I don't believe in coincidence. I think that coincidence, luck, serendipity (whatever you call it) is simply a way of trying to come up with an explanation for the unknown. Just as believing in a god explains away the unknowns of the beginning of the universe, believing in coincidence explains away the occurrences that repeat in our lives. There is no fate. There is only a series of decisions that people make that intersect occasionally. The present - coincidences - are nothing but an accumulation of the past - people's decisions-.
REVISION: Coincidence isn't something you can believe in. Luck and serendipity are what I'm referring to. Coincidence is just two similar occurrences and a component of luck and serendipity.
I don't think coincidence is a matter of belief. Coincidence is the term we use for the phenomenon of things seeming to correlate serendipitously. "Luck" or "serendipity" connote something deeper than random chance, but "coincidence" merely implies that something of coincidental note has occurred.
ReplyDeleteIn that sense, then, your observation – "there is only a series of decisions [knowledge]...the present coincidences...are nothing but an accumulation of the past" – is profound, without violating your sense of objectivity.
I think that in defining coincidence as a seemingly serendipitous correlation, you're choosing to believe that things have more meaning than they really do... Versus thinking of it as a reoccurance based on the common context of our lives.
ReplyDelete