People are Too Disbelieving of Coincidence
People are entirely too disbelieving of coincidence. They are far too ready to dismiss it and to build arcane structures of extremely rickety substance in order to avoid it. I, on the other hand, see coincidence everywhere as an inevitable consequence of the laws of probability, according to which having no unusual coincidence is far more unusual than any coincidence could possibly be.
Notes:
...and go to great lengths to construct rationalizations to explain it, when, in reality, a lack of coincidence would be an incredible coincidence.
Folksonomies: chance coincidence
Taxonomies:
/family and parenting/children (0.618791)
/society/unrest and war (0.210684)
/science/mathematics/statistics (0.140257)
Keywords:
coincidence (0.943745 (negative:-0.586044)), incredible coincidence (0.891950 (negative:-0.623170)), unusual coincidence (0.780233 (neutral:0.000000)), extremely rickety substance (0.703263 (negative:-0.890159)), great lengths (0.470351 (neutral:0.000000)), inevitable consequence (0.461390 (negative:-0.438663)), arcane structures (0.426645 (negative:-0.890159)), People (0.235214 (negative:-0.622608)), rationalizations (0.232013 (neutral:0.000000))
Concepts:
G. I. Gurdjieff (0.919335): yago | dbpedia
2006 albums (0.876400): dbpedia
Theory (0.874015): freebase | dbpedia
P. D. Ouspensky (0.817571): dbpedia | yago | freebase
Probability theory (0.727440): dbpedia | freebase | opencyc
Probability (0.714000): dbpedia | freebase
According to Jim (0.707280): yago | freebase | dbpedia
Construction (0.684710): opencyc | freebase | dbpedia
The Planet That Wasn't