What is the status of the Book of Changes?

The English preface of the famous western psychologist Jung's book The Book of Changes involves the understanding of the Book of Changes, which is very meaningful: "I don't know Chinese, and I have never been to China, but I can assure my readers that it is not easy to find the right way to enter this famous China thought. Compared with our mode of thinking, the difference is too far. If we want to understand this book thoroughly, it is imperative to get rid of our prejudice in the west. For example, it is strange that a talented and intelligent nation like China has not developed what we call science. In fact, our science is based on the law of cause and effect, which was once considered an axiom. This view is undergoing great changes at present. What Kant's critique of pure reason can't accomplish, contemporary physics is striving for success. The axiom of causality has been fundamentally shaken. Now we understand that the so-called laws of nature are only statistical truths, so there are bound to be exceptions.

We haven't fully realized that in the laboratory, we need to strictly limit its situation in order to get unchangeable and reliable natural laws. If we let nature take its course, we can see a completely different picture: it is extremely common that every process is disturbed by probability, so in natural circumstances, events that can completely conform to the law are exceptions. As I saw in the Book of Changes, China people's thinking seems to be completely attracted by the probability of events, but what we think of as coincidence seems to be the main concern of this special thinking. And the law of cause and effect that we admire is almost completely ignored. We must admit that probability is very important, and human beings have made great efforts to destroy and limit the harm caused by probability. However, compared with the actual effect, the causal relationship obtained from theoretical consideration suddenly appears soft and weak, as low as dust. A timely crystal can naturally be described as a hexagonal prism-as long as we see an ideal crystal, this statement is of course very correct. But in nature, although all crystals are indeed hexagonal, it is impossible to see two identical crystals. However, what the saint of China saw seemed to be real, not a theoretical shape. For him, the empirical entity formed by rich natural law firms is more important than the causal explanation of events. Because events must be separated from each other one by one, it is possible to deal with them properly with cause and effect.

?