• 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.

Another Reincarnation Case

I think it's a bit more complex than just making stuff up.

I think of it a lot like a bunch of soldiers sitting around telling war stories. You almost get into a competition, and it's very hard not to "embellish" your story a bit to make it funnier/scarier/more intense/whatever. The better stories get you higher status in the group, and serve as a way of fitting in and bonding. Soldiers spend a lot of time together and tell a lot of stories, as stories are all most soldiers have in common (military experiences, rather). So as you tell these stories over and over, and they get little embellishments over time, until the story and the "real" memory blur together, or the stories you heard blur into memeories you have. And you defned anyone who calls you out on them, because you don't want to lose cred.

I think the same process happens with any sort of in-group like that. Bigfooters, Reincarnationists, ghost hunters, or whatever. The stories get exaggerated to gain cred with the group, to add to you importance, to raise your status in the group. OVer time, the line between "really happened" and "didn't happen" gets blurred.

Add to that, you can't admit you exaggerated a bit without losing cred and status with the group, so you're driven to defend your story even if you are consciously aware of it's falsity. Likewise, you defend the stories of others from outsiders through empathy (most of the time, sometimes you help tear that other guys story down, again as a way to gain status in your in-group).

Least, that makes sense to me. Hopefully I didn't ramble too far off course for others to understand what I tried to say :)
 
The sad part is that the little kid with the penchant for creative writing is misunderstood by his ignorant parents, and being force-fed a bunch of Christian-angel-soul silliness that will stunt his intellectual development, perhaps for life.
 
I forget which skeptical book I read this in.....There was a case a few years back in which a young woman in the UK was convinced she had lived as a Roman citizen there at Hadrian's time. She recounted many apparently-accurate details and seemed quite convincing... Got a lot of media play.

Then, someone listening realized that her accounts sounded very familiar. Sure enough, the individual had recently read a historical novel based on life in the period.
They checked the local library where the young woman lived, and she had actually checked the book out when she was a child.
Apparently having quite forgotten reading the thing. But some of her descriptions were line-for-line....
 
Hellbound said:
I think it's a bit more complex than just making stuff up.

I think of it a lot like a bunch of soldiers sitting around telling war stories. You almost get into a competition, and it's very hard not to "embellish" your story a bit to make it funnier/scarier/more intense/whatever. The better stories get you higher status in the group, and serve as a way of fitting in and bonding. Soldiers spend a lot of time together and tell a lot of stories, as stories are all most soldiers have in common (military experiences, rather). So as you tell these stories over and over, and they get little embellishments over time, until the story and the "real" memory blur together, or the stories you heard blur into memeories you have. And you defned anyone who calls you out on them, because you don't want to lose cred.

I think the same process happens with any sort of in-group like that. Bigfooters, Reincarnationists, ghost hunters, or whatever. The stories get exaggerated to gain cred with the group, to add to you importance, to raise your status in the group. OVer time, the line between "really happened" and "didn't happen" gets blurred.

Add to that, you can't admit you exaggerated a bit without losing cred and status with the group, so you're driven to defend your story even if you are consciously aware of it's falsity. Likewise, you defend the stories of others from outsiders through empathy (most of the time, sometimes you help tear that other guys story down, again as a way to gain status in your in-group).

Least, that makes sense to me. Hopefully I didn't ramble too far off course for others to understand what I tried to say :)
Click to expand...

Yes, this.
 
Senex said:
I remember a poster here who went on about reincarnation. He invited anyone to go to his favorite forum, the Past Life Forum. A number of members took him up and registered there much to the chagrin of the other members of the Past Life Forum. For the most part the members there were not interested in having any of their memories challenged for some reason. The guy who invited us was suspended from that forum but as far as I know everyone from this site behaved themselves in the Past Life Forum and were not banished.

Does anyone else remember that?
Click to expand...

Oh yes. Charles Boden. I think delorde was the only one who actually registered. He did an exceptional job, but really ticked off the powers that be. I followed the thread pretty closely.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=188210

Past Life Forum

ETA: Garrette was there too. Just read upthread.
 
Last edited:
Garrette said:
If we're remembering the same incident, then yes. I and dlorde went to that forum. I stayed a short while; dlorde stayed longer and remained more civil.

The blatant cognitive dissonance was astounding.

Skeptic: Please define the criteria by which you are evaluating the claims of reincarnation and then present the best case you have.

Believer: A valid case would exhibit traits A, B, and C. Here's SPECIAL CASE #1 that does just that.

Skeptic: Actually, SPECIAL CASE #1 does not exhibit traits A, B, or C, and here's why. In addition, it exhibits traits D, E, and F, which are indicative of inauthenticity.

Believer: That doesn't apply to SPECIAL CASE #2.

Skeptic: Actually, it does, and here's why.

Believer: I see where you're coming from in regard to technical dissection of the claims, but you're not considering the totality of claims or the unlikelihood that a child will lie about this.

Skeptic: Sigh
Click to expand...

If I recall correctly, the dialog typically continued as:

Believer: Why do you pseudo-skeptics always butt in where you aren't wanted and try to destroy people's beliefs. You are not welcome here any more.

Believer: Yeah. Losers, all of them.

I'm going hyperbolic here, but it was pretty creepy over there.
 
Giordano said:
In my past life, I was a peasant who slowly starved to death eating what little grain and few potatoes I could farm. Before that, I was a peasant who slowly starved to death eating what little grain and few potatoes I could farm. Before that though was more exciting, when I was a peasant too, but I died of an infection before I could starve to death.

I am very envious of the many, many people who had romantic and exciting past lives. What do you think happens to all the souls who led boring lives (and who should vastly outnumber the movie producers, Queens of the Nile, etc): are they never reincarnated?
Click to expand...

Those would be a bit harder to verify because of the nature of their lives though.
 
Olowkow said:
If I recall correctly, the dialog typically continued as:

Believer: Why do you pseudo-skeptics always butt in where you aren't wanted and try to destroy people's beliefs. You are not welcome here any more.

Believer: Yeah. Losers, all of them.

I'm going hyperbolic here, but it was pretty creepy over there.
Click to expand...
Typically, yes, but not always. It is one of the things I admire about dlorde. He managed to avoid that on PLF, just as he usually manages to avoid it here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom