What's good about being an attorney?

[QIR]

This user was placed on 7 day ban for harassment.

Thanks,

The Mods

Amen! This poster's avatar is provocative as well!

[miXin]

Jung's Model

All synchronistic phenomena can be grouped under three categories:

1. The coincidence of a psychic state in the observer with a simultaneous objective, external event that corresponds to the psychic state or content, (e.g. the scarab), where there is no evidence of a causal connection between the psychic state and the external event, and where, considering the psychic relativity of space and time, such a connection is not even conceivable.

2. The coincidence of a psychic state with a corresponding (more or less simultaneous) external even taking place outside the observer's field of perception, i.e. at a distance, and only verifiable afterward.

3. The coincidence of a psychic state with a corresponding, not yet existent future event that is distant in time and can likewise only be verified afterward.

Two Fundamental Types of Synchronicity

1. One in which the compensatory activity of the archetype is experienced both inwardly and outwardly. [the event seems to emerge from the subconscious with access to absolute knowledge, which cannot be consciously known]

2. One in which the compensatory activity of the archetype is experienced outwardly only. [these convey to the ego a much-needed wholeness of the self's perspective, they show one a new perspective]


Essential Characteristics of the Synchronistic Event

1. The specific intrapsychic state of the subject defined as one of the following:

a) The unconscious content which, in accordance with the compensatory needs of the conscious orientation, enters consciousness [something is in our conscious]
b) The conscious orientation of the subject around which the compensatory synchronistic activity centers [something happens concerning what is in our mind]

2. An objective event corresponds with this intrapsychic state [may be literal or figurative correspondence]

a) The objective event as a compensatory equivalent to the unconscious compensatory content
b) The objective event as the sole compensatory of the ego-consciousness

3. Even though the intrapsychic state and the objective event may be synchronous according to clock time and spatially near to each other, the objective event may, contrary to this, be distant in time and/or space in relation to the intrapsychic state [as in telepathy, clairvoyance, etc.]

4. The intrapsychic state and the objective event are not causally related to each other [acausality]

5. The synchronistic event is meaningful [excludes some coincidence, but does not require the meaning to be understood]

a) The intrapsychic state and the objective event as meaningful parallels.

b) The numinous charge associated with the synchronistic experience [feeling of spiritual experience]

c) Import of the subjective-level interpretation [the content must reflect back on the issues of the individual]

d) The archetypal level of meaning [transcends the individual and implies absolute knowledge].

The contradictory tenants of Quantum Physics desecrated the Newtonian Determinism that had dominated modern thought for some two hundred years: the electron 'cloud of possibility' and the photon wave/particle paradox shattered the comfortable, mechanistic notion of causality (cause and effect), relegating it to historical curiosity. In effect: these rigid clockwork rules, when viewed at the smallest sphere, suddenly turn elastic, "reality" dictated by the will of the observer and/or the constraint of the causal experiment: clockwork causality began to stretch like salt-water taffy before the conscious participant, giving Dali's soft-clock surrealism an eerily prescient scope. For empiricists and hardwired logicians, Quantum-theory was as dangerous and reality-threatening as anything Darwin pulled on the Secular Fundamentalists, and resistance to its baffling, frustratingly unfussy relativity continues to this day - some would rather reject it out of hand, rather than deal with the consequences.

Others, on the other hand, probed the quandary, and found therein substantive material for the more questionable aspects of this existence. Psychoanalyst Carl Jung latched onto the discoveries of his friends Einstein, Planck, Bohr (etc.), saw the correlation with Eastern philosophy and his own studies into the paranormal, and in 1952 published "Sychronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle," an attempt to condense and conceptualize some very difficult peculiarities/inconsistencies that statistical science neglected to take into account - specifically 'meaningful coincidences', the inexplicable that occurred far too often to be products of chance. Or, as Jung put it:

"Sychronicity... means the simultaneous occurrence of a certain psychic state with one or more external events which appear as meaningful parallels to the momentary objective state...(pg. 25)."

In other words, the chaotic, malleable elements of the extreme microverse have a representative affect on our causal-ruled macroverse - although the manifestation of it cannot be adequately measured, due to its unpredictable nature - and to Jung's views, this was as a serious venture to be studied rather than outright dismissed. Essential to this argument is the concept of a 'soul,' or soul-network: 'something' beyond the physical perception, and beyond the spatial limitations of energy, working in accordance to its own plan. Jung envisioned, beyond the mechanistic aspect of the 'normal' world, a broader framework of existence, in which all things are connected via an indefinable ether-verse, encompassing such derided/quizzical concepts as "meaningful coincidences," foreknowledge/precognition/intuition, ESP, telepathy, telekinesis, and so forth. As a human came to channel the Quantum theory,

"...we must regard them as creative acts, as the continuous creation of a pattern that exists from all eternity, repeats itself sporadically, and is not derivable from any known antecedents (pg 102)."

Heady stuff! It's interesting to note Jung tip-toe around the 'G' word (the thesis would have been outright rejected then and there by self-respecting scientists), instead incorporating the Tao, Schopenhauer's Will & various other cultural representations of an all-pervading force that, as the Chinese sages knew three thousand years before, could not be comprehended consciously, but through meditative "non-being" ... or the "unconscious state," Jung is quick to clarify. Integral to this discussion are archetypes, the common models upon which cultural icons/identities are patterned. Jung does not go into specifics here (for he mined archetypes throughout his career) but does pose several interesting notes - the theory of whether numbers actually existed, as archetypes, before human conception (and human existence?) was certainly something to ponder upon.



"Sychronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle" is divided into four sections, being 1) the establishment of the theory, 2) an experiment of statistical randomness to 'prove' Sychronicity by way of astrology, 3) a list of examples of similar concepts throughout the ages (the Tao etc. mentioned above), and 4) a lecture in 1951 wherein the genesis of this book was formulated. As a student of Eastern philosophy, nothing Jung stated here was exactly new or revelatory to my mindset; but when the dominant Western attitude of that period is taken into perspective, it is easy to see why this work would be deemed controversial and, a favored expression of shallow dismissal, "junk science." Still, some reservations should be made here. Synchronicity shouldn't be considered science, rather a metaphysical theory; and Jung falls into the all-to-common trap of claiming his hypothesis as irrefutable, using the higher-than-probable results of his tests and a number of "meaningful" coincidental stories to make his case. I suggest that anyone seriously investigating these theories make the effort to view both sides of the coin - those who support and those who refute the concept of Synchronicity and the innumerable derivations of Quantum possibility, for the following reason: this thesis can be seen as an origin point for the current market of the New Age: hokum and free-wheelin' misinterpretation take voluminous cues from that established by Einstein et al. Although there are practical alternatives - self-help agencies such as PSI and similar motivational speakers a la Tony Robbins utilize these concept as the base platform of success: "To Think is to Create" - despite this, the more intricate (and exciting) aspects of Quantum Physics are often diluted by some into mass-consciousness vehicles for easy enlightenment - think of Redfield's bestselling poppycock-omnibus "The Celestine Prophecy," or any number of Quantum-cannibalizing frauds designed exclusively for the bohemian soccer-mom set - and the increasingly nebulous 'pseudo' aspect of it subsequently strengthens resistance from traditionalists and skeptics. This book is an excellent attempt to map the unknown, the indefinable "Something" so intrinsic with the ongoing process of life. A brave, massively influential analysis of all that 'beyond chance'.

[tidbit]

Here it is a great test for you fellas interested in this sorta thing



http://personal.ansir.com/

My type was ENFJ

moderately expressed extrovert

distinctively expressed intuitive personality

slightly expressed feeling personality

slightly expressed judging personality

My type appears to be ENTJ

Enneagram type: 3, variant: sexual (sx/so/sp)

Different profiles each time you take it?

[u03B4]

It's not the same test, tidbit. The 3 Sides of You is developed by ANSIR, while the poster has taken another test, namely, the MBTI.

[rememberme?]

The contradictory tenants of Quantum Physics desecrated the Newtonian Determinism that had dominated modern thought for some two hundred years: the electron 'cloud of possibility' and the photon wave/particle paradox shattered the comfortable, mechanistic notion of causality (cause and effect), relegating it to historical curiosity. In effect: these rigid clockwork rules, when viewed at the smallest sphere, suddenly turn elastic, "reality" dictated by the will of the observer and/or the constraint of the causal experiment: clockwork causality began to stretch like salt-water taffy before the conscious participant, giving Dali's soft-clock surrealism an eerily prescient scope. For empiricists and hardwired logicians, Quantum-theory was as dangerous and reality-threatening as anything Darwin pulled on the Secular Fundamentalists, and resistance to its baffling, frustratingly unfussy relativity continues to this day - some would rather reject it out of hand, rather than deal with the consequences.

Others, on the other hand, probed the quandary, and found therein substantive material for the more questionable aspects of this existence. Psychoanalyst Carl Jung latched onto the discoveries of his friends Einstein, Planck, Bohr (etc.), saw the correlation with Eastern philosophy and his own studies into the paranormal, and in 1952 published "Sychronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle," an attempt to condense and conceptualize some very difficult peculiarities/inconsistencies that statistical science neglected to take into account - specifically 'meaningful coincidences', the inexplicable that occurred far too often to be products of chance. Or, as Jung put it:

"Sychronicity... means the simultaneous occurrence of a certain psychic state with one or more external events which appear as meaningful parallels to the momentary objective state...(pg. 25)."

In other words, the chaotic, malleable elements of the extreme microverse have a representative affect on our causal-ruled macroverse - although the manifestation of it cannot be adequately measured, due to its unpredictable nature - and to Jung's views, this was as a serious venture to be studied rather than outright dismissed. Essential to this argument is the concept of a 'soul,' or soul-network: 'something' beyond the physical perception, and beyond the spatial limitations of energy, working in accordance to its own plan. Jung envisioned, beyond the mechanistic aspect of the 'normal' world, a broader framework of existence, in which all things are connected via an indefinable ether-verse, encompassing such derided/quizzical concepts as "meaningful coincidences," foreknowledge/precognition/intuition, ESP, telepathy, telekinesis, and so forth. As a human came to channel the Quantum theory,

"...we must regard them as creative acts, as the continuous creation of a pattern that exists from all eternity, repeats itself sporadically, and is not derivable from any known antecedents (pg 102)."

Heady stuff! It's interesting to note Jung tip-toe around the 'G' word (the thesis would have been outright rejected then and there by self-respecting scientists), instead incorporating the Tao, Schopenhauer's Will & various other cultural representations of an all-pervading force that, as the Chinese sages knew three thousand years before, could not be comprehended consciously, but through meditative "non-being" ... or the "unconscious state," Jung is quick to clarify. Integral to this discussion are archetypes, the common models upon which cultural icons/identities are patterned. Jung does not go into specifics here (for he mined archetypes throughout his career) but does pose several interesting notes - the theory of whether numbers actually existed, as archetypes, before human conception (and human existence?) was certainly something to ponder upon.



"Sychronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle" is divided into four sections, being 1) the establishment of the theory, 2) an experiment of statistical randomness to 'prove' Sychronicity by way of astrology, 3) a list of examples of similar concepts throughout the ages (the Tao etc. mentioned above), and 4) a lecture in 1951 wherein the genesis of this book was formulated. As a student of Eastern philosophy, nothing Jung stated here was exactly new or revelatory to my mindset; but when the dominant Western attitude of that period is taken into perspective, it is easy to see why this work would be deemed controversial and, a favored expression of shallow dismissal, "junk science." Still, some reservations should be made here. Synchronicity shouldn't be considered science, rather a metaphysical theory; and Jung falls into the all-to-common trap of claiming his hypothesis as irrefutable, using the higher-than-probable results of his tests and a number of "meaningful" coincidental stories to make his case. I suggest that anyone seriously investigating these theories make the effort to view both sides of the coin - those who support and those who refute the concept of Synchronicity and the innumerable derivations of Quantum possibility, for the following reason: this thesis can be seen as an origin point for the current market of the New Age: hokum and free-wheelin' misinterpretation take voluminous cues from that established by Einstein et al. Although there are practical alternatives - self-help agencies such as PSI and similar motivational speakers a la Tony Robbins utilize these concept as the base platform of success: "To Think is to Create" - despite this, the more intricate (and exciting) aspects of Quantum Physics are often diluted by some into mass-consciousness vehicles for easy enlightenment - think of Redfield's bestselling poppycock-omnibus "The Celestine Prophecy," or any number of Quantum-cannibalizing frauds designed exclusively for the bohemian soccer-mom set - and the increasingly nebulous 'pseudo' aspect of it subsequently strengthens resistance from traditionalists and skeptics. This book is an excellent attempt to map the unknown, the indefinable "Something" so intrinsic with the ongoing process of life. A brave, massively influential analysis of all that 'beyond chance'.

Do luck and coincidence truly exist,or can everything be explained scientifically buy the laws of probability? Meeting a lost friend on a train could be just a case of mathematics,not fate.

When Sue Hamilton was working alone in her office in July 1992 when the fax machine broke down. Unable to fix it, she decided to call her colleague Jason Pegler, who had set off home a little earlier. Finding his home number pinned up on a notice board, she called him and began to explain the problem. But Jason quickly stopped her: "I'm not at home", he explained. "I just happened to be walking past this phone box when it rang, and I answered it!" The number Sue found on the notice board was not Jason's home number at all. It was his employee number - which was the same as the number of the phone box he was walking past when she called. It was a bizarre coincidence, one of those that fascinate and perplex us. From a chance meeting with a long lost friend to weird parallels between world events, coincidences hint at "spooky" laws in our universe. Last year an amazing set of coincidences put Paula Dixon in the headlines - and saved her life. On a flight from Hong Kong to London, she began to feel ill. A call went out to any doctors on board the plane, and two - Professor Angus Wallace and Dr Tom Wong - duly emerged.



The presence of two doctors was not so surprising. But Paula had a "potentially fatal collapsed lung-and Professor Wallace was not only an expert in aecident surgery, but had just finished a course dealing with precisely this type of crisis. DrWong turned out to have with him the one textbook needed to help them carry out the surgery. They saved Paula's life - and won world-wide acclaim. But scientists claim coincidences are simply the result of remembering a few "amazing" concluences of events, but forgetting all the times when nothing amazing happens A classic example is the "small world" effect, where two strangers at a party discover they have a friend in common. People at parties tend to be from the same social class, level of education, income bracket and the same area. So the likelihood of meeting someone with whom you share a trait is higher than it might seem. Sociologists have found that individuals typically have around 150 people whom they regard as "close". Therefore each of us typically has an entourage of around 23,000 "friends of a friend". Say we have about five acquaintances for each close friend, the number swells to 600,000.

[marshallah]

My type appears to be ENTJ

Enneagram type: 3, variant: sexual (sx/so/sp)

ENTJs are pretty despicable -- with their "larger than life" attitude in describing their projects or proposals, for instance... with this ability being expressed as salesmanship... story-telling facility... or stand-up comedy, for that matter... not to mention their natural propensity for filibuster -- our hero can make it indeed very difficult for the customer to decline.

"I'm really sorry you have to die" -- this may be an overstatement; however, most Fs and other gentle souls usually chuckle knowingly at this description of ENTJs.

[saysesame]

ENTJs are pretty despicable -- with their "larger than life" attitude in describing their projects or proposals, for instance... with this ability being expressed as salesmanship... story-telling facility... or stand-up comedy, for that matter... not to mention their natural propensity for filibuster -- our hero can make it indeed very difficult for the customer to decline.

"I'm really sorry you have to die" -- this may be an overstatement; however, most Fs and other gentle souls usually chuckle knowingly at this description of ENTJs.

mashallah, don't be so hard  on ENTJs -- ENTJ personality types tend to be strong leaders and feel the need to take command of a situation. The Myers-Briggs description of an ENTJ says that "although ENTJs are tolerant of established procedures, they can abandon any procedure when it can be shown to be indifferent to the goal it seemingly serves ... They are tireless in the devotion to their jobs and can easily block out other areas of life for the sake of work. The ENTJ female may find it difficult to select a mate who is not overwhelmed by her strong personality and will."

[le mains sales]

My type appears to be ENTJ

Enneagram type: 3, variant: sexual (sx/so/sp)

ENTJs are pretty despicable -- with their "larger than life" attitude in describing their projects or proposals, for instance... with this ability being expressed as salesmanship... story-telling facility... or stand-up comedy, for that matter... not to mention their natural propensity for filibuster -- our hero can make it indeed very difficult for the customer to decline.

"I'm really sorry you have to die" -- this may be an overstatement; however, most Fs and other gentle souls usually chuckle knowingly at this description of ENTJs.

I'm under the impression that many T's turn F's when in love. E.g., there is a big difference between ENTJs at work (arrogants, shark mentality, bossy, ambitious) and their being melancholic, romantic, lovey-dovey in relationships with their love ones. Some researches, however, say that it's not because your ENTJ is in love that he has turned into an "ENFJ" in the relationship. Having a preference for "Thinking" does not mean that you are devoid of feelings. It simply means that you prefer to make decisions a certain way. Besides, people who tend to repress their feelings may have a harder time managing the ones that are too strong to "bury" psychologically, such as love, because they may not have developed the necessary emotional coping skills.

It's not because he's supposed to be the bossy leader type that he functions in a drastically different way than other people and will stay level headed and rational throughout the relationship. When the chemicals of infatuation start being released, he is under the influence of substances that have strong effects on thoughts, feelings and behavior. You'd be surprised at the number of leader/alpha male types that have little emotional competency and crumble psychologically when in love with a woman. They may be even subconsciously seeking a place where they can show their weakness in security and have someone take care of them for a change. It is not rare that a need to control the external environment stems from an inability to control one's internal environment. Some of the most dominating people can be full of insecurities and fears that they attempt to cover up by controlling the environment instead of themselves. They may then turn to somebody else in hopes that the person will provide the specific control that they lack. For example, I know several stereotypical alpha males who are completely subdued to the whims of their wives, for they cater for a part of themselves that they cannot take care of.

[LittleRussianPrincess, Esq.]

I thought this thread was going to be about being a lawyer. Then I read something about physics and immediately tuned out.

So, therein lies the answer: Being a lawyer is great because I don't have to know, read or understand anything about physics! 

[American Ale]

Actually most serial killers are opportunists, they seek out conditions that will allow them to kill repeatedly without detection or apprehension.

I agree, vignette, they are, but that does not mean they are not motivated by what the other poster listed. Take, for instance, Donald Harvey -- after he was dismissed from the military and the mental ward he spent the next few months trying to get his life back in order and eventually found work as a part-time nurses' aide at Cardinal Hill Hospital in Lexington. In June 1973, he started a second nursing job at Lexington's Good Samaritan Hospital. Harvey kept both jobs until August 1974, when he took up a job as a telephone operator, and then secured a clerical job at St. Luke's Hospital in Fort Thomas, Kentucky. He may have been able to control his urge to kill during this time, but the more feasible explanation would be that he did not have the same access to the patients as he did at Marymount Hospital, which could also explain why he shifted from job to job during this time.

He had not yet evolved enough to take his urges outside of the place he felt safe in committing his crimes -- the dimly lit patient rooms -- his killing sanctuaries. Harvey was a different kind of hunter and in order for him to get hold of his prey, he had to first find the right environment. In September 1975, Harvey moved back to Cincinnati, Ohio. Within weeks he got a job working night shift at the Cincinnati V.A. Medical Hospital. His duties varied and he performed several different tasks, depending on where he was needed at the time. He worked as a nursing assistant, housekeeping aide, cardiac-catheterization technician and autopsy assistant. Harvey had found his niche and wasted little time in starting where he had left off. Since he worked at night, he had very little supervision and unlimited access to virtually all areas of the hospital. Over the next 10 years, Harvey murdered at least 15 patients while working at the hospital.

Now when it comes to his motive, "Why did he kill?" he responded, "Well, people controlled me for 18 years, and then I controlled my own destiny. I controlled other people's lives, whether they lived or died. I had that power to control." And in response to the qeustion, "What right did you have to decide that?" he said, "After I didn't get caught for the first 15, I thought it was my right. I appointed myself judge, prosecutor and jury. So I played God."

87 in all I believe?