How do you explain past lives?

[programmer_guy]

Actually it isn't. You are making an assumption with regard to an inherent "materialist view of reincarnation" that does not necessarily hold: to whit "the conservation of souls through space & time", aka "one soul, one life".

Such an assumption seems "obvious" to an intellect conditioned by principles of modern physics, but such considerations actually only apply to the realm of physical phenomena. They need not apply to matters of spirit, i.e. those phenomena which are inherently NON-physical.

There are in fact other ways of viewing the apparent availability of prior life information to present life individuals. Many of these alternate viewpoints are not readily explainable in traditional materialistic terms. Reincarnation is an easy model to understand. As commonly understood it is not necessarily the best such model, but like the Bohr Atom it is relatively simple and can be used early on to explain a lot of apparent phenomena.

Ultimately past lives are not themselves significant. Its something of an indulgence to waste time pondering on their "mechanisms". Doing so constitutes something of a "dead end" spiritually.


Mark A. Baker

It's either true or not.
I would rather not deal in obfuscation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obfuscation

Obfuscation is the concealment of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, intentionally ambiguous, and more difficult to interpret.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

It's either true or not.
I would rather not deal in obfuscation.

Are you really so simplistic in your thinking that you believe all propositions are resolvable by a facile appeal to binary reasoning?


Mark A. Baker

 

[programmer_guy]

Are you really so simplistic in your thinking that you believe all propositions are resolvable by a facile appeal to binary reasoning?


Mark A. Baker

I'll stick to scientific studies which are not so iffy.

Post some links to scientific studies on this topic and I will read them.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

I'll stick to scientific studies which are not so iffy.

Post some links to scientific studies on this topic and I will read them.

Your best bet is to look up the works of Drs. Ian Stevenson, Jim Tucker, & Bruce Greyson. Needless to say, the subject does not lend itself to materialistic objectivism. Until recently the traditional "experts" have for good reason specialized in areas dealing with metaphysics.


Mark A. Baker

 

[programmer_guy]

Your best bet is to look up the works of Drs. Ian Stevenson, Jim Tucker, & Bruce Greyson. Needless to say, the subject does not lend itself to materialistic objectivism. Until recently the traditional "experts" have for good reason specialized in areas dealing with metaphysics.


Mark A. Baker

Give me your favorite URL links and I will read them.

 

[Freeminds]

No past lives

How do I explain past lives?

Easy: you mocked up your past lives. You haven't lived before, and I'm sorry to say that you won't live again.

The basis for my reasoning is that there are more people now living - seven billion - than the total number of all our ancestors, in all of history. (That's the funny thing about the population explosion...) This means that we can't have lived before. There aren't enough previously inhabited meat bodies to go around.

Furthermore, nobody has ever managed to remember accurate details about their claimed past life or lives, despite regression, hypnosis and auditing.

Furthermore, L Ron Hubbard was a fraud. He claimed to be Cecil Rhodes (founder of Rhodesia) despite the fact that he didn't know that Rhodes was a homosexual, and therefore not somebody a bigot like Hubbard would want to be associated with.

No past lives. This is the only one you get: don't waste it on Dianetics.

 

[programmer_guy]

Easy: you mocked up your past lives. You haven't lived before, and I'm sorry to say that you won't live again.

And THAT is what people don't want to read or consider.
I would luv to read credible scientific studies that prove this wrong.
But there are none.
As Alan Watts once said, "The universe *I's* (making a pronoun into a verb).

 

[programmer_guy]

And I didn't even mention my wisdom tooth extraction surgery.
That was some time snipped out of my life/memory.
Where was I? Give me your best guess.

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

Actually it isn't. You are making an assumption with regard to an inherent "materialist view of reincarnation" that does not necessarily hold: to whit "the conservation of souls through space & time", aka "one soul, one life".

Such an assumption seems "obvious" to an intellect conditioned by principles of modern physics, but such considerations actually only apply to the realm of physical phenomena. They need not apply to matters of spirit, i.e. those phenomena which are inherently NON-physical.

There are in fact other ways of viewing the apparent availability of prior life information to present life individuals. Many of these alternate viewpoints are not readily explainable in traditional materialistic terms. Reincarnation is an easy model to understand. As commonly understood it is not necessarily the best such model, but like the Bohr Atom it is relatively simple and can be used early on to explain a lot of apparent phenomena.

Ultimately past lives are not themselves significant. Its something of an indulgence to waste time pondering on their "mechanisms". Doing so constitutes something of a "dead end" spiritually.


Mark A. Baker

Mark, You used an awful lot of words to say nothing. I don't have an issue with people believing in past lives, it when they claim to 'know' it is truth when it becomes an issue, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own set of facts.

I agree with you about past lives are not themselves significant, but your view of spending time pondering their "mechanisms" as a spiritual dead end, is shortsighted at best. You are confusing religion and dogma with spirituality.

If people throughout history did not ponder the mechanisms of phenomenon they did not understand, we would still believe be blaming the imaginarfy gods in the clouds for volcanoes, earthquakes, and weather conditions, since pondering their "mechanisms" would be a spiritual dead end.

If you can explain to me how spending time entertaining delusions rather than searching for truths and facts helps one out of a spiritual dead end, I'm all ears.

 

[The Great Zorg]

quote

Mark, You used an awful lot of words to say nothing. I don't have an issue with people believing in past lives, it when they claim to 'know' it is truth when it becomes an issue, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own set of facts.
I agree with you about past lives are not themselves significant, but your view of spending time pondering their "mechanisms" as a spiritual dead end, is shortsighted at best. You are confusing religion and dogma with spirituality.
If people throughout history did not ponder the mechanisms of phenomenon they did not understand, we would still believe be blaming the imaginarfy gods in the clouds for volcanoes, earthquakes, and weather conditions, since pondering their "mechanisms" would be a spiritual dead end.
If you can explain to me how spending time entertaining delusions rather than searching for truths and facts helps one out of a spiritual dead end, I'm all ears.

^^^
This!

 

[themadhair]

Mark, You used an awful lot of words to say nothing. I don't have an issue with people believing in past lives, it when they claim to 'know' it is truth when it becomes an issue, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own set of facts.

I agree with you about past lives are not themselves significant, but your view of spending time pondering their "mechanisms" as a spiritual dead end, is shortsighted at best. You are confusing religion and dogma with spirituality.

If people throughout history did not ponder the mechanisms of phenomenon they did not understand, we would still believe be blaming the imaginarfy gods in the clouds for volcanoes, earthquakes, and weather conditions, since pondering their "mechanisms" would be a spiritual dead end.

If you can explain to me how spending time entertaining delusions rather than searching for truths and facts helps one out of a spiritual dead end, I'm all ears.

QFT. Worth adding that an integral crux of Mark’s argument is based upon his misuse of the label ‘materialist’.

 

[Mark A. Baker]

If you can explain to me how spending time entertaining delusions rather than searching for truths and facts helps one out of a spiritual dead end, I'm all ears.

:confused2:

Frankly, you seem to me to spend a great deal more time "entertaining delusions" in the matter than I so I defer to your greater experience in this regard.

I know enough to know that not all phenomena, especially those which are mental/spiritual are reducible to known physical constructs, or indeed must "mimic" such where they are not in fact physically based. Nor am I so simple minded as to consider that all phenomena MUST be so reducible. If nothing else, that would violate principles of formal logic.

Whether you choose to believe or disbelieve in reincarnation is of no actual importance. Take it either way. The commonly occurring error lies in thinking that the explanation of such apparent phenomena MUST be restricted to your present way of thinking about the physical universe.


Mark A. Baker

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

:confused2:

Frankly, you seem to me to spend a great deal more time "entertaining delusions" in the matter than I so I defer to your greater experience in this regard.

I know enough to know that not all phenomena, especially those which are mental/spiritual are reducible to known physical constructs, or indeed must "mimic" such where they are not in fact physically based. Nor am I so simple minded as to consider that all phenomena MUST be so reducible. If nothing else, that would violate principles of formal logic.

Whether you choose to believe or disbelieve in reincarnation is of no actual importance. Take it either way. The commonly occurring error lies in thinking that the explanation of such apparent phenomena MUST be restricted to your present way of thinking about the physical universe.


Mark A. Baker

No, actually the commonly occurring error lies in thinking that someone can just make up a random story to explain a belief and present it as a truth.

 

[Zinjifar]

No, actually the commonly occurring error lies in thinking that someone can just make up a random story to explain a belief and present it as a truth.

They can. And then they face disbelief and riducule

Zinj

 

[nw2394]

No, actually the commonly occurring error lies in thinking that someone can just make up a random story to explain a belief and present it as a truth.

You assume that the "story" is made up.

Which doesn't prove that past lives exist either, of course - but the phenomenon isn't, at least in a lot of cases, just dreamed up.

Nick

 

[AnonyMary]

I audited someone once using the dianetic book bullshit method. He began recounting a past life so I ran with it. He started to remember being in a battle with Indians and he was having trouble figuring out who he was, one of the Indians or one of the cowboys or Pony Soldiers.
After a while his expressions and demeanor changed and he said "This is getting to be nothing but fucking bullshit!!!! I asked him what was going on and he told me he was trying to remember his past life as an Indian or cowboy and the he had just realized that the entire past life 'engram' he had just recounted was some John Wayne movie he had seen years and years ago.

He just got up and left mumbling something about "fucking scientology".

He never came back.

Fucking scientology.

At least he figured it out quickly enough!

 

[ChuckNorrisCutsMyLawn]

You assume that the "story" is made up.

Which doesn't prove that past lives exist either, of course - but the phenomenon isn't, at least in a lot of cases, just dreamed up.

Nick

I dream every night, and my dreams are always of incidents which have never actually took place, some are enjoyable and some are not. I can describe them in great detail as if I lived them, usually with all five senses. My favorites are the ones where I can defy gravity, play an instrument like a virtuoso, or the ones which involve sexual encounters, I'm even an excellent military marksman in some of my dreams. Those are the ones that stimulate the same portions of the brain which recreational drugs and auditing do, making them quite enjoyable even long after waking up.

I can claim I must have been able to defy gravity at one time for me to know what the experience consists of, or have played that instrument to know where to move my fingers, or even know a foreign language to be able to hear that language in my dreams, but we all know these are just a dreams.

Now I could start a religion claiming these dreams are memories of real events which actually took place, or I can just take them for what they are ... dreams,

but all this is beside the point.

The point is the believe of past lives is just that a belief, and I have no problem with people choosing to believe it, but once they try to pawn it off as a truth, that is where the problem lies, and no amount of flimflam, bamboozling, or attempts to tie it to spirituality, by Mark, will change that.

The belief in past lives is a man made belief, just as is every other attempt to massage man's ego with religious mythology to connect man to the divine.

No one knows what happens to us after we die or what took place before we were born, anyone who claims otherwise has been either brainwashed or conned ... or is delusional, or insane.

And when I say no one knows, I mean no one, not me, not you, not a con man like L. Ron Hubbard, or anyone else ... no one period.

 

[nw2394]

And when I say no one knows, I mean no one, not me, not you, not a con man like L. Ron Hubbard, or anyone else ... no one period.

Yup. You've asserted your opinion loudly enough.

 

[programmer_guy]

Yup. You've asserted your opinion loudly enough.

What he said is correct as far as our current scientific knowledge can tell us on this subject.

If you believe otherwise then provide some links to credible scientific studies on this subject.

 

[Zinjifar]

Even *without* 'science'; I have often brought it up, and, I'll do so again. Why would you think that a 'past life' you remembered was *your* past life, even if the details of it could be proven indubitably?

Why would 'self' and 'my past life' be so freakin *important* to someone interested in spirituality? Why couldn't 'I' remember 'sombody else's' Past Life? And, why would it be important to me?

Zinj