Merged Defend/Debate Reincarnation / Child Reincarnation Stories

[Wonder234]

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.

By reincarnated I mean that there's a connection between the person the current person remembers being and their current self wherein the memories of the memories of the former are had by the latter.

By being reincarnated I mean the memories of the previous person show up in someone else. (I know that this is where they usually say awareness is transferred from one body to another, but let's stick with memories)

 

[Nay_Sayer]

By reincarnated I mean that there's a connection between the person the current person remembers being and their current self wherein the memories of the memories of the former are had by the latter.

By being reincarnated I mean the memories of the previous person show up in someone else. (I know that this is where they usually say awareness is transferred from one body to another, but let's stick with memories)

That is not how memory works, I'd urge you to look into that first.

 

[Giordano]

I am looking to defend reincarnation. I will start by objecting to various claims of skeptics;

- 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.

- 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.

- In the case of the claim that children who remember past lives simply got their memories from a mundane source rather than a supernatural one and simply forgot where it came from and interpreted it as a past life memory (part of a phenomenon called cryptomnesia) I argue that there are some cases where there is hardly any means to gain the memories (which are sometimes later verified) which they claim to be the memory of a past life due to the obscurity and remoteness in time and space in some cases of the people they claimed to be.

Sorry, I already debated this in a prior life. I vaguely remember it was with someone named, oh, I see a J an A, and some sort of pizza chain maybe but I can't quite recall. In any case I do remember winning.

 

[Wonder234]

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.

Yes, the children may lie because it's just more interesting than the truth, but when the claims the children make are researched and verified that would probably mean one or both of the following things; The children got lucky in their lies, and/or they knew about the truth of the claims before they reported them. I think when a child gets multiple obscure lies/claims (often sometimes 20 or more) correct about a persons life, that chance is not to blame (although that may be a bias on my part, I think chance is not likely). Also, if the child did learn about the truth of the claims before they told someone; 1. It is unlikely that children would research or could competently research (often at ages 3 - 8) a person as obscure as some of the cases there are. 2) Would conceive or even want to do something such as that. 3) In the case of getting the information from a mundane source (television, magazine, conversation) that someone as obscure as some of the people who children claim to have been would be mentioned in some of these. Of course, that is just likelihood, but I believe that if someone looked the evidence reasonably (not saying you aren't) they would perhaps give more credence to it.

 

[Wonder234]

That is not how memory works, I'd urge you to look into that first.

If you do not mind, could you point me toward something?

 

[Wonder234]

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

I'm sorry could you explain? I don't what you mean by "through time"?

 

[Giordano]

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.

Simply put if you can't prove the first step required for a proof of reincarnation then you can't prove (justify) reincarnation. Souls are generally defined as entities separate from our physical bodies that represent our metaphysical selves, our senses of identity. Souls are shorthand for what most believers in reincarnation propose are the things that are reincarnated. Are you proposing somehow that our memories are passed on but not any sense of identity or any "self? "

 

[Wonder234]

Okay how does reincarnation work then?

By reincarnated I mean that there's a connection between the person the current person remembers being and their current self wherein the memories of the memories of the former are had by the latter.

By being reincarnated I mean the memories of the previous person show up in someone else. (I know that this is where they usually say awareness is transferred from one body to another, but let's stick with memories)

 

[Nay_Sayer]

If you do not mind, could you point me toward something?

Certainly.

http://www.human-memory.net/intro_study.html

 

[theprestige]

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

This seems like a bad start. If you don't have even a single convincing case, what do you presume to defend?

 

[Pope130]

It seems that you are now asking about transmigration of memories, rather than reincarnation. Different alleged phenomena, with, presumably, a different mechanism.

There is, however, no reason to try to work out how this works until it can be shown that it does work. First demonstrate the persistence of memory, then work on the explanation. Otherwise you're just counting angels on the head of a pin.

 

[Wonder234]

This seems like a bad start. If you don't have even a single convincing case, what do you presume to defend?

I will look for a case, but what I wanted to happen was someone lend their thoughts about the points made in the initial post.

 

[Resume]

I will look for a case, but what I wanted to happen was someone lend their thoughts about the points made in the initial post.

Present evidence for your claims is my thought.

I'll wait over here.

 

[Wonder234]

It seems that you are now asking about transmigration of memories, rather than reincarnation. Different alleged phenomena, with, presumably, a different mechanism.

There is, however, no reason to try to work out how this works until it can be shown that it does work. First demonstrate the persistence of memory, then work on the explanation. Otherwise you're just counting angels on the head of a pin.

I believe it is easier to make an argument for the persistence of memories than the mechanism by which the awareness that those memories are housed in transfers from body to body and how could we observe observe a soul leaving, existing apart from and then going to another body? There doesn't seem to be any obvious way.

 

[fromdownunder]

I will look for a case, but what I wanted to happen was someone lend their thoughts about the points made in the initial post.

You now seem to be saying that you posted the OP without having a clue as to what you are trying (and I use the word advisedly) to discuss.

If you did not have a clue what you were trying to discuss and will NOW start looking for evidence, did you even have a point?

Norm

 

[Wonder234]

Present evidence for your claims is my thought.

I'll wait over here.

I'll get evidence. But just out of curiosity why not comment on the points of the initial post?

 

[Resume]

I'll get evidence. But just out of curiosity why not comment on the points of the initial post?

The "points" you think you made in your initial post are ambiguous, and lack context. Perhaps you might construct a coherent hypothesis in concrete language.

 

[Wonder234]

You now seem to be saying that you posted the OP without having a clue as to what you are trying (and I use the word advisedly) to discuss.

If you did not have a clue what you were trying to discuss and will NOW start looking for evidence, did you even have a point?

Norm

I had an idea of what I wanted this thread to be, I would post those various points above and someone would point out the problems with it and it would continue from there. Here's an example of what I mean with the first point;

Me: 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.

Other Poster: People could still lie without wanting to gain financially, people just lie for fun sometimes, and kids especially like to make things up.

Me: But what kid would think to lie about something such as this? This is not something a kid would be likely to think up.

Other Poster: You don't know that kids have very lively imaginations, I had a niece who once thought she used to be a frog.

And so on.

 

[Wonder234]

The "points" you think you made in your initial post are ambiguous, and lack context. Perhaps you might construct a coherent hypothesis in concrete language.

Why a hypothesis?

 

[Wonder234]

The "points" you think you made in your initial post are ambiguous, and lack context. Perhaps you might construct a coherent hypothesis in concrete language.

How would the hypothesis work?