• 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.

Reincarnation: Soul Evolution?

Your last statement applies equally to you. :jaw-dropp

Being so positive that one cannot have a supernatural experience because the supernatural does not exist is circular reasoning.


My disbelief of the supernatural is not a matter of personal conviction. It's a matter of verifiable evidence; specifically, a lack thereof. You seem to have admitted, on several occasions, that your belief in the supernatural is founded on nothing more than your interpretation of personal experiences and the conviction of others in their interpretation of their personal experiences.

I understand that this can be a very strong confirmation on a personal level, but it's incredibly weak as proof or even evidence in the broader scope.

There are people with mental illness. There are people who have hallucinations and delusions. There are people whose perceptions can be very wrong (eg witnesses to a crime). [...]

To say that a religious person has a form of mental illness because they have a belief in supernatural phenomena that appear to exist mostly (but not necessarily always) in the brain is again circular reasoning. It assumes again that the phenomena of "seeing a ghost", or "seeing the future" cannot happen because such things are NOT possible.


How do you reliably distinguish between someone who has a hallucination, suffers from a delusion, experiences a very wrong perception... and someone who genuinely sees a ghost?

That's kind of important for your argument.
 
Last edited:
No-one is suggesting you are an illusion. I am suggesting that the world works perfectly well without souls, and that the idea of souls is illogical and inconsistent.

I wasn't being fatuous when I asked where the soul resided, and talked about amputating the hand. If you cut off an arm, have you lost your soul (or part of it)? What about both arms? Both arms and both legs? Do you still have a soul? You lose both arms, both legs, and have a heart and lung transplant..........do you still have a soul? All of the above, and you have a liver and kidney transplant? Do you still have a soul? See where this is going? So, in all seriousness, if you postulate the existence of a soul, you tell me where it is.

ETA........our posts crossed.

Well, if you've had all those transplants, you've presumably got parts of other people's souls. Unless the soul died as soon as they were removed from donor bodies, then you're stuck with soulless organs.
 
Well, if you've had all those transplants, you've presumably got parts of other people's souls. Unless the soul died as soon as they were removed from donor bodies, then you're stuck with soulless organs.


The soul and the brain are pretty much tied together. The journey of the soul is experience. Experience is a sensation in the brain. The soul works through the intermediate state of spirit matter. Spirit assumes the shape of the living organism as it grows.

If one cuts out the heart of a donor who is medically brain dead, the soul and spirit may or may not have left. It does not matter. If the soul stays with the brain, some spirit matter may or may not go with the donor heart. If there is any spirit matter in the heart it fuses with the recipient's spirit matter. If there is no spirit matter in the donor heart, the recipients spirit matter can infuse the new heart.

I do not know what would happen if mankind started transplanting half-brains. I suppose two souls could either fuse into one, or function together.

The spirit matter has no "innate intelligence", therefore no memory or personality.
 
So, what does a soul actually do then?
Is it just some kind of parasitic entity?


I think the soul can interact with physical matter very weakly using spirit. Since it is an intelligence, it can influence thought patterns. It might be the reason people have psychic abilities, such as seeing ghosts. The ghosts are not physical and cannot be detected by physical instruments.

The soul is aware of spirit and other souls, so it subtly manipulates the brain to impose an image, or impose a sound. If a person is engaged in a task requiring concentration, the brain is too active to be affected. This seems to be why the soul is only able to have an influence when the brain is having idle thoughts or in a meditative state.

Drugs and electrical stimulation can probably do the same, but on a blunt scale. It might be that a soul is better able to manipulate some brain activity when under the influence of some drugs.

I have asked a couple of people who claim to have psychic abilities what they experience. The frauds (there are many) change the subject and get evasive. The ones who I think have a talent are curious as to how it might work.

Usually, those who "see" do not "hear", although they get impressions of what is being said. Clairvoyance. Those that "hear" do not see. Clairaudience. Some do not see or hear but "know". Clairpresience. There are some who might have more than one, but that is apparently rare.

The soul can also influence decisions at times, and perhaps affect one's moral behavior or even shape it as one grows.

In turn, the soul is changed by those experiences. Some become more "good". Some souls may change to desire pleasure, and become perverted.

If a soul is needed to influence the organisms physical growth and mental personality as the organism grows, then someone like Einstein would have had an advanced soul. If genetic modification is forced on the embryo, the soul probably has to follow the basic coding, but there may be times something happens. The key area would be in influencing the "hard-wiring" of the unborn brain to impose a basic personality.

As I write this I say to myself, "Do I really believe all of this stuff?" I have to remind myself of all the experiences I have had, and only something like this can explain them. I accept it might be my imagination.
 
How do you reliably distinguish between someone who has a hallucination, suffers from a delusion, experiences a very wrong perception... and someone who genuinely sees a ghost?

That's kind of important for your argument.


Hallucination and perceiving a ghostly event were two very different experiences for me. I knew when I was having an hallucination. I was either drugged (twice), or stressed and tired (once). The paranormal events occurred when I was relaxed everything seemed quite ordinary except for the event.

Since I function on a high level ordinarily (not so much in my old age), I would say I am not prone to suggestion or pareidolia. I cannot see animal or human shapes in clouds or mist or in the dark, even if I try. I am skeptical and curious.

I have seen a person having a hallucination. The man thought there was poison gas coming down from the ceiling. The man had serious paranoia and fear.
 
A believer in Reincarnation of the soul..... I can fix that by doing remote healing on your Aura using quantum, feng shui, Holotropic Breathwork.


There are many who would believe you, and spend good money to try. I am not one of them.
 
Last edited:
This is becoming too prescriptive, PS. You are stating things as fact, now, where you at least started out a few days ago with "I think" and "it seems to me". You cannot know the stuff you have just posted is fact, so could you at least wrap it up in some caveats such as "I think".

If you think that the soul and the brain are tied together so intimately (as do I, but in an altogether different way from you)*, then can you explain how that works with the fact that myriads of brain damaged people through the millennia have lived with parts of their brains missing? In fact, in all likelihood, I'd warrant that almost the entirety of human brains have been survived the lack-of (sorry about that English). In other words, almost no part of the brain has proved to be indispensible. So, a soul would have to live in the tiniest most primitive part of the brain, and yet survive intact to then somehow pass through to another generation.

Tell me, and I'd appreciate an honest and direct answer, have you ever seriously considered the possibility that there is no such thing as a soul, or is this forum in the last few weeks perhaps the first time you have heard such a suggestion? If you have considered that possibility, what is it about the simple and robust logic of that probability that you didn't find convincing, and which an unsupportable and unevidenced alternative (and you have agreed to a similar description in this thread) was able to supplant?

*(the soul is an invention of the human brain)
 
Last edited:
This is becoming too prescriptive, PS. You are stating things as fact, now, where you at least started out a few days ago with "I think" and "it seems to me". You cannot know the stuff you have just posted is fact, so could you at least wrap it up in some caveats such as "I think".

If you think that the soul and the brain are tied together so intimately (as do I, but in an altogether different way from you)*, then can you explain how that works with the fact that myriads of brain damaged people through the millennia have lived with parts of their brains missing? In fact, in all likelihood, I'd warrant that almost the entirety of human brains have been survived the lack-of (sorry about that English). In other words, almost no part of the brain has proved to be indispensible. So, a soul would have to live in the tiniest most primitive part of the brain, and yet survive intact to then somehow pass through to another generation.

Tell me, and I'd appreciate an honest and direct answer, have you ever seriously considered the possibility that there is no such thing as a soul, or is this forum in the last few weeks perhaps the first time you have heard such a suggestion? If you have considered that possibility, what is it about the simple and robust logic of that probability that you didn't find convincing, and which an unsupportable and unevidenced alternative (and you have agreed to a similar description in this thread) was able to supplant?

*(the soul is an invention of the human brain)


I think I have been quite open about the fact that these are my beliefs based on my experiences and that I acknowledge I might be wrong. I got criticism for saying "I think" and "it seems to me", and now I get criticized for taking shortcuts and omitting the disclaimers (except for now and then).

I am not trying to convert anyone. I would like skeptical criticism of my beliefs, and so far that has happened in a constructive way. If what I say has a flaw in my logic it needs fixing.

I have had direct experiences of many psychic phenomena. Only recently have I had more, and have started to wonder about them.

This thread opened with the premise that these were my views that someone wanted to know about. Is this disallowed?

A soul in a brain-damaged person will experience what it is like to be so limited and at the mercy of others. Experience is a great teacher, and can build character.
 
.......A soul in a brain-damaged person will experience what it is like to be so limited and at the mercy of others. Experience is a great teacher, and can build character.

You miss my point, PS. I'm saying that your premise that the soul occupies the brain has to be constrained further, to say that the soul occupies part of the brain. A very small part.

Unfortunately, you didn't answer my polite question about whether you had ever seriously considered that there is no such thing as a soul. The reason I ask is that I have lots of South African friends, and many from conservative Afrikaaner backgrounds, who would actually be mortally offended if they were asked if they had ever considered that the soul might not exist.
 
Here's the question I always consider regarding reincarnation: As far as I, the entity composing this post, am concerned, what is the difference between:

(1) dying, and sometime later having my soul reincarnated as another person, with none of my present memories; and
(2) just dying, that's it, and sometime later some other different person being born?

What makes the "reincarnated me" in the first case any different from the "other random person" in the second case? Neither my present life experience nor the other person's future life experience is affected in any way, one way or the other.


The way I see it the soul does retain some memories, but they fade. Just as our human memories do. It seems reasonable that we retain a few key memories. With time we retain the lesson and not the details (such as who were once were, and where we once were, and who we associated with).

For a while the soul has an interest in those close to them, and can perhaps offer guidance in the form of "intuition" or perhaps even dreams.

A while after my late wife died, I tried internet dating. My late wife said that I did not do too well without a woman, and she would help me find someone. I went on a date with a woman that was very pushy and clinging. That night I dreamed that the woman was a giant spider in the bushes, and as I tried to get past on the path, my arm touched her web. The more I pulled away the more I got entangled. You can imagine the rest. My first and only nightmare, except I was not excessively fearful.

Perhaps that was my late wife trying to warn me. Boy, did I have trouble with that one pestering me. This is a long stretch of the imagination. But I am trying to illustrate the how such "help" could possibly manifest.

I think that I might "meet" my late wife after death, and that we could interact. That might include some other (good) people I knew.

Let me go a little further. It seems to me that souls (like God) have no gender. This means that a soul could reincarnate as a male or as a female. Perhaps one does the male thing for a while before switching to the female experience. I know that although I am an alpha male, I have a female side to me. I prefer the company of women, even if I am the only one in a rowdy bunch. They forget I am a male, and relax. When younger I was into male sports.

This could account for the all the current gender issues. Or I could just be wrong on this thinking.

(One can introduce experiential differences by embellishing the concept of reincarnation with some form or another of cosmic credit scorekeeping, e.g. karma or "soul evolution." That requires a system to turn events into records, some stable form that preserves the records, and some kind of individual identifier attached to the soul itself that associates it with an individual record, none of which is necessary for the basic concept of reincarnation itself. In that case it's the mechanisms of that record-keeping system, and the evidence for it, that should be evaluated, rather than yes or no on reincarnation per se.)


God has a big enough memory, and can multitask (being both male and female). I think he keeps score, and makes decisions as to which soul goes where, although there might be a few very advanced souls helping him.

I got the "information" about being judged when I was a teenager and twice dreamed I died. I was judged. Sent back the first time, and condemned to cease to exist the second time. One could argue it was my upbringing. But I was a firm atheist at this time. The other contrary scenario was ceasing to exist. Where did that come from?

Nothing in my dreams seemed to relate to stories and tales I had heard.

Leaving the fanciful invented celestial bureaucracy out of the picture, the experiential equivalence between reincarnation and no reincarnation works both ways. That is, to the extent that the prospect of reincarnation is comforting, the prospect of individual annihilation alongside the continuation by others of life in general should be equally comforting. And to the extent that the prospect of individual extinction is frightening, the prospect of reincarnation should be equally frightening.


Some people are frightened by change and things they do not know. I think most people are afraid of the terrible pain when one dies. If one drowns or is buried alive, it must be horrible until oblivion arrives.

Personally I accept that there is nothing I can do about it. I am rarely afraid.

This has long been something I see as wisdom. I gave it to my daughter in a time of stress in her life, and it was a big help. One does not need God to follow the advice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer

God, give me grace to accept with serenity
the things that cannot be changed,
Courage to change the things
which should be changed,
and the Wisdom to distinguish
the one from the other.
 
Last edited:
........I think that I might "meet" my late wife after death, and that we could interact.......

How would that work? You've already said that souls go off and inhabit another body. Therefore she isn't available to be met, and more than you would be.
 
You miss my point, PS. I'm saying that your premise that the soul occupies the brain has to be constrained further, to say that the soul occupies part of the brain. A very small part.


I chose my words carefully. "The soul and the brain are pretty much tied together." It does not mean that they occupy the same space. The spirit does. Spatially.

The soul could stay in the dimension that it is in after death. In other words never leave. That does not matter. The important part is that the soul "identifies" with a person, and the connection is broken when the person dies. The connection is done through spirit, and can be simply a transfer of information - upload and downloading. The "connection" is also not of interest.

When the person dies, and the spirit is left to decay, the soul is "judged". It may get promoted or demoted according to its deeds in life. If its life was short (died as a baby for example), its status need not change. If it wasted its "life on earth" and achieved nothing, and showed no potential it may just cease to exist, although that is probably rare. Whether Hitler or serial murderers get another chance is debatable. Most of us would like them to suffer punishment - and maybe they do.

One wonders what bad people came back as.

Unfortunately, you didn't answer my polite question about whether you had ever seriously considered that there is no such thing as a soul. The reason I ask is that I have lots of South African friends, and many from conservative Afrikaaner backgrounds, who would actually be mortally offended if they were asked if they had ever considered that the soul might not exist.


I have absolutely considered that there is no such thing as a soul. I am well aware that my belief is a construct that fits experiences I have had, and I know I have no scientific proof.

I am careful not to offend some of my close relatives and friends who are very religious, and believe in the existence of a soul (and that Jesus is God). There can be no debate with them, and I do not try. I go through the motions when with them without being deceitful.

My decision to believe is a considered one, and I can change if there is reason to.
 
Last edited:
How would that work? You've already said that souls go off and inhabit another body. Therefore she isn't available to be met, and more than you would be.


The Hindus believe that every soul immediately reincarnates. Death and rebirth are simultaneous.

I think that souls get to spend some time in the afterlife. From a short time to maybe a few generations. Maybe Jesus stays there permanently helping God.

By staying in the soul dimension, the soul can help family and friends, and get together with the souls of people they know (when they die). If souls never leave their dimension and only operate via a "connection" then maybe it was the way I "met" my late wife. Connection stayed, but I was aware of my soul in that dimension.

It could also explain mental telepathy as it would be soul to soul communication and then to the brains.

It would help to keep in mind my overall hypothesis. That we are all part of the dream of an Ultimate Intelligence, and this is all part of the drama and story line. Much more interesting.
 

Back
Top Bottom