In writing this paper I have, so to speak, made good a promise which for many years I lacked the courage to fulfil. The difficulties of the problem and its presentation seemed to me too great; too great the intellectual responsibility without which such a subject cannot be tackled; too inadequate, in the long run, my scientific training. If I have now conquered my hesitation and at last come to grips with my theme, it is chiefly because my experiences of the phenomenon of synchronicity have multiplied themselves over decades, while on the other hand my researches into the history of symbols, and of the fish symbol in particular, brought the problem ever closer to me, and finally because I have been alluding to the existence of this phenomenon on and off in my writings for twenty years without discussing it any further. I would like to put a temporary end to this unsatisfactory state of affairs by trying to give a consistent account of everything I have to say on this subject. I hope it will not be construed as presumption on my part if I make uncommon demands on the open-mindedness and goodwill of the reader. Not only is he expected to plunge into regions of human experience which are dark, dubious, and hedged about with prejudice, but the intellectual difficulties are such as the treatment and elucidation of so abstract a subject must inevitably entail. As anyone can see for himself after reading a 419 817 few pages, there can be no question of a complete description and explanation of these complicated phenomena, but only an attempt to broach the problem in such a way as to reveal some of its manifold aspects and connections, and to open up a very obscure field which is philosophically of the greatest importance. As a psychiatrist and psychotherapi-st I have often come up against the phenomena in question and could convince myself how much these inner experiences meant to my patients. In most cases they were things which people do not talk about for fear of exposing themselves to thoughtless ridicule. I was amazed to see how many people have had experiences of this kind and how carefully the secret was guarded. So my interest in this problem has a human as well as a scientific foundation.
— Carl Gustav Jung
Jung spent twenty years alluding to synchronicity in print before he could bring himself to write the paper directly. That delay is worth sitting with. This is not false modesty — it is the record of a man genuinely afraid that his own experience had outrun the conceptual tools available to him, and that saying so plainly would expose him to the kind of dismissal that tends to follow when the interior life exceeds what the reigning epistemology can accommodate.
What surfaces in the preface is something rarer than the theory itself: the admission that his patients had been living with these experiences in silence, guarding them carefully, because to speak of them invited ridicule. Jung is describing a specific topology of the psyche under pressure — not pathology, but the condition of anyone whose inner life arrives in forms that the surrounding culture has agreed not to take seriously. The silence is self-protective, the secrecy learned. And what the silence protects is not superstition but something felt as deeply meaningful, as touching the core of an experience, and therefore too vulnerable to submit to casual dismissal.
The "human as well as scientific foundation" he names at the close is the whole argument, before any argument begins. The problem demands a hearing precisely because something real is being withheld from speech.
Carl Gustav Jung·The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche·1960