Merged Defend/Debate Reincarnation / Child Reincarnation Stories

[Wonder234]

Please demonstrate the existence of souls.

My argument for the existence of souls are those cases of children who remember past lives and who; A) Along with their parents have not gone public with their cases but have kept it to a few family members and friends and B) Claim to have been someone so obscure there is hardly any way of learning about them but through effort.

 

[Wonder234]

The skeptical argument against reincarnation is that there is no reliable evidence for it ever happening. The arguments you put forward are really nothing more than some idle thoughts.

Show the evidence, that is all that is needed to defend reincarnation.

My position is that the cases people dismiss are actually not that bad when you look at them closely.

 

[arthwollipot]

My argument for the existence of souls are those cases of children who remember past lives and who; A) Along with their parents have not gone public with their cases but have kept it to a few family members and friends and B) Claim to have been someone so obscure there is hardly any way of learning about them but through effort.

You are postulating the existence of souls based on the existence of children who remember past lives, and you are postulating the existence of children who remember past lives based on the existence of souls.

I repeat - please demonstrate that souls exist. Once we have established that, we can begin to speculate on how they behave.

 

[RecoveringYuppy]

My argument for the existence of souls are those cases of children who remember past lives and who; A) Along with their parents have not gone public with their cases but have kept it to a few family members and friends and B) Claim to have been someone so obscure there is hardly any way of learning about them but through effort.

If they haven't gone public then how are we supposed to evaluate them (other than simply dismissing them since we have no evidence they really exist)?

 

[theprestige]

My position is that the cases people dismiss are actually not that bad when you look at them closely.

Probably the best way for you to approach this is to bring a case here, and examine it closely with us. Start with the very best case you know of, that gives you the most reason to believe.

 

[Wonder234]

You are postulating the existence of souls based on the existence of children who remember past lives, and you are postulating the existence of children who remember past lives based on the existence of souls.

I repeat - please demonstrate that souls exist. Once we have established that, we can begin to speculate on how they behave.

I'm sorry but it is rather hard for me to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul - I may or may not do it.

But why do we need to discuss the existence of the soul in order to start talking about reincarnation?

 

[Darat]

My position is that the cases people dismiss are actually not that bad when you look at them closely.

Then provide the evidence.

 

[Hokulele]

I'm sorry but it is rather hard for me to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul - I may or may not do it.

But why do we need to discuss the existence of the soul in order to start talking about reincarnation?

What is reincarnated, if it isn't a soul?

 

[Wonder234]

If they haven't gone public then how are we supposed to evaluate them (other than simply dismissing them since we have no evidence they really exist)?

I was not proposing that we evaluate the cases that haven't gone public, I was just using it as an example of a case that was not reported due to monetary inspiration. I suppose there may be cases that are public where the parents did not capitalize on the case, but I would have to find them.

 

[Wonder234]

What is reincarnated, if it isn't a soul?

I was not saying that the soul is not reincarnated but that I do not have an argument for the soul.

 

[arthwollipot]

I'm sorry but it is rather hard for me to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul - I may or may not do it.

But why do we need to discuss the existence of the soul in order to start talking about reincarnation?

Because you said...

- In the case of the argument that the world population has grown from millions to billions and that there would be no new souls to occupy the new bodies, I argue that there could be a vast amount of souls, much more vast than is currently incarnate that are disincarnate.

I would like you to justify your assertion by demonstrating that souls exist. It may be that you can't, and that's okay - nobody ever has - but if you can't, you can't use them to justify your belief in reincarnation.

 

[Darat]

I'm sorry but it is rather hard for me to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul - I may or may not do it.

But why do we need to discuss the existence of the soul in order to start talking about reincarnation?

We don't have to if you provide evidence. As it is you leave folk with nothing to discuss apart from your words.

Again: provide your evidence if you want to discuss reincarnation.

 

[Wonder234]

Then provide the evidence.

I think I will give looking for a case a shot, but if I do not find a convincing one I may not post.

 

[Spindrift]

I'm sorry but it is rather hard for me to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul - I may or may not do it.

But why do we need to discuss the existence of the soul in order to start talking about reincarnation?

Isn't it the soul (or something similar) that is reincarnated into a new body? Therefore please prove the soul exists before we get to the part where it's reincarnated.

 

[Hokulele]

I was not saying that the soul is not reincarnated but that I do not have an argument for the soul.

In that case, to even start the discussion, you need to define your terms. What exactly do you mean by reincarnated, and what exactly is being reincarnated? Before even pondering evidence, you need to be clear on what you are trying to support.

 

[Wonder234]

Because you said...

I would like you to justify your assertion by demonstrating that souls exist. It may be that you can't, and that's okay - nobody ever has - but if you can't, you can't use them to justify your belief in reincarnation.

Can you explain why I can't use them to justify my belief in reincarnation if I can't prove them? Sorry, I'm a bit of a dummy.

 

[Wonder234]

Isn't it the soul (or something similar) that is reincarnated into a new body? Therefore please prove the soul exists before we get to the part where it's reincarnated.

I want to ask why that is necessary because I don't think I would be able to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul and would like to continue the discussion, if possible, without trying prove it's existence.

 

[Ray Brady]

- In cases of children who remember past lives where people claim the parents lie about it while getting their children to play along; Some people don't go public about their child's comments that indicate a probable past life and instead just tell friends and family members, which, I believe, removes the incentive for monetary gain and therefore of a reason to lie.

This argument is predicated on the notion that the potential for monetary gain is the primary reason to lie. Children lie ALL THE TIME, and it's almost never because they're looking for a payday.

When I lied as a child, it was almost invariably because the lie was simply more interesting than the truth.

 

[Spindrift]

I want to ask why that is necessary because I don't think I would be able to come up with a convincing argument for the existence of the soul and would like to continue the discussion, if possible, without trying prove it's existence.

Okay how does reincarnation work then?

 

[jrhowell]

I am looking to defend reincarnation.

You have another thread about astral projection. How would you tell reincarnation from astral projection through time? (Not that I believe in either one.)