One of my favourite words / subjects / rants / illusions / events / acausal principles. I seriously believe and have done for many years (it all started one Thursday night which is one of the reasons
Thursday playlists are SO
very important) that there is no such thing as
coincidence. It's a word we've all heard, all used and more than likely all experienced. Many great philosophers and thinkers have devoted a huge amount of time to the subject and hopefully
you will also. The official version or OV as I like to call it goes like this..
"Coincidence literally describes two or more events or entities occupying the same point in space or time, but colloquially means two or more events or entities possessing unexpected parallels, such as thinking about someone and then receiving an unexpected phone call from that person, when it is clear that there is no ordinary causal connection.
The
index of coincidence can be used to analyse whether two events are related. A coincidence does not prove a relationship, but related events may be expected to have a higher index of coincidence. From a statistical perspective, coincidences are inevitable and often less remarkable than they may appear intuitively. The odds that two people share a birthday, for example, reaches 50% with a group of just 22 [1] (see the
Birthday paradox)."
We (the Jinster & I) watched a film a couple of months ago (we'll be repeating the viewing on November 5th) that we'd been looking forward to seeing for quite a while. The
Wachowski Brothers are responsible for probably my favourite film(s) of all time - the (IMHO) breathtakingly brilliant Matrix trilogy. So when I saw their names on the cover of the DVD for a film I'd heard of, but with all the excitement of emigrating to our favourite place in the world, hadn't had time to catch, we rented it for that evening's visual entertainment - no questions asked.
We were not disappointed. The reviews of this film have varied considerably. In fact some would say they have polarised quite dramatically - all depends on your point of view (as with anything). We loved it. Having seen quite a few documentaries recently on the "War on Terror" the film really resonated. As the old saying goes "One man's Terrorist is another man's Freedom Fighter."
But it was the script that got me, the "obsession" with coincidences and the fact that when I "wiki'd" the word "coincidence" the film was one of the two external references that was listed - this has now changed unfortunately (you've gotta love wiki updates) but it still blew me away, especially as we'd been discussing the amazing string of coincidences that has led us to our current position. It really is quite simple I suppose - when you spell it out in black & white - is there a point to life? A purpose?
Or is it just chance?
A purpose to your / my existence?
Or just a bunch of atoms and chemicals that after billions of years of randomly mutating finally manage to come together in a structure that can actually contemplate their own existence?
Again it's one of the things that really fascinates me. A lot of people (and quite a lot of people I know) don't give this question a seconds thought. Literally - not one second is even allocated to this most pertinent of questions. It's the reason I titled track one of my forthcoming album
"What is The Question?" To me - and obviously this is only my point of view - it's the most important question we could possibly ask. I mean after all, if just for arguments sake the
Big Bang and life suddenly starting for no apparent reason is
not an accident. The Universe is
fine tuned for our existence (
"That is not a reasonable idea, that something is tuned to 120 decimal places just by accident" - Professor Leonard Susskind)
Richard "Dick" Dawkins recently appeared on Newsnight and was interviewed by Paxman - Dick ended the interview with the classic slip up of all slip ups "I don't believe we are
put here to be comfortable.." He's got a new book out and was basically whoring it and misrepresenting Einstein to justify his own narrow minded beliefs. I love scientists that will basically ignore any facts that do not support their own point of view - defiantly defending the paradigm against an overwhelming weight of evidence to the contrary. That's not Science Dick - that's "belief" - "faith" if you like - a word you have problems with. Makes you realise what Copernicus was up against when he valiantly tried to tell the "scientists" of many a year ago they were wrong.
If something has odds of 120 decimal places to 1 against - would you bet on it? Is it "Science" to believe it is the most probable outcome. The Buddhists had it right all along - "The World is an Illusion"
Much, much, much more on this later - for now Hasta Luego
Cue Track 2 "Vurt"
Peace & Love
Migz
