• 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.

What Evidence Would Be Sufficient To Prove Reincarnation?

For those new to this thread, which I started yesterday, I''m a skeptic who doesn't believe in reincarnation but who sometimes talk to people who believe in past lives in order to challenge the cases they, in their words, call 'proof'.

When I question the value of their evidence, I often get the response "well, you skeptics wouldn't accept reincarnation whatever proof we gave you". I tell them this isn't true, but I haven't been able to honestly say what would be acceptable to the majority of skeptics, only what I myself would demand from them.

To find out what other skeptics than myself would say, I posed a question and have so far received a great number of responses, some of which I've collected as a series of quotes in post #112, for those interested.

Thank you


Some late answers:

Akhenaten, I love brevity, but did your answer suggest it’s impossible to define reincarnation or did you mean that reincarnation is impossible? Please expand.

Paulhoff, I don’t need to prove there’s a soul, something I don’t even believe in, to have the right to ask questions to those who are kind enough to answer.
Edited by LashL: 
Edited for civility. Please read the Membership Agreement and abide by it.


PixyMisa, you lovely thing, nobody can misrepresent what is said in the thread because it’s all there for everyone to read!

Pup, don’t just read a sentence here and there and jump to conclusions. I don’t believe in reincarnation and I’ve said it so many times and in so many posts now, it’s ridiculous. Also, what if reincarnation doesn’t give you the same genes? Aren’t you making huge assumptions?

CynicalSkeptic, I’m more interested in your definition, since I’m here to learn.

Stanfr, thanks for your answer.

Fromdownunder, 1) get a dictionary and look up reincarnation - whatever definition you find will be my definition as well. 2) Bridey *********** Murphy? Are you serious? G’day!

Sun Countess, if it's happening in a way that can't be measured, then you find a way to measure it - not you but someone of high intelligence and capability.

Sadhatter, it does reek to high heaven of flim flam to me, that’s why I talk to people who believe in reincarnation and try to make them see the error of their ways. Do you know who else thinks it’s worth the time and effort to dissuade woo-woos? Randi, whom the JREF is named after.

Le Jab, have you considered the possibility that you’re a useless hypnotist and that your subjects aren’t really hypnotized? Just thinking out loud.

Marduk, do you mean one rule for us mortals and one for divine entities?

SusanB-M1, just admit you made it up and all is forgiven.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Illiadus said:
Paulhoff, I don’t need to prove there’s a soul, something I don’t even believe in, to have the right to ask questions to those who are kind enough to answer.
Click to expand...
What is the title of this thread, and didn't you say you wanted to know what evidence would be sufficient to prove reincarnation. Prove first there is a soul.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Paulhoff, you need to be more articulate in the future, but I understand now that you mean "prove the soul" as a method of proving reincarnation.

Does anyone else agree that proving there's a soul necessarily proves reincarnation, because I don't see why it would?
 
Illiadus said:
Paulhoff, you need to be more articulate in the future, but I understand now that you mean "prove the soul" as a method of proving reincarnation.

Does anyone else agree that proving there's a soul necessarily proves reincarnation, because I don't see why it would?
Click to expand...

No, but its existence is a necessary condition for reincarnation to be possible.
 
Illiadus said:
Paulhoff, you need to be more articulate in the future, but I understand now that you mean "prove the soul" as a method of proving reincarnation.

Does anyone else agree that proving there's a soul necessarily proves reincarnation, because I don't see why it would?
Click to expand...


1. Don't be so rude.

2. Paul's point is both perfectly clear and 100% correct.


Sideroxylon said:
No, but its existence is a necessary condition for reincarnation to be possible.
Click to expand...


What you said.

:)
 
Illiadus said:
Pup, don’t just read a sentence here and there and jump to conclusions. I don’t believe in reincarnation and I’ve said it so many times and in so many posts now, it’s ridiculous. Also, what if reincarnation doesn’t give you the same genes? Aren’t you making huge assumptions?
Click to expand...

Assuming you're referring to post #116 about the genes, of course I'm making a huge assumption. Well, I mean, I'm not really sincerely making it, I'm presenting it as a humorous exageration to show that any hypothesis about reincarnation involves huge assumptions, which first need pinned down before one can proceed.

What if reincarnation doesn't give you memories that carry over from one life to the next? Isn't that a huge assumption too?
 
Illiadus said:
Paulhoff, you need to be more articulate in the future, but I understand now that you mean "prove the soul" as a method of proving reincarnation.

Does anyone else agree that proving there's a soul necessarily proves reincarnation, because I don't see why it would?
Click to expand...

Nobody here believes that, including Paulhoff, who said nothing of the sort.

The existence of an unseen entity called a soul is just a first step. If there's no soul, then there's nothing to reincarnate. No soul = No reincarnation.

If there is a soul, then that opens a slew of possibilities. Where do they come from? Where do they go? Nearly half the planet believes that their souls will go on to an afterlife. Most of those don't believe in reincarnation.

It's a first step toward reincarnation even being a possibility, but it's certainly not the only step.

With so many people hinging their entire lives on the existence of their soul, you'd think one of them would have proven it by now. Until then, I'm not going to believe in their existence any more than I believe in the existence of gods, pixies, or orbiting teacups.
 
Last edited:
Illiadus said:
Paulhoff, you need to be more articulate in the future, but I understand now that you mean "prove the soul" as a method of proving reincarnation.

Does anyone else agree that proving there's a soul necessarily proves reincarnation, because I don't see why it would?
Click to expand...
Yes, some do need to be hit on the head many times to get a simple idea.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Some people here are assuming reincarnation would require a soul. As a skeptic, I don't jump to such conclusions.
 
Illiadus said:
Some people here are assuming reincarnation would require a soul. As a skeptic, I don't jump to such conclusions.
Click to expand...

I reckon pretty much any means that you can come up with of preserving the information of the conscious mind and then having that reborn into another person would attract the label of soul.
 
Last edited:
Illiadus said:
Some people here are assuming reincarnation would require a soul. As a skeptic, I don't jump to such conclusions.
Click to expand...
Oh, and how else would it be. Something that isn't of this universe would have to make the jump from one body to another, and you can name it anything you want, but soul would fit the bill.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Last edited:
Illiadus said:
Some people here are assuming reincarnation would require a soul. As a skeptic, I don't jump to such conclusions.
Click to expand...

Then what exactly is being reincarnated? Genetic material? Birthmarks? Similar facial structures?

Maybe you really do need to go back to your reincarnation boards where you're spending time "debunking" and ask the enthusiasts what they think is being reincarnated. From everything I've read about the subject, they believe that a soul or consciousness is being reincarnated from one body into another.
 
Illiadus said:
For those new to this thread, which I started yesterday, I''m a skeptic who doesn't believe in reincarnation but who sometimes talk to people who believe in past lives in order to challenge the cases they, in their words, call 'proof'.

When I question the value of their evidence, I often get the response "well, you skeptics wouldn't accept reincarnation whatever proof we gave you". I tell them this isn't true, but I haven't been able to honestly say what would be acceptable to the majority of skeptics, only what I myself would demand from them.

To find out what other skeptics than myself would say, I posed a question and have so far received a great number of responses, some of which I've collected as a series of quotes in post #112, for those interested.

Thank you


Some late answers:

Akhenaten, I love brevity, but did your answer suggest it’s impossible to define reincarnation or did you mean that reincarnation is impossible? Please expand.

Paulhoff, I don’t need to prove there’s a soul, something I don’t even believe in, to have the right to ask questions to those who are kind enough to answer.

PixyMisa, you lovely thing, nobody can misrepresent what is said in the thread because it’s all there for everyone to read!

Pup, don’t just read a sentence here and there and jump to conclusions. I don’t believe in reincarnation and I’ve said it so many times and in so many posts now, it’s ridiculous. Also, what if reincarnation doesn’t give you the same genes? Aren’t you making huge assumptions?

CynicalSkeptic, I’m more interested in your definition, since I’m here to learn.

Stanfr, thanks for your answer.

Fromdownunder, 1) get a dictionary and look up reincarnation - whatever definition you find will be my definition as well. 2) Bridey *********** Murphy? Are you serious? G’day!

Sun Countess, if it's happening in a way that can't be measured, then you find a way to measure it - not you but someone of high intelligence and capability.

Sadhatter, it does reek to high heaven of flim flam to me, that’s why I talk to people who believe in reincarnation and try to make them see the error of their ways. Do you know who else thinks it’s worth the time and effort to dissuade woo-woos? Randi, whom the JREF is named after.

Le Jab, have you considered the possibility that you’re a useless hypnotist and that your subjects aren’t really hypnotized? Just thinking out loud.

Marduk, do you mean one rule for us mortals and one for divine entities?

SusanB-M1, just admit you made it up and all is forgiven.
Click to expand...

Hey, I participated too. Why wasn't I insulted?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom