The question “What is truth?” may sound profound.
In reality, I think we all know the answer. That's because we live by a certain definition of truth every day.
Maybe it's not that we don't know what truth is but that we don't know that we know. In other words, we have trouble defining truth. It's easy to fix if we take a moment to contemplate the nature of truth.
Three Views on Truth
There are three dominant theories of truth.
The first one is the social construction view, according to which truth is relative to what people desire. This makes truth dependent on social and personal goals. However, if we examine it further, we see that this proposition is not logical. It contradicts itself. If all truth is relative, then the statement "All truth is relative" is absolutely true. The statement that "all truth is relative" is false if it is absolutely true.
Another theory of truth is the coherence theory: truth is logical consistency (coherence) among a group of beliefs an individual holds. Coherence, however, is better described as a measure of truth rather than truth itself. In fact, identifying truth with coherence fails because opposing views are internally coherent, even if they disagree with each other. Religions may have complex worldviews full of internal coherence, but they are not compatible with one another and with scientific evidence.
Lastly, there is the correspondence theory of truth: truth is when an idea, belief, or statement corresponds with the way the world really is (reality).
One could rightfully call this the "common sense" view of truth. According to correspondence theory, an idea, belief, or statement is true if it corresponds to reality. In this sense, reality is the truth-maker and ideas, beliefs, or statements are the truth-bearers. In an "appropriate correspondence relationship," truth emerges when the truth-bearer (idea) matches the truth-maker (reality).
Synchronicity: A Case of Correspondence
Regarding synchronicity experiences, I have advanced a scientific argument in favor of the correspondence theory of truth. According to this view, synchronicity is neither true just because it works for us (the relativistic view) nor because it is consistent with scientific theory (the coherence view). Because synchronicity is an objective fact that correlates with reality, it is true.
When one experiences synchronicity, he or she actually experiences truth, a correspondence between thought and reality. Since this is the view we all presuppose in our daily actions and speech (for example, we all assume the correspondence theory of truth when we read a medicine label), this is the "common sense" definition of truth.
A synchronicity either corresponds to reality or it does not. If it does, then the person presumes the correspondence view. If, however, a synchronicity does not correspond to reality, then we have no reason to accept it.
Fibonacci Lifechart reflects the correspondence theory of truth. This is a tool that can help you decide whether or not to take one's synchronicity seriously, for only a synchronicity that corresponds with the way things actually are deserves our attention and belief.
Truth is not relative, contrary to the postmodern adage. Truth is what we have taken it to be all along, what we take it to be every day.
At the core of synchronicity is a sense of unity. Why might synchronicity relate to a sense of unity? It is important to note that the universe consists of nonlocal and fractal connection. Nonlocality refers to correlations between spatially separated events (Stapp, 2009). A fractal is a symmetry having a pattern that repeats at different scales (Bak, 1996).
Fractals are thought to be linked to synchronicity experiences (Hogenson, 2005). Significantly, fractal geometry includes the Fibonacci sequence as a unifying theme (Devaney, 1999). The Fibonacci sequence is a recursive series and visualizations of the Fibonacci sequence exhibit self-similarity. For example, the spiral consisting of circular arcs embedded in Fibonacci sized squares:
Another amazing fact is the presence of the Fibonacci sequence in the Mandelbrot set.
Professor Robert Devaney of Boston University has found the Fibonacci numbers in the Mandelbrot set and it's all to do with those buds on the outside of the set! For any two bulbs, the sum of their period is the period of the largest bulb between them. By taking bulbs closer and closer to each other, the Fibonacci sequence is generated.
So synchronicity might relate to nonlocality, fractals, and the Fibonacci sequence generally (Sacco, 2016), and particularly experiences of ultimate meaning, unity, and interconnectedness.
Bak, P. (1996). How nature works: The science of self-organized criticality. New York: Springer.
Hogenson, G. B. (2005). The self, the symbolic and synchronicity: Virtual realities and the emergence of the psyche. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 50(3), 271–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8774.2005.00531.x
Devaney, R. L. (1999). The Mandelbrot set, the Farey tree, and the Fibonacci sequence. The American Mathematical Monthly, 106(4), 289–302.
Sacco, R. G. (2016). The Fibonacci Life-Chart Method (FLCM) as a foundation for Carl Jung’s theory of synchronicity. Journal of Analytical Psychology, 61(2), 203–222. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-5922.12204
Stapp, H. (2009). Nonlocality. In Greenberger, D., Hentschel, K., Weinert, F. (Eds.), Compendium of Quantum Mechanics (pp. 405–410). New York: Springer.