Synchronicity 428

Synchronicity 428
共时性
Carl Jung
卡尔 荣格

III. Exposition
说明
In his view “the subject of the great dream of life … is but one,” 17 the transcendental Will, the prima causa, from which all causal chains radiate like meridian lines from the poles and, because of the circular parallels, stand to one another in a meaningful relationship of simultaneity.18 Schopenhauer be¬lieved in the absolute determinism of the natural process and furthermore in a first cause. There is nothing to w<!rrant either assumption. The first cause is a philosophical mythologem which is only credible when it appears in the form of the old paradox "Ev TC, ?Tav, as unity and multiplicity at once.

依照他的观点,“生命的伟大的梦想的主体,仅是一位。”这个超验的意志,这个prima causa,所有的因果的锁链,从极地,像子午线般焕发出来。因为这些循环的并列,所有的因果的锁链处于互相具有共时性的意义的关系。叔本华相信这个绝对的决定论,自然过程进一步地处于一个最初原因的绝对的决定论。没有任何东西能够保证任何一个假设。这个最初原因是哲学的神秘主义,仅有当它以古老的悖论的形式出现时,它才是可信的。它同时具有一致性与多重新。

The idea that the simultaneous points in the causal chains, or meridians, represent meaningful coincidences would only hold water if the first cause really were a unity. But if it were a multiplicity, which is just as likely, then Schopenhauer's whole explanation col¬lapses, quite apart from the fact, which we have only recently realized, that natural law possesses a merely statistical validity and thus keeps the door open to indeterminism. Neither philo¬sophical reflection nor experience can provide any evidence for the regular occurrence of these two kinds of connection, in which the same thing is both subject and object. Schopenhauer thought and wrote at a time when causality held sovereign sway as a category a priori and had therefore to be dragged in to explain meaningful coincidences. But, as we have seen, it can do this with some degree of probability only if we have recourse to the other, equally arbitrary assumption of the unity of the first cause. It then follows as a necessity that every point on a given meridian stands in a relationship of meaningful coincidence to every other point on the same degree of latitude.

在因果律的锁链或子午线,同时性的点代表有意义的巧合。这个观念将会证明是真实,仅有但第一原因确实是具有一致性。但是,假如它是多重性,那是同样的可能,那么叔本华的整个的解释就崩溃了。除了这个事实之外,我们仅是在最近才体会到的事实,自然法则拥有一个仅是统计数目的正确性,因此保持大门开放给不确定主要。哲学的反思,或经验都无法供应这个证据,给这两种的联接的规律发生的事情。在那里,相同的事情既是主体,又是客体。叔本华认为并且写作,当因果律拥有统治的影响,作为是先验的范畴。因此,因果律必须被带进来解释有意义的巧合。但是如同我们已经看见,因果律能够这样做,带着某个程度的可能性,仅有当我们诉诸于另外一个,同样是任意性的一致性的假设,最初原因具有一致性。因此,我们能够推论这是必要的:在某个子午线的每个点,都处于具有意义的巧合的关系,跟相同程度的纬度度每个其他的点。

16 P. 45. [Irvine, pp. 49f.]
17 P. 46. [Irvine, p. 50']
18 Hence my term "synchronicity."
428

SYNCHRONICITY: AN ACAUSAL CONNECTING PRINCIPLE
This conclu¬sion, however, goes far beyond the bounds of what is empirically possible, for it credits meaningful coincidences with occurring so regularly and systematically that their verification would be either unnecessary or the simplest thing in the world. Schopen-hauer's examples carry as much or as little conviction as all the others. Nevertheless, it is to his credit that he saw the prob¬lem and understood that there are no facile ad hoc explanations. Since this problem is concerned with the foundations of our epistemology, he derived it in accordance with the general trend of his philosophy from a transcendental premise, from the Will which creates life and being on all levels, and which modulates each of these levels in such a way that they are not only in harmony with their synchronous parallels but also prepare and arrange future events in the form of Fate or Providence.

可是,这个结论远超过这个边界,经验上的可能的边界。因为它推崇有意义的巧合,跟如此规律而有系统地发生,以致于它们的证明为真实要就是没有必要,要不就是世界上最简单的事情。叔本华的例子,具有如此多,也如此少的信念,如同其他的信念。可是,由于他的信念,他看见这个难题,并且理解到:并不存在着事实而明确的解释。因为这个难题所关注的是我们的认识论的基础。叔本华获得这个认识论,依照他的哲学的一般倾向,从超验的假设。从这个“意志”。这个意志创造生命与生物,在各个层次。这个意志调换每一个这些层次,以这样一种方式,以致它们不但跟它们的共时性的并列互相和谐,而且准备与安排未来的事件,以命运或天启的形式。

829 In contrast to Schopenhauer's accustomed pessimism, this
utterance has an almost friendly and optimistic tone which we can hardly sympathize with today. One of the most problemati¬cal and momentous centuries the world has ever known sepa¬rates us from that still medievalistic age when the philosophizing mind believed it could make assertions beyond what could be empirically proved. It was an age of large views, which did not cry halt and think that the limits of nature had been reached just where the scientific road-builders had come to a temporary stop. Thus Schopenhauer, with true philosophical vision, opened up a field for reflection whose peculiar phenomenology he was not equipped to understand, though he outlined it more or less correctly.

跟叔本华的习惯性的悲观主义对照起来。这个表达具有几乎是友善而乐观主义的语调。我们今天几乎无法同情的语调。其中一个最棘手而重要的世纪,这世界曾经知道过的世纪,将我们分开,跟依旧是中世纪分。当哲学的心灵相信,它能够发表各种主张,超越经验上能够被证明的主张。那是一个百家争鸣的时代。这些观点并不喊叫停止,并且思维,自然的极限已经被达到。就在科学的筑路者暂时停止的地方。因此,叔本华,具有真实的哲学的幻景,展开这个领域作为反思。这个领域的特殊的现象学,他并没有具备理解。虽然他描绘出轮廓,相当正确地。

He recognized that with their omina and praesagia astrology and the various intuitive methods of in¬terpreting fate have a common denominator which he sought to discover by means of "transcendental speculation."

他体认出,凭借他们的omina and praesagia,星相学与各色各样的直觉得诠释命运的方法,具有共同的母母。他设法发现这个共同分母,凭借“超验的沉思”。

He recog¬nized, equally rightly, that it was a problem of principle of the first order, unlike all those before and after him who operated with futile conceptions of some kind of energy transmission, or conveniently dismissed the whole thing as nonsense in order to avoid a too difficult task.19 Schopenhauer's attempt is the more remarkable in that it was made at a time when the tremendous advance of the natural sciences had convinced everybody that causality alone could be considered the final principle of ex¬planation. Instead of ignoring all those experiences which re¬fuse to bow down to the sovereign rule of causality, he tried, as we have seen, to fit them into his deterministic view of the world.

他体认到,同样正确地,那是最初秩序的原则的难题。不像在他之前与之后的所有人们的那些难题。那些人们运作徒然无效的某种能源的传递的观念,或是方便地排斥整个的事情,作为是无稽之谈,为了避免太困难的一件工作。叔本华的企图是更加引人注意,因为他从事这一个企图,当自然科学的巨大的进步已经说服每个人们:仅有因果律能够被认为是解释的最后的原则。叔本华并没有忽略所有那些经验,拒绝屈服于因果律的统辖统治的那些经验。相反地,他尝试,如同我们已经看见,他尝试将它们套进他的决定论的世界观。

In so doing, he forced concepts like prefiguration, cor¬respondence, and pre-established harmony, which as a universal order coexisting with the causal one have always underlain man's explanations of nature, into the causal scheIJ1e, probably because he felt-and rightly-that the scientific view of the world based on natural law, though he did not doubt its validity, nevertheless lacked something which played a considerable role in the classical and medieval view (as it also does in the intuitive feelings of modern man).

当他这样做时,他强迫那些观念,诸如预先想像,对应性,与预先建立的和谐,进入因果律的行程里。作为普世的秩序,跟因果律的秩序共同存在,它们总是作为人对自然的解释的基础。可能是因为他感觉到,正确地感觉到,科学的世界观,以自然法则作为基础,虽然他并没有怀疑科学的世界观的正确性,它仍然欠缺某件扮演重要角色的东西,在古典与中世纪的观点(如同它扮演重要的角色,在现代人的直觉的感觉。)

429

THE STRUCTURE AND DYNAMICS OF THE PSYCHE
830 The mass of facts collected by Gurney, Myers, and Pod-
more 20 inspired three other investigators-Dariex,21 Richet,22 and Flammarion 23_ to tackle the problem in terms of a prob¬ability calculus. Dariex found a probability of 1 : 4,114,545 for telepathic precognitions of death, which means that the ex¬plan'ltion of such a warning as due to "chance" is more than four million times more improbable than explaining it as a "telepathic," or acausal, meaningful coincidence. The astron¬omer Flammarion reckoned a probability of no less than 1 : 804,622,222 for a particularly well-observed instance of "phantasms of the living." 24

由古涅,梅尔,与普得莫收集的那一大堆事实,启发三位研究员—达瑞克,李查特,与弗拉马力恩,来克服这个难题,用机率微积分的术语。达瑞克发现1比4,114,545的机率,作为心灵感应预先体认到死亡。这意味着,这样的预警的解释,作为由于“偶然性”,超过四百万倍的更加不可能,比起解释它,作为是“心灵感应”,或非因果律,有意义的巧合。天文学家,弗拉马力恩考虑到一个机率:有1比804,622,222之多,作为特殊被仔细观察的例子:活着的人都幻景“。

He was also the first to link up other suspicious happenings with the general interest in phe¬nomena_ connected with death. Thus he relates 25 that, while writing his book on the atmosphere, he was just at the chapter on wind-force when a sudden gust of wind swept all his papers off the table and blew them out of the window. He 3.lso cites, as an example of triple coincidence, the edifying story of 19 Here I must m<lke an exception of Kant, whose treatise Dreams at a Spirit¬Seer, I/lustrated by Dreams at Metaphysics pointed the way for Schopenhauer. 20 Edmund Gurney, Frederic W. H. Myers, and Frank Podmore, Phantasms at
the Living. 21 Xavier Dariex, "Le Hazard et la telepathie."
22 Charles Richet, "Relations de diverses experiences sur transmission mentale, la lucidite, et autres phenomenes non explicable par les donnees scientifiques
actuelles." 23 Camille Flammarion, The Unknown, pp. 1911£.
24 Ibid., p. 202. 25 Pp. 192f.
430

SYNCHRONICITY: AN ACAUSAL CONNECTING PRINCIPLE Monsieur de Fortgibu and the plum-pudding.28 The fact that he mentions these coincidences at all in connection with the problem of telepathy shows that Flammarion had a distinct intuition, albeit an unconscious one, of a far more compre¬hensive principle.

他是第一位将其他的可疑的发生的事情连接一块,跟对死亡息息相关的这些现象的一般興趣连接一块,因此,他陈述,当他正在写作他探讨这个气氛的书时,他仅是从事探讨风的力量的这个章节。突然地,有一阵强风将他的所有的文稿从书桌扫落,将它们吹向窗外。他也引述,作为是三重的巧合的例子。佛己布与草梅-布丁的启蒙的例子。他提到这些巧合,跟心灵感应的难题息息相关的这个事实,显示出来,弗拉马力恩拥有杰出的直觉。虽然是无意识的直觉,属于更加全面性的原则。

雄伯译
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: