Tuesday, 22 April 2014

The strange case of the Syracusan dekadrachm ― part four

Picture of the concept of synchronicity by C.G. Jung
Much of the circumstances concerning my obtaining and later selling the Syracusan dekadrachm revolves around Jung's concept of synchronicity. Just about everybody will have heard of this theory, but very few will have a very accurate or comprehensive knowledge of it. In what follows, I will treat such knowledge as a given. There are also a few prerequisites to understanding synchronicity so reading the following linked articles might be necessary. These are: Neils Bohr's Complementarity and Einsteinian Spacetime. If you have read these, or do not need to read them, the following two links will take you directly to detailed information about Jung's Synchronicity and his Personality Typology. I should mention that the article on synchronicity, under the subsection Time  references a work that is less familiar than the Princeton volume, so the corresponding references can be found in the latter from pages 98 - 110, or paragraphs 963-986. An expanded version of the chart pictured above is at the start of the Princeton reference I give: to causality is added "Constant connection through Effect, and to synchronicity is added "Inconstant Connection through Contingence, Equivalence, or "Meaning". The other two parts of the quaternity are as given in the chart without further clarification.

Mostly, whenever I speak of synchronicity, I refer to incidents in the unconscious having an acausal relationship in the present to an event within the localized space of the person experiencing it. Jung calls this "synchronous". If the thought and the event are at the same time, but at remote points in space, or if the events are at different times, but in the same space, he calls it "synchronistic". The latter category is easiest to criticize because the phenomenon can be seen by many to have possible causes within the realm of possibility outside of that which is reserved by quantum physics. In a practical sense, of course, the "same space" is considered to be upheld when the unconscious event is taking place inside the head, and the physical event is taking place in the room, although, technically, these are different spaces by our observation. We cannot separate space and time, but spacetime is distinct from matter. You will also see, in the Personality Typology link, that the same quarternity diagram is adapted: Synchronicity being Intuition and Causality being Sensation. How these four are all aligned depends on which type is being discussed.

Archaeology and numismatics attracts a higher percentage of extraverts than introverts. We can understand this better by saying that extravert is Logos/Matter and introvert is Mythos/Mind. Depending on the effect of other functions, an extravert archaeologist will likely see Context as the relationship between material objects in an archaeological site, and the Archaeological record  as a real-world phenomenon that is not dependent on the observer.. An introvert archaeologist is fairly rare as archaeology is all about material remains, and materialists are extraverts. An introvert archaeologist will see Context as the relationship between the material objects and what and by whom is thought about them, and the Archaeological record as a psychic manifestation created by an interaction between the psyche and matter. Another way to look at the dichotomy at its most extreme is to consider hostilities between modernist and postmodernist archaeologists. Sadly, it is an internecine war that can never be resolved without the use of transdisciplinarity which allows for multiple realities as a resolution of Bohr's complementarity problems, just as psychological complementarity is resolved by positing the existence of an Unconscious with a large measure of objectivity (Wolfgang Pauli).

The "divvy" in antique jargon, is going to be one of Jung's Introverted Intuitive types ― an INTJ (about 2.5% of the population) or an INFJ (about 1% of the population). I would guess that a "divvy" in the antique trade is more likely to be an INFJ, and a "divvy" in archaeology is more likely to be an INTJ because the INTJ is more drawn to the sciences (which archaeology often purports to be), and the INFJ is more drawn to the arts. As an INFJ, I was first drawn to the antiques trade but came to archaeology later in life (which is also an expectable phenomenon factoring the effect of age on thought processes (e.g. young mathematicians an old philosophers).

In the West, science is heavily toward the Logos end of the spectrum, while the arts are heavily toward the Mythos end. The situation will be at least somewhat different in the East, depending on cultural influences. Modern academia is overwhelmingly toward the Logos end, even within the arts. Genius, in any subject, will have a tendency to be well-balanced between Logos and Mythos, and "think tanks" (whether aware of the fact or not) strive to collect a mix of people to achieve a balanced set of minds in order to solve their problems. Academic qualifications are nearly always worked out by logos types of decisions and are increasingly finding it difficult to adapt to modern "real world" needs for transdisciplinary approaches. Personality types are virtually ignored in academia while they are now often considered paramount in business.

When it comes to the two ancient Greek terms for "life", βίος is "Spacetime Continuum" on the chart ― a series of finite lives, and ζωή is "Indestructible Energy" or "infinite life" (Dionysos). Western ideas of reincarnation or resurrection are about the entire person (βίος)"coming back", while Eastern ideas are more about the essence (ζωή) ― apart from the physical manifestation (as in the "Clear Light" in Tibetan Buddhism). If you include both, you get the Chinese Taoist "Yin-Yang" as a convenient model of wholeness.

So, yesterday's post was about the playing field, and today's post is about the players. The game will start tomorrow.

No comments:

Post a Comment