and one final thought.
According to Alan Vaughan’s experiences, synchronicities seem to almost
always occur to those who have just read about or discussed the topic.
So, should you put down this paper, and suddenly feel a sensation of déjà
vu, let me assure you, it’s just good ol’ synchronicity.
Krista Rae Depperschmidt
19 November 1999