1

Cosmos and Culture in the

Play of Synchronicity

Joe Cambray
INTRODUCTION

n considering the topic of this years Jungian Odyssey, the playful

psyche, notions of creation and creativity quickly come to mind.
The production of new creative forms, ideas, objects, etc. captivates
and intrigues most of us. Generating the new or true innovation tends
to transcend rational, cognitive planning; something of the intuitive
and serendipitous, if not miraculous, is required. C.G. Jung speaks of
the play instinct:
The creation of something new is not accomplished by the
intellect, but by the play instinct acting from inner necessity.
The creative mind plays with the object it loves.1

From this comment we can surmise that Jung envisions creative play
as a fundamental aspect of nature. In this essay I would like to follow
Jung and expand the range of where we usually look for signs of play
in our world, both at the core of nature and at the heart of culture.
COSMOGONY AND COSMOLOGY
Stories of creation are nearly ubiquitous in cultures around the
world. Creation myths portray archetypal themes often employing

JOE CAMBRAY

images of birth or rebirth, frequently with elements of emergence, as

from a primeval ocean or out of a chthonic underworld realm, to convey
the origins of the world, and/or the people who live in it.2
The study of origins is one of the most powerful attractors in the
psyche and thus it is not a surprise that many disciplines seek to engage
questions of origins, especially the creation of the world or the universe,
and of life. Debates between science and religion tend to be most
fervently fought over this ground. Theories, whether mythic, poetic,
religious, or scientific, of the coming into being of the universe are
classified as cosmogonies, from the Greek kosmogona (or kosmogena),
itself a combination of ksmos cosmos, and the root of g-gnomai/
ggona to become, to happen, to be born.3 The broader study of
the structure and (on-going) evolution of the universe is known as
cosmology (the logos of the cosmos); for some authors cosmogony is
treated as a special discipline within cosmology. Often thinkers have
articulated a cosmogony as foundational for a cosmology, as Plato briefly
did in the Timeaus.
During the first half of the twentieth century there were enormous
developments occurring in scientific conceptions of the universe.
Cosmological formulations went from a static world the size of what
we now know as our galaxy, the Milky Way, to an expanding cosmos
with incredible numbers of galaxies, or island universes, hurtling
away from one another. Some of the greatest cosmologists themselves
underwent radical transformations in their own conceptions of the
universeEinstein famously remarked about his cosmological
constant, which he constructed in order to maintain a static universe
in the face of his own theory of gravity, as the biggest blunder of his
career. 4 Twentieth century physics together with astronomical
investigations eventually lead to the main contemporary scientific
cosmogony, the Big Bang in which our universe is envisioned as
emerging out of a singularity. In recent years other cosmological
schemes, variants of a multiverse, have been proposed though often
with a similar cosmogony. The origin point for the Big Bang is
imagined as outside any known laws of physics, literally a dimensionless
point. This theory was brought to the world after the Second World
War by the Russian physicist George Gamow. (A detailed historical
study of the development of this theory can be found in the 2004
book by Simon Singh, The Big Bang. 5) The coincidence of these

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

developments in scientific thinking with the later works of C. G. Jung,

in particular his monograph on synchronicity, is something I have
noted previously that deserves a bit more explication.6
JUNGS COSMOLOGICAL IMAGINATION
In the Collected Works outside Jungs writings on synchronicity,
cosmogony is usually discussed from mythological, alchemical, or
archetypal perspectives. However, a bit more detail of Jungs views
on the controversies surrounding scientific theories about the
nature of the universe can be found in his published letters. From
these it is clear that he was aware of multiple theories in physics,
but he unsurprisingly considers them in terms of their psychology
rather than their physics. For example, in differentiating himself from
Einsteins views on quantum mechanics in a 1953 letter to James
Kirsch, he comments:
If Gods consciousness is clearer than mans, then the Creation
has no meaning and man no raison dtre. In that case God does
not in fact play dice, as Einstein says, but has invented a machine,
which is far worse. Actually the story of the Creation is more
like an experiment with dice than anything purposive. These
insights may well involve a tremendous change in the Godimage.. . . Synchronicity is soon to appear in English. . . . 7

In this passage Jung is implicitly attempting to embrace quantum

theory and relativity together (the project that Einstein tried and failed
to accomplish in his search for a unified field theory); he is seeking
the psychology of an originary state. His curious juxtaposing of the
announcement about the Synchronicity essay at the end of this letter
quoted above indicates a direct link between his evolving thoughts
about cosmogony and the archetypal psychology of creation.
The current scientific description concerning the singularity in
the earliest states of the universe would not have been available to Jung
as science, though Russian physicist George Gamow had proposed a
primordial state he called the ylem, an obsolete term meaning the
primordial substance from which the elements were formed.8 This type
of idea must have struck Jung as a scientific parallel to alchemical
notions of the prima materia. From his knowledge of cultural history
coupled with his profound intuitive capacities, Jung seems to be
moving in the synchronicity essay towards an intuition of a state

JOE CAMBRAY

in which space and time have not yet come into existence. This
view also would, of course, have had some resonance with his views
of the unconscious, as in statements such as, . . . the observer
can easily be influenced by an emotional state which alters space
and time by contraction.9
According to contemporary cosmogony, in the initial period at
less than 10-43 seconds (referred to as the era before 1 Planck time
and named after Max Planck, the German physicist who first postulated
a quantum theory) there was no separation of any of the forces that
comprise our universe and hence no space or time. This phase ended
with spontaneous symmetry-breaking, 10 allowing gravity to be a
distinct force so that space-time began to come into existence.
However, it is not until matter and energy began to separate at about
10 -32 seconds, through another series of spontaneous breaks in
symmetry, that the laws of our universe, as we have come to know them,
were available for the unfolding evolution of the cosmos, i.e., when
our modern views on cosmology enter. Jungs intuition, most likely
activated through his exchanges with Pauli, again seems to remarkably
link his views of the unconscious with scientific cosmogony, as found
in his comment:
[s]ince experience has shown that under certain conditions space
and time can be reduced to almost zero, causality disappears
along with them because causality is bound up with the
existence of space and time and physical changes, and consists
essentially in the succession of cause and effect. For this reason
synchronistic phenomena cannot in principle be associated with
any conceptions of causality.11

From a scientific perspective the collapse of causality is indeed

congruent with the loss of the laws of physics (the articulated
description of the forces shaping our world) that occurs as the
singularity is (retrospectively) approached through studies in high
energy physics. Jungs use of space, time, physical change, and
causality in this passage makes clear that he is not simply
attempting to use physics as a metaphor for the expression of his
psychological theories but wishes to go further. As he clearly states
in his concluding chapter to the monograph, his intent is to
supplement the triad of classical physics (space, time, causality)by

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

synchronicity.12 From his dialogues and debates with Pauli they agree
to propose a new quaternio:13

Fig. 1: C.G. Jung (1960), A Quaternio14

The purpose here seems to be the creation of a psychological,

grounded scientific cosmology: This schema satisfies on the one hand
the postulates of modern physics, and on the other hand those of
psychology.15 One major implication is that the potential to form
psyche would be inherent in the very origins of our universe, a
staggering suggestion in the context of the scientific thought of the
day, perhaps less so today as more of the intermediate links have been
found. Then too, at just this juncture, Jung introduces the notion of
the psychoid archetypes which are transgressive:
because the archetypes are not found exclusively in the psychic
sphere, but can occur just as much in circumstances that are
not psychic (equivalence of an outward physical process with a
psychic one). Archetypal equivalences are contingent to causal
determination, that is to say there exist between them and the
causal processes no relations that conform to law.16

The psyche is not just embedded in the world; it is a part of the

very fabric of our world. As he presses forward this expanded view
of archetypes, Jung wishes to solidify his new insight as a
cosmogonic factor:
If we consider synchronicity or the archetypes as the contingent,
then the latter takes on the specific aspect of a modality that has
the functional significance of a world-constituting factor.17

JOE CAMBRAY

The implications for our understanding of meaning are being

thoroughly reworked in this conclusion as will be discussed in the next
section. For now, I would like to look at a related area where Jung
extended his cosmological views, the origins of life and evolution.
As I have indicated elsewhere, Jung continued his reflections on
the cosmological relevance of his synchronicity hypothesis, probably
until close to the time of his death. Consider the following passage
from his March 1959 letter to Erich Neumann:
In this chaos of chance, synchronistic phenomena were probably
at work, operating both with and against the known laws of
nature to produce, in archetypal moments, syntheses which
appear to us miraculous. . . . This presupposes not only an allpervading, latent meaning which can be recognized by
consciousness, but during that preconscious time, a psychoid
process with which a physical event meaningfully coincides.
Here the meaning cannot be recognized because there is as yet
no consciousness.18

The significance of these remarks in terms of research seeking to

articulate the origins of life requires recognition that Jungs formulation
of synchronicity has many close parallels with complexity theorys idea
of emergence. 19 Once the overlap of these concepts is taken into
consideration, the use that scientists such as Stuart Kauffman make
of emergence to help hypothesize and simulate a plausible origin of
life can be employed to retrospectively appreciate the depth of Jungs
insight in the above passage. The self-organization of the chemicals
that will assemble into proto-life forms is postulated to occur at the
edge of order and chaos. The conditions only exist within a narrow
window of opportunity, so that life itself has an almost fortuitous or
serendipitous origin; its emergence was an act of creation in time.
CREATION AND MEANING IN THE LIGHT OF SYNCHRONICITY
The remarks just cited can challenge our common sense way of
attributing meaning. Meaning is an extraordinarily rich and
complicated topic, the study of which has been going on for millennia.
While most closely associated with consciousness, which the notion
of an unconscious psyche by the time of synchronicity essay had
already seriously challenged, the extension here of meaning to include

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

the psychoid offers to alter our fundamental view of reality. The

tendency is to dismiss this reading of Jungs psychoid archetype as
atavistic, a return to archaic modes of thought, or a magical worldview.
However, with the recovery of more holistic paradigms in science, such
views require reconsideration.
Intelligence and intentional behavior are not confined to the
individual, nor are they limited to humans. Studies on swarm
intelligence have begun to give more detailed understandings of the
collective actions of an enormous variety of organisms.20 The schooling
behavior of fish, flocks of birds, as well as the collective actions of herd
animals have long been commented upon. The intelligence
manifesting in these cases is taken to be a form of emergence, coming
bottom up. Similarly, the social insects such as ants, bees, and termites
display in aggregate not only intelligent action, adapting collectively
for survival purposes, but also maturational, or life span, trajectories
of the collectives that transcend the individual creatures. An ant
colonys behavior changes as the colony grows older and larger, as has
been delineated by researchers such as Deborah Gordon, 21 e.g.,
manifesting changed levels and qualities of aggression over time,
decreasing as a colony becomes established and ages.
Collective adaptive behavior can even be observed in one-celled
creatures, perhaps most studied in cellular slime molds which aggregate
into a multicellular organism under the right conditions, without any
hierarchical leadership. Slime molds have been shown to be capable
of solving certain kinds of problems that can require detailed
consideration by humans. Toshiyuki Nakagaki and colleagues recently
demonstrated how a slime mold colony could solve networking
problems. The researchers offered their slime mold a favorite food, oat
bran, set up nearby in a pattern replicating municipalities around
Tokyo. The mold was then introduced at what would map to the
center of Tokyo. The slime mold was allowed to feed for 26 hours;
tendrils were grown that linked the oat bran into the network shown
in Figure 2. On the right is a graphic comparison of the slime mold
network with one that was designed by engineers. 22 The two
networks not only are quite similar in the main lines of connection
but the researchers claim the slime mold Physarum polycephalum forms
networks with comparable efficiency, fault tolerance, and cost to those

JOE CAMBRAY

Fig. 2: Atsushi Tero, et. al. (2010), Physarum polycephalum (Slime Mold) Mimicking
Tokyo Rail Network 24

of real-world infrastructure networks.23 The heuristic, biologically

adaptive solution closely parallels the one derived from a mathematical,
engineering analysis.
The attribution of conscious intention to the slime molds behavior
naturally would be a gross misunderstanding of the type of intelligence
operating here, so meaning as usually employed would be an
enormous anthropomorphic projection. However, acknowledging the
adaptive intelligence at play in this and other examples may move us
closer to an interpretation of what Jung might be suggesting with his
notion of latent meaning. The psychoid process would be a means
for trying to describe emergent behavior in systems that would not
appear to have anything conceivable as a psyche, at least from a human
perspective. The appearance of spontaneous self-organization, which
is one way to conceive of a psychoid archetype manifesting, is a
fascinating area under intensive scientific study. Heuristic evidence in
support of such events is plentiful with operational models and
simulations used to test hypotheses but descriptions still lack full

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

articulation. The paradigm shift involved here was, I believe, glimpsed

by Jung with his notions of the psychoid archetype and synchronicity.
One of the challenges for contemporary Jungians is to sort out the
degree of overlap between Jungs notions and the new ideas from
complexity theorymy opinion is that the overlap is significant but
not exact or complete.
Considering the psychoid as part of cosmogony has the potential
for locating meaning in the world. This occurs not by endowing matter
with a pre-existent mind but rather through symmetry breaking
emergence manifesting greater complexity with an adaptive capacity
that we retrospectively recognize as having attributes akin to what we
label in ourselves as intelligence. The intelligence in the things of the
world is not coming from an external designer but emerges from the
spontaneous interactions of the components under the right
conditions. The potential for meaning then would not lie in inert
matter but come out of the interactions that produce self-organization.
The radical nature of Jungs synchronicity hypothesis would be its
foresight regarding the potential for the eventual emergence of the
psyche as inherent in the origins of the universe; in this sense we could
say that the impulse towards individuation is also a part of the structure
of our universe. Jung could then be seen as an early adherent of the
anthropic principle in contemporary cosmology, the philosophical
stance that knowledge and observations of the universe must be
compatible with the conscious life that is making the observations.
If emergence is compatible with a psychoid formulation, then
psychic productions such as dreams could easily be seen as partaking
of this emergentism. Psychological interpretation would then not be
reducible to apt metaphors, as valuable as they may be, but would
ultimately be contingent on being a part of, at least a reflection of,
that which is emerging. In classical Jungian terms accurate, adequate
interpretation would necessarily require a manifestation of the
transcendent function, not a pointing to it. This approach would
differentiate symbol from metaphor in a manner close to Jungs idea
of the symbol being unknowable to consciousness in its fullness.
However, the emergentist view would place greater emphasis on the
substantial involvement of the interactions of the stuff of the world.
There could be no transformation without changes in patterns of
interaction at all levels from molecular to the social. Shifting from

10

JOE CAMBRAY

cosmological and biological systems, let us now turn to cultural forms

of synchronicity.
SERENDIPITY, SYNCHRONICITY, AND CULTURAL MEANING
The transformational possibilities of the collective unconscious
were noted by Jung in an article entitled Depth Psychology: The
activity of the collective unconscious manifests itself not only in
compensatory effects in the lives of individuals, but also in the mutation
of dominant ideas in the course of the centuries.25 One implication
of such activity would have to do with synchronistic events of a cultural
or transcultural nature that might span time periods beyond the life
of an individual. Archetypes constellated either within a culture or
between cultures could lead to cultural synchronicities, with certain
individuals playing a role often of archetypal proportions. I have
detailed a few examples in my book including the emergence of Greek
democracy, the conquest of Mexico, and the discovery of
Phosphorous.26 Furthermore, I suggested there that the subject of
serendipity might hold examples of synchronicity:
[Serendipity] is the gift or capacity of the well-informed mind
that is open to chance that can make the curious or odd, often
seemingly minor occurrence in an encounter into a meaningful,
at time momentous, event, that is, for the synchronistic
dimension to become more evident.27

This was followed by the example of the discovery of penicillin, laden

with a fantastic set of coincidences, which proved to be increasingly
meaningful over time, in this case saving the lives of many Allied
soldiers in World War II. There seems to be a class of serendipities
that are reflections of the Zeitgeist; these may point to cultural
synchronicities that are at play in the world.
The role of serendipity in discoveries of all types, but especially
in science, has become more commonplace knowledge. This is in part
due to recognition of the importance of subjectivity and
intersubjectivity in all fields, and to a host of scientific biographies
that are challenging the notion of the lone scientific genius making
tremendous discoveries in pure isolation. Science writer Steven Johnson
has devoted a chapter in his latest work to serendipity.28 Among the
points he makes is the way in which the internet, especially the worldwide-web, enhances opportunities for serendipitous finds:

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

11

. . . thanks to the connective nature of hypertext, and the

blogospheres exploratory hunger for finding new stuff, it is far
easier to sit down in front of your browser and stumble across
something completely brilliant but surprising than to walk
through a library, looking at the spines of books.29

The web then seems to be ushering in an age of serendipity with

the rich, densely interconnected network of information priming
us for what I have discussed clinically as moments of complexity,
nodal moments reflecting the multiplicity of connections at play
in symbolically laden events, often with a resistance to ordinary,
clock time. 30
The twenty-first century has been labeled the century of the brain
and indeed there is an enormous amount of neuroscience research
underway at present to try and unlock the neurological roots and
correlates of consciousness. With a complex system such as the brain,
it is not surprising to find serendipitous discoveries being noted;
further, it could be argued that they are inherent parts of the process.
I will mention several examples to give a better sense of the role of the
serendipitous in brain research.
By 1953 Nathaniel Kleitman and Eugene Aserinsky had observed
rapid eye movement (REM) while attempting to quantize and correlate
human eye movements with brain activity. In the midst of their
research they accidentally uncovered a link between the rapid, erratic
but symmetrical movements of the eyes during sleep states associated
with low voltage, fast wave EEG (electroencephalogram) recordings
and dreams. Subjects reported dreams when awoken during these
REM states. That physiological correlates of dynamic unconscious
processes, as manifest in dreams, are reflected in serendipitous discovery
seems fractally congruent with the nature of the unconscious itself.
In 1961 Roger Sperry and colleagues began to study human
patients who had had their corpus callosa severed to prevent the spread
of grand mal epileptic seizures. The patients who underwent the
commissurotomy did indeed experience relief from their seizures;
however, they also began to have difficulties with various forms of
communication. Attending to these anomalies led Sperry to explore
the quality of consciousness associated with each hemisphere and
lateralization of functions, not previously known. Sperrys work, which
came from attending to curious, unexpected symptoms, eventually
earned him a Nobel Prize.

12

JOE CAMBRAY

More recently in the mid 1990s there was the serendipitous

discovery of mirror neurons by the research group around Giacomo
Rizolatti at the University of Parma.31 This class of neurons was first
observed, wholly by accident, in monkeys during experiments
designed to examine their motor cortices. Because a monkey was
inadvertently left in a functional apparatus during lunch, an unexpected
discharge of these motor neurons (as they were thought to be) was
observed in the absence of any movement by the monkey. After
verifying the signal was not due to malfunctioning equipment, the
researchers set about to uncover the mystery. They found that these
neurons fire both in the performance of an action and in the
observation of the same action. These neurons, therefore, are thought
to form a fundamental link between the perceptual system and
interiorly focused mental states, though surely they are not the only
components. Many psychologists and neuroscientists see these neurons
as holding one key to the experience of empathy, though again this is
far more complex than can be accounted for by these relatively simple
neuronal systems.
Research on mirror neurons has brought about a revival of interest
in empathy, as they seem to be at the core of our ability to know the
minds of others, what is known as theory of mind, and have an
important role in our abilities for aesthetic appreciation. While the
embryology of mirror neurons has not yet been articulated, some are
functional at or shortly after birth as infant studies on post-partum
tongue protrusion mimicry has demonstrated.32 These neurons may
have some plasticity in their connectivity which would be quite
important for possibilities in forming interactive fields and of
therapeutic change. Training to become a psychotherapist may partially
involve enhancement of neural pathways with such neurons, or even
more speculatively may stimulate some neurogensis. Conversely,
deficits in these neurons and/or the networks they participate in are
thought to be important in autism and psychopathy.
While these examples do not leap out as synchronicities in the
usual sense, they do involve observations that contain coincidences
which may not be recognized at the time as such. Once the coincidence
is made conscious, understanding the underlying meaning often
requires going beyond the causal explanations available at the time,
often coming with a shock of surprise when the links are made. I

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

13

believe these events have synchronistic cores that point to the emergent
quality of the events within the larger cultural context in which they
are occurring.
CONCLUSIONS
Select applications of Jungs radically novel concept of
synchronicity to a variety of originary or innovative events have been
presented here as a means of encouraging further exploration. As has
frequently been observed, pioneering efforts often leave many
implications and potential uses of newly formulated ideas
undeveloped. I believe we are entering a cultural period in which
the enhanced ability to attend to interconnectivity in systems of
every sort may permit a re-visioning of the inherent playfulness of
our world. If the current trend towards a more open, imaginative
paradigm capable of appreciating linkages not easily acknowledged in
the past persists, then Jungs contribution of the synchronicity
hypothesis may well aid us in better articulating what has been on or
beyond the margins of consciousness.

NOTES
1

C.G. Jung, Psychological Types (1921), The Collected Works of C.G.

Jung, Vol. 6, eds. Sir Herbert Read, Michael Fordham, Gerhard Adler,
William McGuire, trans. H.G. Baynes, rev. by R.F.C. Hull, Bollingen
Series XX (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1971), 197.
Future references to The Collected Works, abbreviated to CW, will be
by chapter title followed by the publication date, volume, and
paragraph numbers.
2
Joe Cambray, Towards the Feeling of Emergence, Journal of
Analytical Psychology 2006:51 (1), pp. 1-20.
3
Henry Georg Liddell and Robert Scott, A Lexicon: Abridged from
Liddell and Scotts Greek-English Lexicon (New York: American Book
Co., 1882), pp. 141-142 and p. 389.
4
Briefly discussed in Cambray, Synchronicity: Nature and Psyche
in an Interconnected Universe (College Station, TX: Texas A & M
University Press, 2009), p. 17.

14

JOE CAMBRAY
5

Simon Singh, Big Bang: The Origins of the Universe (New York:
HarperCollins, 2004).
6
Joe Cambray, Synchronicity: Nature and Psyche in an Interconnected
Universe (College Station, TX: Texas A & M University Press, 2009).
7
C.G. Jung to James Kirsch, 1953, in Letters, Vol. 2: 1951-1961,
eds. Gerhard Adler & Aniela Jaffe (Princeton: Princeton University
Press, 1975), p. 118.
8
Singh, Big Bang, p. 314.
9
Jung, Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle (1960),
CW 8, 856.
10
Symmetry-breaking is a fundamental feature of complexity; any
increase in the complexity of a system requires a decrease in
symmetry. In addition this seems to be essential for selforganization to occur, allowing for emergence of new forms at
higher levels of complexity. This observation from general systems
theory is directly applicable to human systems, including the psyche.
There are profound clinical implications that come from this; I have
briefly touched on them in my book on synchronicity. See Cambray,
Synchronicity: Nature and Psyche.
11
Jung, Synchronicity: An Acausal Connecting Principle
(1960), CW 8, 855.
12
Ibid., 961.
13
Ibid., 963.
14
My title and reproduction of Jungs image in ibid., 961.
15
Ibid., 964.
16
Ibid.
17
Ibid., italics mine.
18
Jung to Erich Neumann, March 1959, in Letters, Vol. 2, 494495.
19
See Joe Cambray, Synchronicity and Emergence, in American
Imago, 2002:59 (4), pp. 409-434.
20
James Kennedy and Russell C. Eberhart with Yuhui Shi, Swarm
Intelligence (San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann Publisher, 1975/2001).
21
See Deborah Gordon, Ant Encounters: Interaction Networks and
Colony Behavior (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2010). See also
Gordons Ants at Work: How an Insect Society is Organized (New York:
W. W. Norton, 2000).

COSMOS AND CULTURE IN THE PLAY OF SYNCHRONICITY

22

15

Atsushi Tero, Seiji Takagi, Tetsu Saigusa, Kentaro Ito, Dan P.

Bebber, Mark D. Fricker, Kenji Yumiki, Ryo Kobayashi and Toshiyuki
Nakagaki, Rules for Biologically Inspired Adaptive Network Design,
in Science 22 January 2010: Vol. 327, no. 5964, pp. 439-442.
23
Ibid., p. 439.
24
Image by Atsushi Tero, Seiji Takagi, Tetsu Saigusa, Kentaro Ito,
Dan P. Bebber, Mark D. Fricker, Kenji Yumiki, Ryo Kobayashi and
Toshiyuki Nakagaki, from Rules for Biologically Inspired Adaptive
Network Design, Science 22 January 2010: Vol. 327, no. 5964, pp.
439-442. Reprinted by permission of AAAS. [My image title here.]
25
Jung, Depth Psychology (1948), CW 18, 1161.
26
Cambray, Synchronicity: Nature and Psyche.
27
Ibid., p. 102.
28
Steven Johnson, Where Good Ideas Come From: The Natural
History of Innovation (New York: Riverhead Books, 2010), Chapter 4.
29
Ibid., p. 118.
30
Joe Cambray, Moments of Complexity and Enigmatic Action:
A Jungian View of the Therapeutic Field, Journal of Analytical
Psychology, 2011: 56 (2) pp. 296-309.
31
For a more detailed history and summary of the research to date
on mirror neurons see Marco Iacoboni, Mirroring People (New York:
Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2008).
32
Andrew Meltzoff, Imitation and the Other Minds: The Like
Me Hypothesis, in S. Hurley and N. Chater, eds., Perspectives on
Imitation: From Neuroscience to Social Science. Volume 2: Imitation,
Human Development, and Culture (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005).