Intention and manifestation are real, but they don't work the way that most new age people are describing it.
I find the scientific attempts to explain it away really laughable. Material reductionists should stick to what they're good at: analysis of the material world. They have no business trying to explain metaphysics.
You know when an intersectional event has happened. You can feel it in your core. It's not rational or linear. It feels like magic and that's because it is.
Foreigner, I would also be very interested to hear some elaboration about what you mean here. swilow has already responded quite well I think, so I won't bother to do the same point by point, as I generally agree with the points already made.
That said, you have posted in a somewhat cryptic way, and I suspect I do not entirely agree with you, although admittedly I would probably qualify as one of the "material reductionists" you are referring to.
Just to be clear that I understand you - you are saying, essentially, that experiences of synchronicity are something metaphysical, and cannot be explained in a rational way? Additionally, that people can innately "know" when they have experienced such an event, despite the lack of any physical means to explain this phenomena?
The first point I think is essentially unprovable and unfalsifiable - as is the nature of anything said to be outside rationality or reason - given that these tools are really the only means we have to assess the likelihood or "truth" of anything, so I won't bother to address this any further. However the second point I think is reflective of a counterproductive and harmful human tendency - to assume that our "gut feeling", instinct, blind faith, or whatever you want to call it, is in at least some circumstances a reliable way to assess events in the world.
When I say this is harmful, we only need to look at history for the evidence - in times when reasoned, logical thought was given less weight, and a less scientific approach was taken to determining guilt in more primitive societies, it might only take a few rumors and being considered something of an outsider or "oddball" to be accused of witchcraft or sorcery and suffer some horrific punishment for an unfalsifiable and ultimately metaphysical crime (whether guilty or not, and I'd venture to say that unjust punishments were doled out far more often than they are today).
But even today humans consistently make errors of judgement that harm themselves and others through over-reliance on gut feelings and "innate knowledge" rather than rational assessment of facts - ultimately, gut feelings are based on emotions - to some extent, although an argument may be made that there are other factors involved - and human emotions are vulnerable to exploitation, manipulation and bias by both conscious and unconscious agents in our world. While obviously experiencing a synchronous event and happily putting it down to magic probably, usually, has far less harmful consequences than, say, a judge making an assessment of guilt based on someone's skin colour because of just "feeling it in their core" that this person is guilty, influenced by unconscious biases that they may or may not be aware of - the mechanism behind these things, I would say, is equivalent... and for that reason I think that saying that people can just know
anything, or "feel it in their core", is problematic.
Of course, that is a fairly rational assessment, or at least I would like to think so - based in human logic and physical evidence of what we know about our own history... so if the nature of "feeling something in your core" is said to be beyond reason, then an assessment based on physical evidence rather than "metaphysical evidence" (as far as such a thing even exists) can be fairly conveniently dismissed.