lunaticheathen Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 I ask no one to agree with me, or believe what I do. I owe no one any proof, ever. I refuse to even play that game anymore. I'll tell those asking for proof of my PERSONAL BELIEFS to fuck off until the day I die. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 You can believe whatever you want for all I care, but this is a public discussion space and my asking for evidence or rationale to support such extraordinary claims should not be viewed as offensive in any way. The question is rather is it relevant to demand evidence in a discussion about personal beliefs about reincarnation? No one is asking you to believe them yourself, so your 'demand' is taken more as your unwillingness to allow others to hold views which to them go beyond lesser questions of evidence. This isn't a scientific paper discussion, is it? Why are you making it one? Edit: Grant it, Deva did ask in the opening post "what evidence is there"? But still, I think the point is that those that believe in it don't need the validation of those in the Church of Scientism to approve it first. They're not making a claim for you to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Edit: Grant it, Deva did ask in the opening post "what evidence is there"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 And so you're offering some evidence? Or what exactly is your point in citing Sagan saying "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 The question is rather is it relevant to demand evidence in a discussion about personal beliefs about reincarnation? In response to the purpose of this thread, I believe so, yes - it is highly relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 The question is rather is it relevant to demand evidence in a discussion about personal beliefs about reincarnation? In response to the purpose of this thread, I believe so, yes - it is highly relevant. Here is the exact quote in how she worded it: Is reincarnation valid or possible? What is the evidence for it and is it convincing to you, why or why not? I don't see any declaration of it as fact in which you need to demand evidence. And when she asked about evidence, it is a question about peoples points of view why they do or don't believe it. I don't hear her coming on stage like a know it all saying "Freeze! Evidence police here!". Entirely different tone, don't you think? I believe people have explained why they believe it. Clearly your answer to her question should be "I'm not convinced of it." Why are you demanding others give you evidence, unlike her question? Please note what she says following this.... Please be respectful of others points of view. Possible? Not possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VacuumFlux Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Is reincarnation valid or possible? What is the evidence for it and is it convincing to you, why or why not? Do you think people can reincarnate as animals or animals to humans? If not, why not? Can people or animals reincarnate into bodies on different planets? Please be respectful of others points of view. Bolding mine. The question is rather is it relevant to demand evidence in a discussion about personal beliefs about reincarnation? In response to the purpose of this thread, I believe so, yes - it is highly relevant. If the main point of this thread was the scientific evidence for/against reincarnation, this would be in the Science and Religion section. But this thread isn't about the state of the scientific evidence so much as personal experiences (so the evidence asked for at the start of the thread includes anecdotes) and how different individuals react to limited data. The point isn't to debate the one right answer, but to understand what sort of views other people have and why they have them. I value this sub-forum for being a safe space to share and compare personal, subjective ideas, experiences and emotions. So it's completely ok for you to say that you do not find the evidence for reincarnation to be compelling, but this is not the place to tell other people that they are wrong and demand that they prove themselves to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 The scientific proof is not there yet. If this thread were about scientific evidence, it would be a short one. What we have are accounts of children saying they remember having lived before. They want to go see their families in the distant village, etc. I just wondered what the people here think about the possibility. Say you were convinced reincarnation was a strong possibility. How would you design an experiment? How could you get repeatable results? Are there places in human expereince where the scientific method fails? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunaticheathen Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 I just KNEW this thread would attract fucking trolls asking for PROOF of our PERSONALLY HELD BELIEFS. Cooley, kiss my ass. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 but this is not the place to tell other people that they are wrong and demand that they prove themselves to you. I am sorry if my asking for any shred of evidence in support of a particular thesis would make you feel that I am "telling other people that they are wrong". I have made no claims as to what is right or wrong, nor have I even stated my position as regards this whole issue of 'reincarnation'. I do, however, find it difficult to believe that people would think itoffensive that others should ask them to present their rationale behind their claims, especially as we are gathered here trying to establish the possibility of reincarnation being true. How do we suppose we engage in any kind of intellectual discussion when one's premise begins with "I owe no one any proof, ever"? Cooley, kiss my ass. That is all. Hey, no thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev R Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 The scientific proof is not there yet. If this thread were about scientific evidence, it would be a short one. What we have are accounts of children saying they remember having lived before. They want to go see their families in the distant village, etc. My question here is how exactly do these experiences indicate reincarnation as opposed to an Akashic Record type of phenomenon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VacuumFlux Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 but this is not the place to tell other people that they are wrong and demand that they prove themselves to you. I am sorry if my asking for any shred of evidence in support of a particular thesis would make you feel that I am "telling other people that they are wrong". I have made no claims as to what is right or wrong, nor have I even stated my position as regards this whole issue of 'reincarnation'. Here is what I am objecting to: Asking for evidence against reincarnation is like asking for evidence against the existence of God. Sure, you can point to fallacies here and contradictions there, but at the end of the day, it is simply another unfalsifiable religious claim held as true only by virtue of faith and/or personal (and shared) revelation. Freeze! This is the evidence police! How are these quotes not showing that you do not think that reincarnation is right, and are mocking anyone who does? To me, it reads like a statement that anyone who believes in reincarnation is just as deluded as any christian and is stupid to be holding those beliefs, unless they can show you evidence that will convince you otherwise. Your second statement feels like you were saying "Shut up about your discussions on how reincarnation might work, until you have sufficient cold, hard facts to prove that you have any right to be having this discussion." You haven't given much of an explanation for your own views, you've merely stated your contempt for anyone who does believe in reincarnation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rev R Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 How do we suppose we engage in any kind of intellectual discussion when one's premise begins with "I owe no one any proof, ever"? Maybe it's not an intellectual discussion, but rather community building chit chat. People sometimes need to be able to make a connection in order to feel that they are not alone. Maybe the human connection found in considering the idea is far more important than any proof. Besides, the only time anyone ever owes proof is when the claim is made that theirs is the absolute truth and you should believe it as well. None of that here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Asking for evidence against reincarnation is like asking for evidence against the existence of God. Sure, you can point to fallacies here and contradictions there, but at the end of the day, it is simply another unfalsifiable religious claim held as true only by virtue of faith and/or personal (and shared) revelation. I stand uncorrected. The similarities are uncanny. Secondly, my rather ridiculous "evidence police" post was in response to this (and my apologies for not making it clearer): there are 2 things people are saying, it's about a 50/50 split. 1. we are material, we die, our atoms break down and form other things, that is all. 2. we have a soul that lives within us and lives on after our atoms break down and form other things. Lastly, You haven't given much of an explanation for your own views I think I can relate somewhat to the quasi-Buddhist concept of rebirth as a metaphorical interpretation of "reincarnation" (summarised here), which I find is rather interesting. As far as physical reincarnation goes, I had a dream once in which it was revealed to me that I had been the son of a bicycle shopkeeper in my previous life. True story! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 The scientific proof is not there yet. If this thread were about scientific evidence, it would be a short one. What we have are accounts of children saying they remember having lived before. They want to go see their families in the distant village, etc. My question here is how exactly do these experiences indicate reincarnation as opposed to an Akashic Record type of phenomenon? Yes, that is what Ian Stevenson pointed out -or various other possibilities as well - such as other spirits occupying living bodies. This is why he said his evidence was only "suggestive" of reincarnation. He never claimed it was scientific proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 How do we suppose we engage in any kind of intellectual discussion when one's premise begins with "I owe no one any proof, ever"? Well, what do you think this is, Cooley, when 4 year old kids start talking about prior lives? Just imagination? Especially when the places they describe really turn out to exist? I am only partially joshing here - I know all about the "they heard it somewhere.." I mean, have you read these accounts? I do think its a kind of proof that something is happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted March 16, 2012 Share Posted March 16, 2012 Asking for evidence against reincarnation is like asking for evidence against the existence of God. Sure, you can point to fallacies here and contradictions there, but at the end of the day, it is simply another unfalsifiable religious claim held as true only by virtue of faith and/or personal (and shared) revelation. I stand uncorrected. The similarities are uncanny. And the cynic wins! Seriously, asking for evidence about God is like asking for evidence of love when you've never experienced it. I'm happy you're happy in your created self-assurances. I'm sure you were just as self-assured in your beliefs when you were a Christian. But wait, if you were, why the need to show everyone how silly they are for not believing like you do? Wouldn't it be more fun to open your mind and learn? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 16, 2012 Author Share Posted March 16, 2012 Possible? Not possible? I think when people start demanding scientific, peer- reviewed type evidence on such a topic as this, they know damn well that no such a thing exists. Do they think we are stupid?? Does science have a complete explanation for consciousness? Are there not gaps in our knowledge?? Shouldn't we be investigating these areas? I feel it is arrogant to simply say "There is no scientific proof, therefore we must say the person is delusional or it simply CAN'T be true. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Again, I'm sorry I ever mentioned the word "evidence" in a discussion whose thread begins "Is reincarnation valid or possible? What is the evidence for it and is it convincing to you, why or why not? ...". Silly me. What was I thinking? have you read these accounts? I do think its a kind of proof that something is happening. I saw something like this on TV a while back. This kid, boy, went to this random house and practically recited the family tree, or something to that effect. Intriguing, yes? I think so. I think when people start demanding scientific, peer- reviewed type evidence on such a topic as this, they know damn well that no such a thing exists. Do they think we are stupid?? Does science have a complete explanation for consciousness? Are there not gaps in our knowledge?? Shouldn't we be investigating these areas? I feel it is arrogant to simply say "There is no scientific proof, therefore we must say the person is delusional or it simply CAN'T be true." I don't disagree, but if you would kindly look back you will see that I have made no such claim. All I have been trying to say is that we shouldn't take offence when asked to present some kind of evidence or rationale for our beliefs (ie. in response to "I don't owe you any proof" -- which is true by the way, Luna, you don't owe me anything), especially when discussing in a thread in which we are trying to establish the possible truth of something. Asking for evidence against reincarnation is like asking for evidence againstthe existence of God. Sure, you can point to fallacies here and contradictions there, but at the end of the day, it is simply another unfalsifiable religious claim held as true only by virtue of faith and/or personal (and shared) revelation. I still think that this is true, and this entire thread has been proof that this is so. I am not too sure though how pointing that out makes me a "cynic", but so be it. I'm sure you were just as self-assured in your beliefs when you were a Christian. I just KNEW this thread would attract fucking trolls asking for PROOF of our PERSONALLY HELD BELIEFS. Cooley, kiss my ass. That is all. Thank you, Luna, Antlerman. Much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lunaticheathen Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 You're welcome. Fuck off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cooley Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 You're welcome. Fuck off. Gladly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Objective evidence would be subjective right? Since it's open to our personal experiences and what not. Am I correct in guessing at that? Not that this is an arguement for/against reincarnation. Just wondering if I've gotten the definition right...I could google it I guess. Objective evidence is beyond human perception. It is the real stuff in our universe. The thing is that each human has a subjective interpretation of that objective world. So technically humans can't access that objective world. We must use our subjective senses to perceive the objective world. Now with that said let me just add that people who are minding their own business and not harming others don't owe anybody any explanation regarding their own personal beliefs. They are under no obligation to cough up evidence. They don't even need to base their beliefs on evidence. They should have the freedom to believe whatever seems right to them. Now in other sections (not this one) you will see me demand of Christians that they show me objective evidence. The difference is that those Christians are demanding that others convert to their religion and they are threatening us with eternal torture. That is the difference. I do not ask for evidence of even Christians when they are not trying to convert and not threatening. This community has a lot of wisdom regarding spiritual matters. It may not be correct in the sense that 1 +1 = 2. But much of it is useful and helpful to the human experience. Besides, religion is part of the human experience just like art, music and dance are part of the human experience. So even if I'm not personally into the deep spirituality I am grateful for some of the people who are. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zephie Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Oh okay. That makes sense somewhat. I do agree with you regarding evidence of personal beliefs. While I consider myself an atheist...I do practice some pagan ways as well as worship a goddess of wisdom (Saraswati) since I think wisdom is a higher ideal. As for evidence of reincarnation...I'm not so sure. It could happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 I'm sure you were just as self-assured in your beliefs when you were a Christian. Thank you, Luna, Antlerman. Much appreciated. Anytime. Happy to help point that out for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted March 17, 2012 Author Share Posted March 17, 2012 Now with that said let me just add that people who are minding their own business and not harming others don't owe anybody any explanation regarding their own personal beliefs. They are under no obligation to cough up evidence. They don't even need to base their beliefs on evidence. They should have the freedom to believe whatever seems right to them. Now in other sections (not this one) you will see me demand of Christians that they show me objective evidence. The difference is that those Christians are demanding that others convert to their religion and they are threatening us with eternal torture. That is the difference. I do not ask for evidence of even Christians when they are not trying to convert and not threatening. This community has a lot of wisdom regarding spiritual matters. It may not be correct in the sense that 1 +1 = 2. But much of it is useful and helpful to the human experience. Besides, religion is part of the human experience just like art, music and dance are part of the human experience. So even if I'm not personally into the deep spirituality I am grateful for some of the people who are. Thank you, mymistake. I appreciate that. Generally speaking, I would never demand evidence from anyone. Even most Christians just go about their business and leave other people alone, in my experience. Their actions and their lives show where they are at, not what they say. People say stuff all the time. Many times you can't tell if they are serious, or if they truly believe the stuff. I happen to think there is some evidence for reincarnation, and that was why I opened the thread like I did. It is not accepted by the scientific community. The human mind and consciousness may not be discoverable according to scientific method. After all, it is also a product of the mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts