More or less every thinking man has at one point in his life uttered or at least heard the phrase "X is a-historical" or "Y is not in continuity with history". Admittedly, this doesn't apply to thinking middle aged children one must often deal with in the public sphere of our day, but the question still stands: what exactly do we mean when we claim that something is historically shallow?
Traditional metaphysical notion of causality seems like the most abstract thing in the world. In order to demonstrate the opposite, or rather qualify "abstract" in a quite different sense, we'll take a look at two passages from supposedly the most abstract treatise on the subject: Elements of Theology by Proclus. Simultaneously, we'll lay out how the notion of unity of cause and effect is quite obvious from the pinnacle moment of growing up from boy into man: a recognition of likeness between father and the son.
In the second part of the analysis of the phenomenon of synchronicity, we proceed to compare it with what was traditionally understood as correspondence between man and the world. The synchronicity appears to be a veritable inversion of this relation with rather sinister consequences.
In this analysis we’ll offer few insights about what the phenomenon called "synchronicity" might be. However, in contrast to most treatments of this issue – from C.G. Jung’s preliminary work down to plethora of the New Age “spiritual” textbooks and manuals, ending up with alt right ‘chaos magick’ inauguration of their President of choice – the inferences you’ll find here are intended to show that the question of synchronicity could in fact be a rather sinister affair.
