'20 cases suggestive of reincarnation'

[bfinn]

Does anyone else who has read this book have a view on the research it documents and any conclusions to be drawn from it?

 

[CFLarsen]

Some articles on Ian Stevenson:

Book Review: Children Who Remember Previous Lives, A Question of Reincarnation, Ian Stevenson
Some of the perhaps best cases for reincarnation are investigated. How do they hold up to reality?

The Apparent Belief System Of Ian Stevenson
This is a follow-up to the book review of Ian Stevenson's book "Children Who Remember Previous Lives, A Question of Reincarnation".

 

[bfinn]

Thanks for this. However Rockley is reviewing another book by Stevenson (which I have bought, but not read yet) - though I assume the book is somewhat similar to 20 Cases as it appears to include some of the same cases.

I can't say Rockley's analysis and criticisms are particularly impressive. In the 20 Cases book Stevenson himself devotes a substantial part of the book to considering possible prosaic explanations (involving fraud, self-delusion, coincidence, etc. - even exotic explanations such as telepathy), concluding that these could explain some aspects of some cases but by no means all. He is also quite open about the weaknesses of some of the cases - the 20 Cases book is after all intended to contain a representative sample of strong and weak cases from a variety of countries - not just the best cases.

Rockley would I think hit trouble if he focussed on a single strong case and tried to explain all aspects of it (rather than effectively saying 'we can explain some aspects of some cases, ergo they must all be entirely explicable in a somewhat similar way'). This is something that Stevenson attempts to do at considerable length with each of the cases (in 20 Cases).

I agree with Rockley that the fact that apparent reincarnation seems to arise mostly in cultures that believe in it, and in the way they believe it happens, is puzzling (the suggestion being that reincarnation is imagined), but this does not amount to a satisfactory explanation for the large amount of correct information conveyed by the apparent reincarnee about his/her supposed former life. And it is consistent with other explanations (hey, maybe post-death you can choose whether & how you are reincarnated?) - of course entirely speculative, but it shows there is no logical contradiction here.

I think Rockley's parting shot is quite bogus:
With these comments I believe he blows his credibility as a serious scientist. In my view this casts doubt on all of his work.

Which I translate as:
Ian Stevenson has funny views on consciousness, materialism, etc. - so we can safely ignore all his reports of apparent reincarnation cases.
Which is just an ad hominem attack (Rockley seems very fond of classifying his arguments).

 

[CFLarsen]

Do you want to discuss Stevenson's best case, then?

Incidentally, Rockley is "RichardR" on this forum.

 

[bfinn]

Sure, which case do you think is the best one? Maybe one of the Indian cases (as they tend to involve separate families)?

 

[CFLarsen]

Sure, which case do you think is the best one? Maybe one of the Indian cases (as they tend to involve separate families)?

I don't think there are any cases for reincarnation.

You tell us what the best case is, in your opinion.

Then, let's discuss it.

 

[cj.23]

I'm planning to re-read Twenty Cases and will be interested to participate in the discussion.

Stevenson's own methodology always struck me as sound, with the exception of the use of translators in several cases, where there are obvious problems. Clearly this was absolutely necessary, but it still worries me.

Comments about Stevenson not being a decent scientist are farcical. He was committed to the pursuit of medical science - sure he may well have made errors, but his intent was as far as I can see purely scientific, and his efforts have revealed a curiosity.

Apparent Reincarnation Memories in children ( a new acronyum - ARMC ?) --and remember Stevenson was a scathing critic of ALL recovered memory/ hypnotic regression claims, something his detractors generally overlook-- need an explanation,. That explanation may well teach us something about how parents shape children's identities, cultural understandings of religion, or maybe something weirder. Yet what Stevenson spent much of his life on was an oddity which demands exploration, a cross cultural phenomenon which however is clearly shaped by each cultures beliefs and expectations, and yet remains tot his day largely unexplored.

cj x

 

[Brattus]

We are all unique beings. All of our thoughts and feelings, hopes and dreams, passions and pleasures, sorrow and pain is ours and ours alone.
To suggest that we are used spirits in new bodies is an insult to our amazing uniqueness.
Instead of wasting time searching for some way to not be who we are. We should be embracing ourselves as the one of a kind beings that each of us truly are.
Reincarnation is not a real thing. When we are dead we are focking dead.
So we should embrace each moment we have no matter how mundane, tragic, sad, painful, happy, loving or beautiful it is.
Life is just to short to do otherwise.

 

[cj.23]

I admire the sentiments Brattus, nobly put. I am however convinced there remains an anomaly here worthy of proper scientific investigation: Stevenson's work was not religious (he may well have been) - I think it's a mystery worth exploring. I don't believe in reincarnation as it happens, but I want to understand the mechanism by which these cases arise...

cj x

 

[Zep]

I admire the sentiments Brattus, nobly put. I am however convinced there remains an anomaly here worthy of proper scientific investigation: Stevenson's work was not religious (he may well have been) - I think it's a mystery worth exploring. I don't believe in reincarnation as it happens, but I want to understand the mechanism by which these cases arise...

cj x

The real world calls this mechanism "delusion".

 

[cj.23]

The real world calls this mechanism "delusion".

Delusion? Is that meant to be an explanatory mechanism, because it fails rather badly! You are making a priori assumptions, rather than addressing the evidence. Yeah sure the kids might be deluded, in the sense they have false memories, but that tells us nothing about how this arises.

I don't see how it can work, but I know there is a phenomena of children reporting previous lives, and I want to understand why. At the very least it will have something to teach us about developmental psychology and the role of cultural and familial factors on the creation of individual identity, and as such could be extraordinarily important...


cj x

 

[swifty]

Wait this makes no sense. So we are all spirits. But the human population is increasing. So there are getting to be more and more spirits. Where do these spirits come from? And what chooses who will be what next? If there are old spirits, shouldnt they be much wiser? Why do we need to re-learn everything in our life even though we lived before, if we simply forget everything which happened what is the difference between reincarnation in which you forget everything which happened and everything just not happening?

Unless you want to answer the core fundamentals of this theory, I don't see how this study is relevant.

 

[cj.23]

Wait this makes no sense. So we are all spirits. But the human population is increasing. So there are getting to be more and more spirits. Where do these spirits come from? And what chooses who will be what next? If there are old spirits, shouldnt they be much wiser? Why do we need to re-learn everything in our life even though we lived before, if we simply forget everything which happened what is the difference between reincarnation in which you forget everything which happened and everything just not happening?

Unless you want to answer the core fundamentals of this theory, I don't see how this study is relevant.

Reincarnation makes no sense to me philosophically either. Nonetheless, the fact the explanatory mechanism proposed by believers makes absolutely no sense in no way evaluates the peculiarity we face: somehow some children are becoming convinced they lived before. That is fascinating -- even more so if the metaphysical claims are wrong, because it might provide us with material relevant to how individual identity forms.

I note from my memory of reading Stevenson that these memories arises early, say prior to 2, and pass by the age of 5 normally, becoming less and less frequent. Now we can assume it is somehow culturally conditioned, as most of the cases Stevenson reports are from cultures which believe in reincarnation, but, and i speak from experience, it is not necessarily so. It may just be that "memories of other lives" are a stage in separation from mother and development of many children, but only associated with proof of reincarnation in cultures that believe in reincarnation.

I'd like to see a lot more work on this, as human identity and how we formulate our sense of self is fascinating stuff... Just because an experience is often put in box marked woo does not make it woo. Night hag experiences and NDEs are probably real experiences - the woo is in the pseudo-explanatory mechanisms, not in the experience itself, if that makes sense.

Linda suggested a while back that "the paranormal" is possibly a category error, and I agree wholeheartedly. We need more proper science here...

cj x

 

[Pup]

To suggest that we are used spirits in new bodies is an insult to our amazing uniqueness.

That sounds like the same argument used by people who want to stop any discussion of evolution. To suggest that we're descended from animals would be an insult to our divine nature, so it would be wrong to discuss it.

I like cj.23's approach. If it appears that the data is there--if children regularly report something that appears like past life memories--it doesn't mean they are having past life memories.

We can discuss sleep paralysis without believing in the "old hag," or the psychology behind ouija boards and dowsing rods without believe in ghosts or dowsing, or mental illness without believing in possession by evil spirits. So why not see if there's some data on this topic worth examining?

 

[Rasmus55]

Reincarnation makes no sense to me philosophically either. Nonetheless, the fact the explanatory mechanism proposed by believers makes absolutely no sense in no way evaluates the peculiarity we face: somehow some children are becoming convinced they lived before. That is fascinating -- even more so if the metaphysical claims are wrong, because it might provide us with material relevant to how individual identity forms.

I note from my memory of reading Stevenson that these memories arises early, say prior to 2, and pass by the age of 5 normally, becoming less and less frequent. Now we can assume it is somehow culturally conditioned, as most of the cases Stevenson reports are from cultures which believe in reincarnation, but, and i speak from experience, it is not necessarily so. It may just be that "memories of other lives" are a stage in separation from mother and development of many children, but only associated with proof of reincarnation in cultures that believe in reincarnation.

I'd like to see a lot more work on this, as human identity and how we formulate our sense of self is fascinating stuff... Just because an experience is often put in box marked woo does not make it woo. Night hag experiences and NDEs are probably real experiences - the woo is in the pseudo-explanatory mechanisms, not in the experience itself, if that makes sense.

Linda suggested a while back that "the paranormal" is possibly a category error, and I agree wholeheartedly. We need more proper science here...

cj x

Hmm, how about the simple explanation? Children fib; they make things up all the time. The lie in school, at home, in play with other kids, and in just about every place where children are to be found. Kids do not understand the implication of lying or why it is not generally desirable; that is the whole reason why the legal system gives them a pass. Kids also lie with the encouragement of their parents; given suggestability in young kids (and older ones), is it any wonder that the focus of fibs might be the things to which their parents expose them including religious beliefs? Kids have incredible imaginations; they play with toys, dolls, play guns in the yard, have imaginary friends, etc; more indications of the ability to create fantasy worlds and non-reality. Why is it so hard to recognize BS when you see it? Instead, psychs always seek to validate their pseudo-scientific claptrap with sophisticated sounding theories for something that is usually as plain as the nose on your face. In this case, it's called fibbing.

 

[cj.23]

Because fibbing does not explain large parts of Stevenson's data. Now fibbing is as you say what we might expect from very young kids, and in cross caste cases we can see other motives, but some of the reincarnation cases resulted in severe punishment of the children, and in some cultures arose in heavy parental opposition to the claims.

Still, yes lying is a good explanation - but one assumes it would be cross cultural, and probably is? My biggest objection would be why these fantasies of being someone else and having lived before- not something one might easily think of!

My major problem is so much of the information we have is reliant on Dr Ian Stevenson, and therefore subject to the criticisms of his methodology. Further studies by other medical and psychiatric authorities of his rank are rare (I can think of a couple on specific cases) but until we get more data it's hard to comprehend. Children do fantasise, and lie in all innocence, but "Twenty Cases" deals with that issue - an many other equally sound objections...

Insufficient data. I hope we see more well researched studies.

cj x

 

[Rasmus55]

Because fibbing does not explain large parts of Stevenson's data. Now fibbing is as you say what we might expect from very young kids, and in cross caste cases we can see other motives, but some of the reincarnation cases resulted in severe punishment of the children, and in some cultures arose in heavy parental opposition to the claims.

Still, yes lying is a good explanation - but one assumes it would be cross cultural, and probably is? My biggest objection would be why these fantasies of being someone else and having lived before- not something one might easily think of!

My major problem is so much of the information we have is reliant on Dr Ian Stevenson, and therefore subject to the criticisms of his methodology. Further studies by other medical and psychiatric authorities of his rank are rare (I can think of a couple on specific cases) but until we get more data it's hard to comprehend. Children do fantasise, and lie in all innocence, but "Twenty Cases" deals with that issue - an many other equally sound objections...

Insufficient data. I hope we see more well researched studies.

cj x

You largest objection concerning the subject matter of the probable lie is possibly western centric. Perhaps in India someone might find it strange that Western kids have imaginary friends? I think the basis for the fibbing is largely cultural as has been suggested here. As for the severe punishment aspect, that is not necessarily a deterrent to lying. We see this time and again with kids and adults. We also don't know at which point there was heavy parental opposition. Certainly, in cultures where reincarnation is part of the majority religion, how could parents justify belief in reincarnation on one hand then punish a kid for claiming it on the other. The Indian caste system is absolutely dependant upon the notion of reincarnation; karma dictates what caste a person will be born into. If the kid is born as an untouchable, for instance, maybe he would want to create fantasies that he was actually reincarnated from the soul of a great king? And if he then presented that to the society around him, his parents (aware of their social standing) might very well punish him not so much for violation of belief in reincarnation but for misrepresenting his reincarnation and, more importantly, causing problems for the parents. The same could be said of high caste parents who have a kid creating fantasies about a low caste reincarnation. Parallel examples could be discussed for Western societies. Just examples, but it's all fibbing just the same.

 

[davidsmith73]

Wait this makes no sense. So we are all spirits. But the human population is increasing. So there are getting to be more and more spirits. Where do these spirits come from? And what chooses who will be what next? If there are old spirits, shouldnt they be much wiser? Why do we need to re-learn everything in our life even though we lived before, if we simply forget everything which happened what is the difference between reincarnation in which you forget everything which happened and everything just not happening?

Unless you want to answer the core fundamentals of this theory, I don't see how this study is relevant.

If "reincarnation" represents a phenomenon based on a mechanism as yet unrecognised science, then I don't see a reason for assuming such questions necessarily apply to the observed phenomena. If "reincarnation" is nothing to do with known mechanisms, what we have, ostensively, are cases where children appear to have access to information about the experiences of people who have already died. So I think its a question of formulating the best and simplest hypothesis (assuming normal explanations ruled out). "Spirits" (whatever they are!) don't necessarily have to come into it.

I haven't read the Stevenson book. Does he mention "spirits"?

 

[cj.23]

You largest objection concerning the subject matter of the probable lie is possibly western centric. Perhaps in India someone might find it strange that Western kids have imaginary friends? I think the basis for the fibbing is largely cultural as has been suggested here.

Possibly: the problem here is to what extent children of that age can assimilate religious symbolism, and graps concepts like death and rebirth, which may vary anyway by individual. There was however i seem to to recall some research mentioned in a BBC news piece which suggested children could learn religious iconography by 3, so this is indeed highly possible.

As for the severe punishment aspect, that is not necessarily a deterrent to lying. We see this time and again with kids and adults. We also don't know at which point there was heavy parental opposition. Certainly, in cultures where reincarnation is part of the majority religion, how could parents justify belief in reincarnation on one hand then punish a kid for claiming it on the other.

Some cultures Stevenson discusses believe previous life memories are a sign the child may die young, hence clearly discourage such, whereas in others the child wishes to go to its "real family", resulting in much distress. There are other reasons in some cases, but those are the key ones as I recall.

The Indian caste system is absolutely dependant upon the notion of reincarnation; karma dictates what caste a person will be born into. If the kid is born as an untouchable, for instance, maybe he would want to create fantasies that he was actually reincarnated from the soul of a great king? And if he then presented that to the society around him, his parents (aware of their social standing) might very well punish him not so much for violation of belief in reincarnation but for misrepresenting his reincarnation and, more importantly, causing problems for the parents. The same could be said of high caste parents who have a kid creating fantasies about a low caste reincarnation. Parallel examples could be discussed for Western societies. Just examples, but it's all fibbing just the same.

Yes, but Stevenson claims that children display knowledge of castes they would have no social contact with. I suspect this could be a way of subverting the social order and allowing the child to "act up" with some cultural validation. I also suspect that when I was young many little girls would recall having been princesses and little boys astronauts in the UK and Denmark! Still i can't prove that, because there is no cultural tradition of reincarnation.

Stevenson draws cases from Canada/Alaska, SE Asia, India and the Middle East as I recall, from widely disparate cultures - and unsurprisingly the children's claims reflect the variant form of reincarnation they are exposed to in the main as far as I recall, so there is little consensus as one might expect if the reincarnation hypothesis is true. I may be mistaken though - its been years since i read Stevenson at all.

Still find it all interesting! I love a mystery, and am keen to understand how it arises...
j x

 

[cj.23]

I haven't read the Stevenson book. Does he mention "spirits"?

As far as i recall, only in the context of describing the beliefs of the various cultures involved as regards reincarnation. It's been a long while though - someone else may have a copy to hand - I'm afraid I don't!

cj x