Reincarnation

[Sebastian Toe]

Why the population increases if souls reincarnate? This is the same question I myself asked  back in 1973 while discussing the subject with someone. It is one of the first questions many people ask while discussing reincarnation.

The answer is that souls are not just human. Even animals are included in the process, as you are probably well aware.

There are 'n' billion creatures alive today, does your philosophy claim that all of these creatures are reincarnated something from a previous life ? How could that work given that if we go far enough back in time there were tiny numbers involved ?  Where have all the extra souls/spirits/selfs come from to inhabit the current population of the living ?

[torridon]

Why the population increases if souls reincarnate? This is the same question I myself asked  back in 1973 while discussing the subject with someone. It is one of the first questions many people ask while discussing reincarnation.

The answer is that souls are not just human. Even animals are included in the process, as you are probably well aware. But the point is not to be able to answer all such questions. I am sure there are many questions that have no ready answer....just as in science too.....

That doesn't really address the question.  Even if 5 billion people currently alive were previously some or other now deceased person, that means two billion were some sort of animal in the last life and four billion people now alive were some sort of animal in the last but one life and so on and if we add in all the other animals currently alive is there enough previous souls to go round ?  This thinking is not consistent with what we know about the branching and diversification of life, if you go back far enough in time we get back to microbial life only and before that no life, so where do all these souls come from, and by what rationale do they hop from one deceased individual into another and what keeps them attached to one individual during a life ?  Does the fact that I don't have any sort of noetic experience during yogic meditation suggest that I am one of the two billion being a human for the first time ?

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

#123

And there we have a woo answer to get over the problem.

It's easy when there is no need for any evidence.

Why don't we all have a go to see just how easy it is to get around difficult questions, when no evidence is required?

Sriram in his #122 did say

I agree that there are lots of questions. I have many questions too, myself. That does not mean we should refuse to investigate such phenomena or dismiss them outright.

I always find it interesting when difficulties become a barrier not to be overcome when a religious belief is involved, but is a barrier to be overcome when a similar type of problem occurs in science.

[SwordOfTheSpirit]

That doesn't really address the question.  Even if 5 billion people currently alive were previously some or other now deceased person, that means two billion were some sort of animal in the last life and four billion people now alive were some sort of animal in the last but one life and so on and if we add in all the other animals currently alive is there enough previous souls to go round ?  This thinking is not consistent with what we know about the branching and diversification of life, if you go back far enough in time we get back to microbial life only and before that no life, so where do all these souls come from, and by what rationale do they hop from one deceased individual into another and what keeps them attached to one individual during a life ?  Does the fact that I don't have any sort of noetic experience during yogic meditation suggest that I am one of the two billion being a human for the first time ?

Now, if someone took this approach to a science claim, it would be called an argument from incredulity

[torridon]

Now, if someone took this approach to a science claim, it would be called an argument from incredulity

Perhaps you'd like to help Sriram out then if you agree there is sufficient reason to endorse his thinking....

[Sriram]

That doesn't really address the question.  Even if 5 billion people currently alive were previously some or other now deceased person, that means two billion were some sort of animal in the last life and four billion people now alive were some sort of animal in the last but one life and so on and if we add in all the other animals currently alive is there enough previous souls to go round ?  This thinking is not consistent with what we know about the branching and diversification of life, if you go back far enough in time we get back to microbial life only and before that no life, so where do all these souls come from, and by what rationale do they hop from one deceased individual into another and what keeps them attached to one individual during a life ?  Does the fact that I don't have any sort of noetic experience during yogic meditation suggest that I am one of the two billion being a human for the first time ?

I agree that you will not be able to match the soul count and come out with some sort of an equation. That is why I said that this is not Physics. Stop thinking in terms of such equivalences. 

There is no complete theory of reincarnation which gives detailed account of such matters. Nor do I think it will ever be done.

Such scornful questions can be asked about Strings, 11 dimensions, Parallel Universes, Dark Energy and so on, even though they are part of an exact science like Physics. That is what makes the universe so complex. Simplistic ideas don't work.

However, if Tucker and his team have successfully investigated  2500 cases and found suitable matches...that is evidence of reincarnation, period! How the maths works out, I have no idea.

 

[Sriram]

Perhaps you'd like to help Sriram out then if you agree there is sufficient reason to endorse his thinking....

I agree with STS that you people do adopt double standards when dealing with subjects that you consider as 'science' and those that you consider as 'religious beliefs'. This is the old 'Two Boxes syndrome'. 

https://tsriramrao.wordpress.com/2018/03/03/the-two-boxes-syndrome/

[BeRational]

Scornful questions can, and indeed are asked about Strings, and Dark energy, and long may it continue.

By default, none of these things should be believed, UNTIL there is evidence to show that they are real.

Until then it is just woo.

Reincarnation is NOT science.

[Sriram]

Scornful questions can, and indeed are asked about Strings, and Dark energy, and long may it continue.

By default, none of these things should be believed, UNTIL there is evidence to show that they are real.

Until then it is just woo.

Reincarnation is NOT science.

That is fine, then!  Just treat the research on reincarnation with the same respect  that you treat research on Strings, 11 dimensions, Dark Energy and so on......

No problem.  I don't ask for anything more.

[Sebastian Toe]

I agree that you will not be able to match the soul count and come out with some sort of an equation. That is why I said that this is not Physics. Stop thinking in terms of such equivalences. 

It's not physics though  is it?
It's logic.

[torridon]

I agree that you will not be able to match the soul count and come out with some sort of an equation. That is why I said that this is not Physics. Stop thinking in terms of such equivalences. 

There is no complete theory of reincarnation which gives detailed account of such matters. Nor do I think it will ever be done.

no complete theory ? ahem, there isn't any theory, unless you know some and aren't sharing it.  To be taken seriously there needs to be sufficient reason; all there is is a vague idea that it happens somehow and all the support for the idea is a tiny handful of curious anecdotes that might be said to support it.  The concepts need to have internal consistency and there isn't any.

[jeremyp]

Reincarnation? We've had threads about this subject before but they all died in the end...

[BeRational]

That is fine, then!  Just treat the research on reincarnation with the same respect  that you treat research on Strings, 11 dimensions, Dark Energy and so on......

No problem.  I don't ask for anything more.

They are not equal!

Reincarnation is woo with nothing but anecdotal silly superstition.

Strings looks like exotica maths, as does QM (but QM demonstrates results)

Dark Energy is a label for an unexplained MEASURED phenomena.

They are not all equal. Unless you think the chances of me winning the lottery is 50/50.

Either I win or I don't, the only two options.

[BeRational]

Reincarnation? We've had threads about this subject before but they all died in the end...

This one came back!!!!

[Sriram]

no complete theory ? ahem, there isn't any theory, unless you know some and aren't sharing it.  To be taken seriously there needs to be sufficient reason; all there is is a vague idea that it happens somehow and all the support for the idea is a tiny handful of curious anecdotes that might be said to support it.  The concepts need to have internal consistency and there isn't any.

Well...yes. I agree it cannot be called a theory.  It is actually a philosophical idea for which there is now enough evidence to make it a hypothesis. Similar to NDE's and an After-life.   

[Nearly Sane]

Well...yes. I agree it cannot be called a theory.  It is actually a philosophical idea for which there is now enough evidence to make it a hypothesis. Similar to NDE's and an After-life.   

How would you falsify it?

[torridon]

Well...yes. I agree it cannot be called a theory.  It is actually a philosophical idea for which there is now enough evidence to make it a hypothesis. Similar to NDE's and an After-life.   

I disagree, there is nothing in there to warrant calling it a hypothesis, it is just a vague idea lacking justification.  A hypothesis would be an explanatory framework that makes testable predictions.  It would cover the sorts of things I posted up in reply #126 - eg what constitutes a 'soul', how would it be recognised and measured, where they come from, how they attach to bodies, how to interact with bodies, by what rationale do they select one new body and not another following death etc;  when we have a coherent set of concepts proposing how all this works and hangs together then we could start to dignify it with the term 'hypothesis'.

It is a hallmark of woo, that it lacks detail.  Meticulous attention to detail on the other hand, is a hallmark of those who would know truth

[ippy]

That is fine, then!  Just treat the research on reincarnation with the same respect  that you treat research on Strings, 11 dimensions, Dark Energy and so on......

No problem.  I don't ask for anything more.

That is fine, then!  Just treat the research on leprechauns with the same respect  that you treat research on Strings, 11 dimensions, Dark Energy and so on......

No problem.  I don't ask for anything more.

Makes as much sense in my book as your post Sriram.

Regards ippy.

[ekim]

I believe there is an ancient Hindu technique called prati-prasav which 'translated' in the West as 'past life regression' conducted by hypnotherapists.  There was a BBC documentary in 1976 as indicated in this link: http://www.ianlawton.com/plr1.html

[Enki]

I believe there is an ancient Hindu technique called prati-prasav which 'translated' in the West as 'past life regression' conducted by hypnotherapists.  There was a BBC documentary in 1976 as indicated in this link: http://www.ianlawton.com/plr1.html

Or, to get a different view of the Bloxham Tapes, and especially of Rebecca the Jew, try reading this:

http://archive.randi.org/site/index.php/swift-blog/1621-the-bloxham-tapes.html

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The general idea in science is that questions are there to be answered, not sat and looked at

great quote....''questions are there to be answered, not sat and looked at''.....Yes that's very good.

[Sriram]

I disagree, there is nothing in there to warrant calling it a hypothesis, it is just a vague idea lacking justification.  A hypothesis would be an explanatory framework that makes testable predictions.  It would cover the sorts of things I posted up in reply #126 - eg what constitutes a 'soul', how would it be recognised and measured, where they come from, how they attach to bodies, how to interact with bodies, by what rationale do they select one new body and not another following death etc;  when we have a coherent set of concepts proposing how all this works and hangs together then we could start to dignify it with the term 'hypothesis'.

It is a hallmark of woo, that it lacks detail.  Meticulous attention to detail on the other hand, is a hallmark of those who would know truth

You do ask for lots of information, I must say.  Do scientists have such detailed knowledge of Strings, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Parallel Universes and so on. I don't think so.

A hypothesis can be a provisional conjecture for guiding investigation.  Both reincarnation and the idea of an After-life are therefore valid hypotheses that guide investigations into past life memories and NDE's.

Anyone who is not a Yogi is not necessarily 'a human for the first time'.  I have said many times that such practices or belief in God or supernatural belief is not what decides a persons spiritual level.  It depends on ones nature, compassion, non-violence, wisdom and so on. Even atheists can be highly developed spiritually!

[torridon]

You do ask for lots of information, I must say.  Do scientists have such detailed knowledge of Strings, Dark Matter, Dark Energy, Parallel Universes and so on. I don't think so.
..

For it to be a hypothesis there needs to be substance, detail, not just vague ideas.  Compare the detail in String Theory with 'Reincarnation Theory' for instance.  String theory consists in dense mathematical formulations relating mass, charge, particles to vibrational states of strings in multidimensional space.  The level of mathematical detail and conceptualisation is so vast you would need years of study and training in advanced mathematics and fundamental physics before you would get close to being able to call yourself a string theorist.  Where is that level of detail in Reincarnation Theory ?  It's not there, the cupboard is bare, and it makes no testable predictions.  It is just woo.

[Sriram]

For it to be a hypothesis there needs to be substance, detail, not just vague ideas.  Compare the detail in String Theory with 'Reincarnation Theory' for instance.  String theory consists in dense mathematical formulations relating mass, charge, particles to vibrational states of strings in multidimensional space.  The level of mathematical detail and conceptualisation is so vast you would need years of study and training in advanced mathematics and fundamental physics before you would get close to being able to call yourself a string theorist.  Where is that level of detail in Reincarnation Theory ?  It's not there, the cupboard is bare, and it makes no testable predictions.  It is just woo.

A hypothesis.... a provisional conjecture for guiding investigation.  Check the dictionary. That is good enough.

[jeremyp]

A hypothesis.... a provisional conjecture for guiding investigation.  Check the dictionary. That is good enough.

How can your reincarnation hypothesis be falsified? What testable predictions does it make?