Would this be decent evidence for reincarnation?

[Brian37]

I want to weigh in a bit because I'm quite fascinated with people who think that there's this "something else" that houses our consciousness, memories and identity.

Yea, maybe, like understanding like cancer happens. It is important to know, but nothing to celebrate.

They don't like the mundane answer. That what we call "we" or "I" or "conscious" is nothing more than our brain in motion.

Theists stupidly like to mistake the car and the speed as being the same when only one object exists, the car. "Speed" is not physical but a description of the car in motion.

[pineapplebunnybounce]

I want to weigh in a bit because I'm quite fascinated with people who think that there's this "something else" that houses our consciousness, memories and identity.

Yea, maybe, like understanding like cancer happens. It is important to know, but nothing to celebrate.

They don't like the mundane answer. That what we call "we" or "I" or "conscious" is nothing more than our brain in motion.

Theists stupidly like to mistake the car and the speed as being the same when only one object exists, the car. "Speed" is not physical but a description of the car in motion.

Lol, no, not celebrating their choice. I just think it's an interesting phenomenon that our brain is so desperate to preserve this sense of uniqueness and sense of self that when threatened, it will allow us to believe in something else so that our identity can be preserved.

[Brian37]

Yea, maybe, like understanding like cancer happens. It is important to know, but nothing to celebrate.

They don't like the mundane answer. That what we call "we" or "I" or "conscious" is nothing more than our brain in motion.

Theists stupidly like to mistake the car and the speed as being the same when only one object exists, the car. "Speed" is not physical but a description of the car in motion.

Lol, no, not celebrating their choice. I just think it's an interesting phenomenon that our brain is so desperate to preserve this sense of uniqueness and sense of self that when threatened, it will allow us to believe in something else so that our identity can be preserved.

It should be studied, but the only context of the word "interesting" I could use it in would be like biologists and psychologist study how people come up with fucked up conclusions.

People fill in gaps, and that is all that is going on. It is important to study how people psychologically mistake the Halloween olive in the covered bowl mistaking it for an eyeball.

But our "identity" is a collection of biology and motion, not magical and most certainly temporary. We will all meet the same fate as the earth and sun.

[Zone]

If you dismiss something as even possible and there is evidence for it then you're going to dismiss the evidence. It doesn't matter what you personally would like to think.

What you will be in danger of here is developing a dogma which is the the same kind of thing as a religion. Rupert Sheldrake has a point here even if I think he is a bit nuts. I think he goes a bit further than suggesting unusual things are potential possible.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

The Earth could be sheathed in some kind energy field or some shit we know nothing about at this point. Think Final Fantasy 7 style Mako Energy.





And this will be a natural part of the universe as a whole with different planets being linked together in some kind of a...thing going on. We don't fucking know. So worth taking various possibilities seriously if there is a chance of knowing something about it.

Could be.

But as there's zero evidence, it's not worth considering.

[Zone]

But as there's zero evidence, it's not worth considering.

Past life memories in young children that match to the historical details? Some scientists have to researched this phenomenon but they have been largely ignored.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

But as there's zero evidence, it's not worth considering.

Past life memories in young children that match to the historical details? Some scientists have to researched this phenomenon but they have been largely ignored.

Still zero evidence, though. Until all other avenues have been explained, the the assertions succeed in holding up to rigorous scrutiny, I still dismiss it as woo.

You automatically infer 'past life memories' in your above. There is no evidence of this, which is why I dismiss it.

EDIT: I read about the author and the above book, but not the book itself. I've read a few reviews in journals and by laymen and it seems to have a good rep, as does the author.

I noticed however in the reviews that the book does not outline evidence for the 'phenomenon', rather indicates possibilities and raises questions about the possibiliites and what they could mean.

[Zone]

Still zero evidence, though.

Statically these accounts are significant as there are only a certain number of things anyone would by coincidence be able to guess. And these aren't general statements that could apply to anyone like cold reading technique or astrology. So yes this is evidence of some kind for something.

Until all other avenues have been explained, the the assertions succeed in holding up to rigorous scrutiny, I still dismiss it as woo.

But this is something you can put to the test by seeing if they actually remember where they lived and what details of their families. They're getting these details right with an alarmingly rate of accuracy. Adults may have the means pull a con job for some media attention/money as there's a motivation there. But a 5 year old would have to be some kind of super genius and they would lack these motivations. So these are excellent specimens overall. This is a potential lead into something an interesting phenomenon.

You automatically infer 'past life memories' in your above. There is no evidence of this, which is why I dismiss it.

It would apparently be the the best explanation. I once read a Muslims (they reject reincarnation) account that past life memories are formed from encounters/conversations with departing souls heading up to heaven just before you're born. That's technically possible as well I suppose but the simple explanation is the best one.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Still zero evidence, though.

Statically these accounts are significant as there are only a certain number of things anyone would by coincidence be able to guess. And these aren't general statements that could apply to anyone like cold reading technique or astrology. So yes this is evidence of some kind for something.

Statistically they are meaningless without evidence to back them up. They very well could be evidence of something, which is to say, they could be evidence of nothing at all.

Until all other avenues have been explained, the the assertions succeed in holding up to rigorous scrutiny, I still dismiss it as woo.

But this is something you can put to the test by seeing if they actually remember where they lived and what details of their families. They're getting these details right with an alarmingly rate of accuracy. Adults may have the means pull a con job for some media attention/money as there's a motivation there. But a 5 year old would have to be some kind of super genius and they would lack these motivations. So these are excellent specimens overall. This is a potential lead into something an interesting phenomenon.

But, again, that does not thus equate to the thesis of reincarnation being right. You're putting the cart before the horse and presuming the thesis is correct using the suppositional 'evidence' that is provided. This is the wrong way around.

Eliminate all other possiblities. What you are left with must be a semblance of the truth. The research currently conducted seems eons away from that at the moment. It could be explained away perfectly by natural, easily verified data. It could be nothing, just a blip of coincidence. It could be lies.

You automatically infer 'past life memories' in your above. There is no evidence of this, which is why I dismiss it.

It would apparently be the the best explanation. I once read a Muslims (they reject reincarnation) account that past life memories are formed from encounters/conversations with departing souls heading up to heaven just before you're born. That's technically possible as well I suppose but the simple explanation is the best one.

Not good enough. 'Apparently the best explaination' to me = no evidence, just presumption and guesswork. Again, I refuse to accept this as 'true' until all avenues of exploration have been conducted and all other explanations dismissed. This is not the case. Even the book you cite admits this.

Parsimony doesn't equate to adequate, especially not in this case, and especially when the data is so lacking.
[/b]

[Zone]

Statistically they are meaningless without evidence to back them up.

This is the evidence in question. The past life memories of young children. This is something you can put to the test but unlike most paranormal claims we're looking at a statistically significant hit rate with an absence of any of the usual con-artist techniques. Sure it's not proof of reincarnation as there may potentially be another explanation for it.

They very well could be evidence of something, which is to say, they could be evidence of nothing at all.

There will have to be a good explanation for this high level of accurate predictive statements. If someone can get 9/10 details right there is a reason to explain how they are able to do this. Reincarnation is suitable explanation, certainly the children themselves claim to have lived before. No reason we know about why they couldn't have done, yes so we don't know how it's supposed to work but I'm sure we don't know quite a lot.

But, again, that does not thus equate to the thesis of reincarnation being right. You're putting the cart before the horse and presuming the thesis is correct using the suppositional 'evidence' that is provided. This is the wrong way around.

It would be a straightforward explanation for how a child can know details of a former life. You don't have to go out of your way to make it more complicated if you don't have to. No reason we know of why that couldn't happen it's well outside of our knowledge or experience of the world. Whether it means religions had it right it could just be a lucky guess on a certain detail.

Eliminate all other possiblities. What you are left with must be a semblance of the truth.

If an explanation is straightforward and would fit the evidence you have then there is a high probability that it is true.

The research currently conducted seems eons away from that at the moment.

It's probably because 95% of scientists share your attitude to anything like this and won't want to touch it with a barge pole. This isn't getting properly researched. Same goes for a number of other phenomenon that are poo pooed.

It could be explained away perfectly by natural, easily verified data.

By chance you're only going to get a certain hit rate of guesses. If you have something significantly better than chance then something significant will account for it.

It could be nothing, just a blip of coincidence.

If it was just one case perhaps but it occurs throughout the world and in all cultures including cultures that don't generally believe in reincarnation such as our own.

It could be lies.

Young children aren't very good at lying, you can tell because they cover their mouths with hands as though to conceal the lie. Adults are much less obvious and may touch their finger to their lips briefly.

Not good enough. 'Apparently the best explaination' to me = no evidence, just presumption and guesswork. Again, I refuse to accept this as 'true' until all avenues of exploration have been conducted and all other explanations dismissed. This is not the case. Even the book you cite admits this.

We have evidence of something interesting and now we have to find a good explanation for the evidence we have. A good explanation is that consciousness is somehow separable from the body and can be transferred into other bodies via some kind of process we don't as of yet understand. There could potentially be a better explanation if you can think of one.

Parsimony doesn't equate to adequate, especially not in this case, and especially when the data is so lacking.

I think the data is lacking because it isn't being seriously researched. To many scientists something like this would be the equivalent of a religious heresy as they're deeply invested in a materialist worldview this wouldn't really support.