Dr. Eric Wargo has turned Carl Jung’s synchronicity idea upside down by suggesting a link to successfully replicated precognition experiments.

photo by: Robbert van der Steeg

One of the mantras I’ve learned on Skeptiko is, “follow the data wherever it leads.” As truth seeking mantras go this one is pretty good. I’ve had to endure some helpings of humble pie after doing an about-face on my cherished beliefs, but that’s part of the process . Sometimes, however, following the data isn’t enough. On today’s episode of Skeptiko Dr. Eric Wargo, creator of TheNightShirt.com and author Trauma Displaced in Time, gives us a new way to look at data that’s been staring us in the face all along. Has Dr. Wargo cracked the code of Synchronicity,  déjà vu  and remote viewing. Let’s find out:

Eric Wargo: …I’m really starting to think in terms of our relationship to time as kind of this circuit. We’re completing these circuits [and] moving through life sort of oriented toward future rewards. This I think explains a lot. I had a series of blog posts about a year ago where I took on Carl Jung’s concept of synchronicity using this model. And I think it explains so-called meaningful coincidences much better than synchronicity can because really all it says is we are orienting constantly, unconsciously, toward information from our future. And we’re orienting toward rewards specifically in our future. But when we are completely unconscious of that fact–when we find this thing that we are unconsciously orienting towards, we feel this surprise and shock. It feels like some intelligence in the universe is guiding us or that God has sort of given us a sign. But I think it’s just really ourselves. We’re oriented toward [future reward] unconsciously, precognitively; and because our society doesn’t allow us to even think about the possibility of precognition, we throw up our hands and say well it’s some bigger organizing force in the universe. It’s archetypes. It’s collective unconscious or whatever. I think this PSI model of precognition, specifically precognition for our own future rewards, I think this explains synchronicity perfectly.

Alex Tsakiris: And just let me interject because one point to take from that is part of what you’re saying is an unavoidable natural fallout from these presentiment and precognition experiments we have. It’s unavoidable, right? That’s what the data clearly says. So if you’re a student at Northwestern University and you’re told you’re going to win five dollars if you guess the right picture before it’s even selected by the computer, and that motivates you, and we can demonstrate that you’re therefore able to orient yourself towards the future that’s coming. Then it’s only a question of to what extent you’re right–not whether you’re right or not because you’re clearly right. The experiment shows that. It’s just to what extent that does play a role in guiding our lives.

Eric Wargo: That’s a great example. Exactly.