Causality (n.) is a faculty of the mind. We cannot imagine events that are connected non-causally and are capable of a non-causal explanation. But that does not mean that such events do not exist.
Causality (n.) pursued further is useless: when an exhaustive understanding is of no avail, one more little bit of it will not be either.
Causality (n.) versus finality is decided less by the things than by the thinker: empathy leads to the mechanistic view, abstraction to the energic.
Causality (n.) is in the last analysis no more than a statistical truth — so in psychology 'To what purpose?' is often more fruitful than 'Why?'
Causality (n.) cannot be transcendental: a cause can only be a demonstrable quantity, and the transcendental by definition cannot be demonstrated — a transcendental cause is a contradiction in terms.
Causality (n.) reigns despotically over the macrophysical world, its rule shattered only at the smallest magnitudes; synchronicity, by contrast, is bound up with the unconscious.
Causality (n.) is one of our holiest dogmas — a theory confirmed about half the time, while the demon of chance rules the rest.
Causality (n.) tells a dramatic family story — D came from C, whose father was B — while synchronicity asks why A, B, C and D appear together at the same moment.
Causality (n.) pursued alone makes the doctor always ask "Why?" and ignore the equally pertinent "What for?" — sending the patient searching for years after some childhood event while the present goes neglected.
Causality (n.) alone yields meaning only in a machine built by an outside mind; a world run by pure necessity is meaningless, so a God who never played dice could only have made a meaningless machine.