Verified answer

The only reason we perceive coincidences in everyday life is because our focus is narrow, limited to partial events. Now I'll explain what I mean by that.

Nothing happens in isolation, everything in a moment is happening simultaneously. All the things happening in a moment, is really just 1 event. If you say "a cat climbed the tree" that's only an infinitesimal part of the event that took place.

Causes and effects are events. So the full cause of an event is the entire state of everything the moment before, the full previous event.

If you only look at part of an event and try to point to only part of the previous event as the cause, that won't work. When you try to do that, you'll sometimes perceive coincidences-- what appear to be unrelated events. An event may be a coincidence with respect to a *partial* cause, but there's no such thing as a coincidence with respect to the full cause. Example: you tell the cat to climb up the tree and it does. It turns out, the cat climbed it to chase a squirrel and not because of your command. So then, the cat's action was a coincidence with respect to the partial cause of you telling it something. But the entire event that took place as the cat was climbing the tree, was NOT a coincidence with respect to the entire event that took place as you were uttering the words.

Do you mean Causality?

---------

I'm sure you know my thoughts on the subject, so I'll offer thoughts from a famed Physicist:

“Scientists are slowly waking up to an inconvenient truth - the universe looks suspiciously like a fix. The issue concerns the very laws of nature themselves. For 40 years, physicists and cosmologists have been quietly collecting examples of all too convenient "coincidences" and special features in the underlying laws of the universe that seem to be necessary in order for life, and hence conscious beings, to exist. Change any one of them and the consequences would be lethal. Fred Hoyle, the distinguished cosmologist, once said it was as if "a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics".

To see the problem, imagine playing God with the cosmos. Before you is a designer machine that lets you tinker with the basics of physics. Twiddle this knob and you make all electrons a bit lighter, twiddle that one and you make gravity a bit stronger, and so on. It happens that you need to set thirtysomething knobs to fully describe the world about us. The crucial point is that some of those metaphorical knobs must be tuned very precisely, or the universe would be sterile.

Example: neutrons are just a tad heavier than protons. If it were the other way around, atoms couldn't exist, because all the protons in the universe would have decayed into neutrons shortly after the big bang. No protons, then no atomic nucleuses and no atoms. No atoms, no chemistry, no life. Like Baby Bear's porridge in the story of Goldilocks, the universe seems to be just right for life.”

― Paul Davies

I think that people who are too afraid of the ramifications of recognizing the reality of causality are always going to take refuge in the idea of coincidence.

At some point the coincidence theory starts looking pretty thin.

In an infinite number of Universes, one had to 'work'. - Coincidence.

"It's Casuality, NOT Casualty!"

No sh*t?