• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof of reincarnation

gerg said:
And that's why in human history from Shamanism of 40,000 years ago to the present day more people have believed in it than those who haven't.
Click to expand...

40,000 years?
How did you find out about shamanistic practices of archaic homo sapiens?
Did they leave a note?
 
kerikiwi said:
40,000 years?
How did you find out about shamanistic practices of archaic homo sapiens?
Did they leave a note?
Click to expand...

Well, duh. He probably was a shaman of an early human tribe in a previous life. How else would he know so much about this phenomenon that still baffles the scientific community?
 
gerg said:
I'll choose to ignore the drivel from the previous posters and respond to yours for now, although Dancing David put forward some reasonable arguments, but does appear a bit stuck in his ways. So Maia, do you have an issue with people who have overcome their phobias by way of a PLR and are now leading happy lives?
Click to expand...

The 'have you stopped beating your dog yet' question can be answered just as coherently. The statement presupposes a.) that these 'people' exist and that their existence can be verified, and this doesn't even get into the fact that anecdotes are not evidence b.) the definition of the word 'overcome' c.) how 'phobias' are defined d.) how 'happy lives' are defined e.) what kinds of psychological problems were ever in question to start with , and all of this is completely leaving out an uncountable number of other issues I can think of, such as the value of beginning any query with "do you have an issue with", etc., etc., etc.

Do you also have any examples of hypnotherapists who on top of not being able to help people have also failed to refer those people they can't help to the right person or people?
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand. a.)Yes b.) I am not obligated to come up with "examples" c.) That's not even what I was talking about d.) Several ideas are conflated here at random e.) The real problem-- which is what I was talking about-- is that practitioners are being allowed and encouraged to do what is really psychotherapy with as little as one hundred and fifty hours of training, rather than limiting it to entertainment purposes, then f through z, and additional alphabets would have to be used and made up to cover it all.
 
psychicwonderer628 said:
Yes, hypnotherapists CAN plant suggestions, whether they mean to or not. However, there are skilled practitioners who do not.
Click to expand...

Yes. I do agree with this. But that statement doesn't have anything at all to do with the claim that somebody is accurately recounting details of past lives. Do you see how these two statements aren't the same and one really isn't related to the other?

Can you deal with the possibility that Dr Newton is skilled enough to not suggest anything? I mean, how can someone suggest some unknown person who died on the Kansas prairie in 1870? It isn't like every dead person has well known facts about themselves floating around in the ether.
Click to expand...

It's not just about skills, but about professional ethics. And if anybody reading this forum is going to say anything about this claim one way or the other, we need to see a citation. As it is, we don't know anything more than what we're reading in this post.
 
Maia said:
'have you stopped beating your dog yet'
Click to expand...
Don't you mean wife? Or was that a sly poke at my earlier posts?
Maia said:
The statement presupposes a.) that these 'people' exist and that their existence can be verified, and this doesn't even get into the fact that anecdotes are not evidence
Click to expand...
Ouch, the old anecdote argument rears its ugly head again..I mean come on where do you draw the line with that argument? It's like people at work saying they have migraines and someone else on the other side of the world saying it's not real just anecdotal!
Maia said:
the definition of the word 'overcome'
Click to expand...
I would have thought it fairly clear in this context!?
Maia said:
how 'phobias' are defined
Click to expand...
the normal way they are defined > intense fear
Maia said:
how 'happy lives' are defined
Click to expand...
I think you know what I mean here Maia..
Maia said:
all of this is completely leaving out an uncountable number of other issues I can think of, such as the value of beginning any query with "do you have an issue with"
Click to expand...
I think you're reading too much into the question. Yes or No would have sufficed.
 
gerg said:
Ouch, the old anecdote argument rears its ugly head again..I mean come on where do you draw the line with that argument? It's like people at work saying they have migraines and someone else on the other side of the world saying it's not real just anecdotal!
Click to expand...


Gerg, anecdotes do not count as evidence, they can count as indications.

However if you wish to present an anecdote, go ahead. Really present something, you haven't so far.
I will ask the same questions I would otherwise:

1. What is the data that allegedly crossed from one past life to a current one?
2. Is this actual evidence of data from a past life?
3. Can this data have been generated by other means?

These are the crucial questions, so present away Gerg.

ETA: Gerg, you need to understand that the question Maia asks are the same all over the JREF, in this case you say
phobias: but you give no baseline of symptoms, what was the level of occurrence and intensity
overcome: no discussion of reduction of symptoms or tolerance for symptoms
happy lives: no baseline to show they did not have a happy life before

So the data is lacking, what level of symptoms and occurrence changed in response to the alleged treatment? What other factors were involved?
 
Last edited:
gerg said:
Don't you mean wife? Or was that a sly poke at my earlier posts? Ouch, the old anecdote argument rears its ugly head again..I mean come on where do you draw the line with that argument? It's like people at work saying they have migraines and someone else on the other side of the world saying it's not real just anecdotal! I would have thought it fairly clear in this context!? the normal way they are defined > intense fear I think you know what I mean here Maia.. I think you're reading too much into the question. Yes or No would have sufficed.
Click to expand...

A phobia is an irrational fear,if you came across a charging tiger in the jungle you would experience intense fear,that is not a phobia.Being afraid of tomatoes would be a phobia.
 
Dancing David said:
Gerg, anecdotes do not count as evidence, they can count as indications.
Click to expand...
Yes but would you accept that certain things can't have the same type of evidence that you are familiar with? So for example, the existance of an Apple can be scientifically proven , however, something like a ghost or the concept of Reincarnation can't be as they fall outside known physical laws. However when you have so many people both historically and present including myself that have experienced Ghosts then I believe they, and other similar concepts, should be accepted even though the evidence that they do or don't exist can't be scientifically proven.
 
dafydd said:
A phobia is an irrational fear,if you came across a charging tiger in the jungle you would experience intense fear,that is not a phobia.Being afraid of tomatoes would be a phobia.
Click to expand...
yes but we are discussing intense fear in relation to "phobias" not coming across a Tiger! Two different things.
 
gerg said:
Yes but would you accept that certain things can't have the same type of evidence that you are familiar with? So for example, the existance of an Apple can be scientifically proven , however, something like a ghost or the concept of Reincarnation can't be as they fall outside known physical laws. However when you have so many people both historically and present including myself that have experienced Ghosts then I believe they, and other similar concepts, should be accepted even though the evidence that they do or don't exist can't be scientifically proven.
Click to expand...
So, why does this thread have the word "Proof" in it.

Because if you or anyone else thinks they seen a ghost, or thinks someone is a reincarnation of someone does not in any way make it true.

Hear say it not a proof.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
gerg said:
Yes but would you accept that certain things can't have the same type of evidence that you are familiar with?
Click to expand...
This makes no sense. Science is asking simply for proof that something exists. You are now saying "I can't prove this exists, but you should accept it anyway." So no, we cannot accept that certain things can't have the same type of evidence we're familiar with unless you start giving us good reasons to do so. So far, your evidence consists of pointing out that some people think reincarnation happens. This is useless.
 
gerg said:
Yes but would you accept that certain things can't have the same type of evidence that you are familiar with? So for example, the existance of an Apple can be scientifically proven , however, something like a ghost or the concept of Reincarnation can't be as they fall outside known physical laws. However when you have so many people both historically and present including myself that have experienced Ghosts then I believe they, and other similar concepts, should be accepted even though the evidence that they do or don't exist can't be scientifically proven.
Click to expand...

Where else would you like the rules of evidence relaxed? The courtroom? Hearsay about your fidelity towards your spouse/partner?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom