--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard M" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think you pointed out some valid points about the difficulty testing these theories. But I think that could be worked out if you had the kind of numbers of people willing to be tested that the reality of reincarnation would be expected (by me) to provide. If ALL of us have had many lives I would expect many many more examples of people coming up with the kind of details that could corroborate the claim. And if truth was created by consensus vote, I would vote for reincarnation to be true. I'm having a blast in my life, and am very pissed off that death has taken away people I love and care about. I would like this myth to be true. But I have to be honest with myself that I put a low probability on it. I do believe that we have only scratched the surface of understanding what our minds are capable of. We don't even know how most birds find their direction across large areas of flight paths. But I would like to see a bit more willingness for rigorous research on the part of believers. I often get the sense that they are too invested with the physiological benifits of such beliefs to be committed to a falsifiable testing standard. I guess we all make choices about what basket we are gunna put our eggs (this analogy has taken a weird turn). This is true of so called skeptics and believers both. No one believes everything from the many beliefs available to us from man's history. We are all skeptics and believers both. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues" > <curtisdeltablues@> wrote: > > > [snip] For Reincarnation they are making specific > > claims about having memories of what actually existed in the world > > when they were alive before. So in principle they can be tested. We > > may not know what happens after death, but if someone claims that they > > DO know because they can remember specifics of having lived before it > > can be tested. > > To an extent - but there is something about Death that seems to leave > us always *locked out*. > > After all - let's say I claim I was Blackbeard the pirate in a > previous life. When challenged by scoffers I say "I am so confident of > my recollections that I can prove it. I *remember* the location of a > small island where I (Blackbeard) buried my treasure. Let's go there > and we'll dig it up!" > > OK - suppose we put that to the test. We go to some remote island. I > count six & half paces from the third palm tree from the north beach, > start digging - and shiver me timbers - there be a treasure chest. > > It has to be said that (as far as I know), tests like these never seem > to work out for reincarnation. But even if they did, all we can say is > this: Something very odd is going on. Reincarnation could explain it - > but so could other equally challenging conjectures. For example this:- > Perhaps I have some strong psychic abilities with which I can indeed > do a remarkable thing (viz. divine the thoughts of a dead pirate that > are somehow still "echoing" or "reverberating" in the ether today.). > If true, that means that I am mistaken and confused in thinking I WAS > Blackbeard. I have a special ability, but my understanding of my own > ability is false. So the question is: How could you ever test between > these two competing explanations? > > There is a similar barrier to empirical experiment with "near-death" > experience. I read a while back that they were setting up tests in a > London hospital. I think the plan was to leave some odd objects in > places that could not be seen by a patient under normal circumstances, > but might be visible to someone *looking back at their body* after > *death*. I don't know how they have got on, but interesting as it is, > I don't see how it could ever establish anything about *life after > death*. I think if someone could indeed correctly refer to these > things after being resuscitated, we would reasonably conclude "that > shows the person wasn't dead". But how could the patient have seen > something hidden away on the top of a cupboard or some such? > > Well that would be remarkable - but to explain this as the astral > travelling of a dead soul around the ceiling ignores other possible > (but still extraordinary) possibilities. Isn't it easier to believe > that minds may have psychic abilities and in this case the non-dead > patient may have somehow read the mind of the experimenter? Perhaps > brains slip easier in to weird mode when under stress and close to death! > > It just seems that death presents a knowledge barrier that we can > never get past... > > (I think the near death experiments were being organised by Peter > Fenwick, one of the early researchers into TM) >
