• 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.

A flaw with the belief in reincarnation?

Reading through the posts it sounds like "Ground Hog Day". I live with a medium and the rule is "you must ask the question" if you want to know. When I state things that some would understand others yell stupid. The problem talking to a group. You can be sure I don't joke. Certain people can talk to the dead, so the life force goes on. We have been told (by asking) incredible things and think we have a vague understanding of what's ahead and behind. Time is screwey.
 
Explorer said:
Astral projectionists get round the problem by saying that a non-physical brains develops alongside your physical brain. Thus when your physical brain dies, the memories are still held in your "astral" brain.
Click to expand...

And God continues to live in the gaps...

(Not saying you are advocating the existence of an astral brain, but I'll comment anyway.) Invoking the existence of an astral brain seems a logical resolution to the issue if it can be proven that a) an astral plane exists and b) an astral brain can develop. However, creating a logically progressive explanation for some phenomenon or other doesn't make it factual, no matter how logical. Quantifiable proof for the existence of an astral brain (let alone an astral plane) would certainly be a swell addition to the science of neurology (and physics). Otherwise, we are left to conclude, based upon the available evidence, that conciousness does not leave the substance of the brain. As in Eos of Eons saying that without a brain we have no conciousness. That doesn't mean that conciousness cannot exist outside the physical structure of the brain, but the likelihood is, to the best of our knowledge, less probable than the more evidenced explanation.

And the God of the gaps lives on...
 
XLDS03 said:
And God continues to live in the gaps...

(Not saying you are advocating the existence of an astral brain, but I'll comment anyway.) Invoking the existence of an astral brain seems a logical resolution to the issue if it can be proven that a) an astral plane exists and b) an astral brain can develop. However, creating a logically progressive explanation for some phenomenon or other doesn't make it factual, no matter how logical. Quantifiable proof for the existence of an astral brain (let alone an astral plane) would certainly be a swell addition to the science of neurology (and physics). Otherwise, we are left to conclude, based upon the available evidence, that conciousness does not leave the substance of the brain. As in Eos of Eons saying that without a brain we have no conciousness. That doesn't mean that conciousness cannot exist outside the physical structure of the brain, but the likelihood is, to the best of our knowledge, less probable than the more evidenced explanation.

And the God of the gaps lives on...
Click to expand...

I struggle with the concept of consciousness. Sometimes I feel it is like having a sounding board or mirror in one's own head, but that is probably as a result of the brain's ability to segment and interact with itself.

That indefinable self that we take for granted, is it the same as yours, and the next person's? It is difficult to conceive of a time when I never had consciousness, but of course I never possessed one before I was born, and don't recall missing it.
 
We are all talking to the wrong people, ask a high ranking mason. 33% mason is called "The living dead" and they understand reincarnation. They build masonic temples on ley lines. Mind and brain are not the same thing, that could take us into the code in our language. Cheers Old Bob
 
Iamme said:
To be reincarnated means that you would have had to come form some past life. Were you also reincarnated in that past life? And so on and so on?

There comes a point where somewheres down the road, there had to have been original life. And out of that original life came reincarnated life (if you so believe this)

That being said; if life comes into existance somehow, originally, in it's pure nonreincarnated state...then why believe that future life becomes recycled (reincarnated)? Why not JUST believe in all life as being original? Why believe that there is both?
Click to expand...

Buddhists believe that there is no "first" original life. That reincarnation _always_ happened. Perhaps they are right. I don't see why a "first" original life follows from reincarnation.
 
Explorer said:
Astral projectionists get round the problem by saying that a non-physical brains develops alongside your physical brain. Thus when your physical brain dies, the memories are still held in your "astral" brain.
Click to expand...

Frankly, I think that this is getting round the problem by asserting something without reason. There is zero proof that there is an "astral" brain. Am I wrong?

By the way, do the neurons in it use astral neurotransmitters??? And astral electric signals?
 
JetLeg said:
Buddhists believe that there is no "first" original life. That reincarnation _always_ happened. Perhaps they are right. I don't see why a "first" original life follows from reincarnation.
Click to expand...

Does anyone?
 
I believe in an original life. If we are all reincarnated there had to be an original life. Common sense.
 
1) To me it's not common sense at all. Care to explain your common sense?

2) Lets assume that everything has a cause. Does it follow that must be a first cause?

I think not. An option that the universe always existed is possible, and more sensible.


(However, it doesn't work in the chicken and egg example. It makes no sense to me to say that there was no first chicken, or first egg. So probably there is some difference between "first cause" and "first chicken". But I fail to see what exactly it is).
 
I agree with the statement above to the effect that reincarnation is just another comforting idea to cheat death. All of the arguments for it appear to be of the ad hoc sort... "Well, then maybe it's THIS way..."
No evidence whatever. No model of how consciousness could possibly exist without the body and brain to support it.
Consciousness is inextricably linked to brain function. Damage X area of the brain, and observable changes to Y aspect of consciousness occur. Infuse the brain with B psychoactive chemical, and C alterations to consciousness occur.
Memories are physically retrievable by electrostimulation of the brain in specific areas.
 
ThreadNecro.jpg
 
JetLeg said:
(However, it doesn't work in the chicken and egg example. It makes no sense to me to say that there was no first chicken, or first egg. So probably there is some difference between "first cause" and "first chicken". But I fail to see what exactly it is).
Click to expand...

Eggs were an evolutionary adaption from dinosaurs, chickens evolved from same but much later
Egg wins
:D
 
New Ager said:
I believe in an original life. If we are all reincarnated there had to be an original life. Common sense.
Click to expand...

If that "if" is properly placed, then common sense would suggest that if we are not all reincarnated then there need not be an original life, so we're back to square one.

Of course it's not common sense or any other kind of sense, until you find better evidence for reincarnation to begin with, and provide some idea of what "original life" is supposed to mean, and some rational argument as to why one necessitates the other. Until then, it's just words and wishful thinking.
 
bruto said:
If that "if" is properly placed, then common sense would suggest that if we are not all reincarnated then there need not be an original life, so we're back to square one.

Of course it's not common sense or any other kind of sense, until you find better evidence for reincarnation to begin with, and provide some idea of what "original life" is supposed to mean, and some rational argument as to why one necessitates the other. Until then, it's just words and wishful thinking.
Click to expand...

Demonstration of original life is feel the life in your body now.
 
I'm curious as to how reincarnationists deal with the problem of evolution. For those who feel that only humans reincarnate, at what stage on the tree did Homo sapiens begin reincarnating--and why?
 
bruto said:
If that "if" is properly placed, then common sense would suggest that if we are not all reincarnated then there need not be an original life, so we're back to square one.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The fatal flaw with the premise of this thread is that it assumes that if reincarnation happens at all, it must happen all the time to everyone. If you assume that reincarnation is possible, but not universal, there is no problem at all.

That is, there's no problem with the logic. Obviously there are some rather big problems concerning the lack of evidence and the largely nonsensical nature of reincarnation in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom