Laird
Member
I think we need to reach for real-world examples. I don't have a good example right now.
OK. How about Alan Amsberg's Mike's bikes incident? Or the 11:11 phenomenon?
I think we need to reach for real-world examples. I don't have a good example right now.
The Bikes Bikes tale is quite a nice one. 11:11 I'm less keen on, but that's my personal bias rather than a proper argument. Having said that, these things come in different flavours, for example the Mikes Bikes had a practical, real-world usefulness, which certainly doesn't disqualify it, but there are other examples (again, I don't have one readily to hand) which may simply seem puzzling, or might possibly carry some sort of message.OK. How about Alan Amsberg's Mike's bikes incident? Or the 11:11 phenomenon?
The Bikes Bikes tale is quite a nice one.
Well, we all have our ways of looking at the world. I don't think there's anything wrong with you looking at the world and coming to grips with it in the way which makes sense best to you.Good, we've got something solid. Do you agree that the same set of options (re orchestration of what would otherwise have been free will choices, and excluding Obiwan's fourth option because we are assuming this is a genuine sync) applies in this case as in the "sync" that I made up and with which you weren't happy?
Happy though to drop this if it's becoming too argumentative.
That's a direct quote from another thread where I replied on a completely different topic, as I said, to someone else. But it seems apposite here. I don't feel excited any more by the technical details, as a result, any replies I might give would be half-hearted at best. That doesn't mean I think there are no answers. I could give them, but it would simply lead to further questions...In my daily life I tend to be somewhat of a mystic, the way I grasp reality isn't easy to express. However my instinct is that it may be a rather different mode of experiencing the world to your own. That in itself can make any such discussion somewhat of a minefield of points which can be analysed and dissected without ever uncovering the intended meaning.
Well, I think an intact and unimpinged free will is a bit of a stretch... our will is always being affected by our experiences and environment. E.g. a sexy brochure for a vacation in a far and exotic country :)OK, so now let's think about what has to have happened for this sync to have occurred. Either:
- You and your partner merrily planned your trip with free will intact and unimpinged, but "something" meddled with your neighbour-from-down-the-road's free will such that he made a series of (forced) "decisions" that led him to running into you on the way out of the church-on-the-other-side-of-the-globe.
- The reverse: your neighbour-from-down-the-road's free will is intact and unimpinged, but your (and your partner's) decision-making was interfered with (forced) such that you ended up running into your neighbour on the way out of that church.
- Both your neighbour's and you and your partner's decision-making was interfered with (forced - goodbye free will) to ensure that all three of you met on the church doorstep across the globe.
Makes sense?
Agreed. It's like being really depressed and somebody telling you to think of those less fortunate than yourself. It sounds very moral but it just doesn't work because it doesn't solve your problems. It's usually just some "moral" that has been copied without thought like saying "suicide is selfish" My friend whose brother had committed suicide was told this once in a shop when I was with her. I couldn't believe it - I was so angry!!!I'm with the author 100%. Anyone who disagrees obviously hasn't experienced real pain for decades on and seeing no end in sight. You experience some minor temporary problems in life and think you've "learned" from the process, you have no idea what true pain is like.
Agreed. It's like being really depressed and somebody telling you to think of those less fortunate than yourself.
Not to bring this thread down but I had just recently read, from a local news source, that a father/husband lost his entire family when they all (expecting mother, 6 year old, 4 year old, and 1 year old) died in a car crash. Did that happen for a reason?
I think it might have, if it didn't then I'm probably barking up the wrong tree being in this forum. It's harsh, no doubt, but if you have certain worldviews, it may not be as quite as harsh as it appears.
I think it might have, if it didn't then I'm probably barking up the wrong tree being in this forum. It's harsh, no doubt, but if you have certain worldviews, it may not be as quite as harsh as it appears.
Steve, haven't we been through this before? I can (and have) show(ed) you harrowing stories of sadistic torture. What are the victims "learning" (because if "education" isn't the reason, then I have no idea what is) from being locked up and raped+tortured for decades at a time by sadists?
I usually support the idea that everything happens for a reason. However, when I hear tragic stories like that, it forces me to pause and rethink my position.
Telling someone who has lost a loved one to suicide. That it is a selfish act.
Strikes me as selfishness personified.
So, if synchronicities are real, no free will. If they're just coincidences, free will.
I can certainly see why.
Despite saying that, the example you have given is far easier to cope with, in my opinion, than the horrors Laird describes.