• 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"

Robert Oz said:
If there is no memory of the past "you" and no continuity of consciousness, how could it, in any way, be considered the same "you"?
Click to expand...

It wouldn't be you, just "you". The perspective. Just like removing a memory card from a digital camera, wiping it and putting it in another. It's still the same card, but has no memory of the last camera. Now assume all memory cards are instances of the same card. There may be a million instances of the card, but in fact are all the same. Like going back in time 2 minutes and meeting yourself. You'd both be the same person but different.
 
Does this work for cakes, too?
Is every chocolate cake actually the same cake, baked and eaten over and over again?
 
canispeaktodave said:
It wouldn't be you, just "you". The perspective. Just like removing a memory card from a digital camera, wiping it and putting it in another. It's still the same card, but has no memory of the last camera. Now assume all memory cards are instances of the same card. There may be a million instances of the card, but in fact are all the same. Like going back in time 2 minutes and meeting yourself. You'd both be the same person but different.
Click to expand...


Your analogy doesn't work. The brain is the memory card and the digital camera is the body. The "you" is the content on the memory card. Once the content is wiped, the "you" ceases to exist.

You essentially defined the "you" as the subjective consciousness and awareness of oneself. If that is wiped clean, there is nothing left to transfer to a new brain and body. The "you" is gone.

You are born. You become self-aware, you grow, experience and remember. And then you die and the self-awareness, growth, experience and memories - the "you" - die with you. Or so the evidence suggests.
 
Last edited:
canispeaktodave said:
It wouldn't be you, just "you". The perspective. Just like removing a memory card from a digital camera, wiping it and putting it in another. It's still the same card, but has no memory of the last camera. Now assume all memory cards are instances of the same card. There may be a million instances of the card, but in fact are all the same. Like going back in time 2 minutes and meeting yourself. You'd both be the same person but different.
Click to expand...

So is there any experiment or any observation of data that would allow us to determine if we are in the reality that you describe or if we are in a more commonly accepted version of reality?

Also, if you are correct, would there be any useful thing we could do as a result of this "oneness"?
 
Reincarnation is a myth that was thought up to comfort those who fear death or who grieve for loved ones that have died.

Only this, and nothing more.
 
Ladewig said:
Also, if you are correct, would there be any useful thing we could do as a result of this "oneness"?
Click to expand...

I think you missed the biggest thing here. If we all knew we were all, then I'd hope some people would think differently about their actions towards others. Maybe that is the ultimate irony. When you die, maybe its like the TV program "This is your life", where the host goes through an embarrasing home video of all the ills you have commited in your life and then says "and now your next life, the guy you stabbed in the throat for being a different colour to you."
 
Some hold that consciousness is what the brain does. In this sense I figure that life is what the cosmos does.

There is an interesting TED talk by neurologist Vilayanur Ramachandran, which I found very interesting. He doesn't discuss reincarnation, but an interesting aspect of our brains that makes us who we are.


M.
 
When we say, "Evidence, Please?" we are not asking for another statement of faith. We are asking for the evidence that supports that faith. Faith proves nothing.
 
canispeaktodave said:
I think you missed the biggest thing here. If we all knew we were all, then I'd hope some people would think differently about their actions towards others. Maybe that is the ultimate irony. When you die, maybe its like the TV program "This is your life", where the host goes through an embarrasing home video of all the ills you have commited in your life and then says "and now your next life, the guy you stabbed in the throat for being a different colour to you."
Click to expand...


The thing is, human beings are very imaginitave. There are all sorts of things we can come up with about the afterlife, the spirit world, existence, the universe, our origins, etc. How do you decide which ideas to take seriously?

You need evidence. Without evidence, it's just another idea, like unicorns, fairies, ghosts, psychics, etc.
 
"If this were true and widely known, then we might be nicer to eachother" is not a valid argument for it actually being true.
 
Robert Oz said:
The thing is, human beings are very imaginitave. There are all sorts of things we can come up with about the afterlife, the spirit world, existence, the universe, our origins, etc. How do you decide which ideas to take seriously?

You need evidence. Without evidence, it's just another idea, like unicorns, fairies, ghosts, psychics, etc.
Click to expand...

Yes, but to get the evidence you need an hypothesis. My hypothesis is that I once didn't exist in my current form and now I do. Therefore when I die and don't exist, will I have the same chance of existing again. I don't need evidence to form that hypothesis. But I would need evidence to PROVE the hypothesis. And to just say, there's no evidence is fallacious. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. How to test my hypothesis? I have no idea. That's why I posted here, see if the hypothesis could be proved, not disregarded due to no-one currently looking for evidence for it.

The Higgs Boson has not been proved to exist yet. However, due to the fact the hypothesis is cogent enough to look for the evidence, they are.
 
Professor Yaffle said:
"If this were true and widely known, then we might be nicer to eachother" is not a valid argument for it actually being true.
Click to expand...

Arg! Don't take quotes out of context. I was replying to the post saying "would there be anything useful in knowing oneness". I said yes, people may end up being nicer to each other. I didn't even insinuate that was an argument for it being true!
 
canispeaktodave said:
Arg! Don't take quotes out of context. I was replying to the post saying "would there be anything useful in knowing oneness". I said yes, people may end up being nicer to each other. I didn't even insinuate that was an argument for it being true!
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't read carefully enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom