What do you think of reincarnation?

We've been enjoying it for 700 years.

The same I think about Santa Claus, God (or any god), ghosts and people who claim they've been anal probed by UFO's. Guess.

The same I think about Santa Claus, God (or any god), ghosts and people who claim they've been anal probed by UFO's. Guess.

 

That they all rule the world secretly through a special committee?

Funny answer: That it would make sense to sentence people to multiple life sentences. You just have to spot the criminal again the moment he is reborn and lock the toddler up again.

 

Serious answer: Not sure what you are expecting here? Input as to whether it is a plausible thing happening to people? Whether it is a good or a bad thing? Whether it is a process we ourselves are in control of? Is it endless repetition or is there a "goal"?

 

A few more words as guide to what you would like to hear would be nice.

It's part of a human belief system and considering how puny humans are in the universe there are zero odds that anything humans believe is true anyway.

A better rephrasal of the topic would be, "what do you think of reincarnation, and why?".

 

Serious answer: Not sure what you are expecting here? Input as to whether it is a plausible thing happening to people? Whether it is a good or a bad thing? Whether it is a process we ourselves are in control of? Is it endless repetition or is there a "goal"?

 

All of the above! But primarily looking for criticism of the concept from rationalist grounds, but criticism from a religious or ethical perspective is acceptable as well.

I don't like any belief system that takes away focus from your actual "current" life, so I think reincarnation is unnecessary and possibly even bad for you as a belief.

A better rephrasal of the topic would be, "what do you think of reincarnation, and why?".

 

Serious answer: Not sure what you are expecting here? Input as to whether it is a plausible thing happening to people? Whether it is a good or a bad thing? Whether it is a process we ourselves are in control of? Is it endless repetition or is there a "goal"?

 

All of the above! But primarily looking for criticism of the concept from rationalist grounds, but criticism from a religious or ethical perspective is acceptable as well.

Wow, thats a very big box to open (It says "Pandora" on the label)

 

I suppose that, in order to accept the possibilty reincarnation, you first have to be willing to accept the concept of a "soul". That is, some kind of container which holds the essence which is you, preserving it past the duration of your physical body.

 

Assuming for a moment that souls exist, what would the consequence be for the "You" when you are reborn? Would you be a sequel to your previous life, rediscovering memories from previous lives, or would you start with a clean slate, in which case, I would ask, what is the purpose of reincarnation then? In quite a few belief systems, there is a place set aside for you, and most people get exactly one chance to determine where your soul end up in the afterlife.

 

Is there some kind of benefit to leading a good life and if so, who determines what a good life is? Is it a divine judgement what you are reborn as or is it just a set of natural laws? What if you lead a bad life, do you then get reborn as a worm destined to go fishing? If the reincarnation is a divinely inspired mechanism, does intercession happen? If so, is it then really that different from those who believe that you get one lifetime, apart from the no second chances part?

 

If I had the time, I could probably have put up an antire flow-chart of all those combinations of outcomes and thoughts on whether they are good or bad.

 

Back to the assumption (and coherent thought?), if we have a "soul", I can't see, depending on your faith, that reincarnation isn't a possibility. If we don't have a "soul", we are fertiliser when we die and our only claim to immortality are the genes we pass on through our children.

 

Assuming for a moment that reincarnation is real, is it a good or a bad thing? I would say, that depends on the ultimate goal. If the cycle is endless, are we then really living (ok, I sound like a Dustie now) or are we trapped for eternity in a prison yearning for oblivion? If the cycle isn't endless and there is some different planes of existence (heaven, hell, somewhere in between), then I don't really see it as much of a difference to say Christianity or Islam. The methods and the trappings may be different, but the goal is ultimately the same. Live a good life according to your faith and get some goodies in the end.

 

Which is really what it all boils down to, what do you believe in? Death is a tricky barrier to pass documentation through, so belief is mostly what is left. Mind you, if we were always only driven by rational thought, I think we would most likely still be cowering in caves when lightning storms passes over our heads... Progress in thinking has been known to be done by irrational people in the past.

 

And Gorth shouldn't really pretend to be able to think deep thoughts towards the end of a long day

Reincarnation ought to be falsifiable, at least in individual cases. I've not seen any tests.

Of course I believe.

Janes, Hindus, The Six, and Buddhists all believe in reincarnation.

and each religion believes in a different version of reincarnation. Showing the evolution of its thought.

Of course I believe.

 

"Of course"? In what sense is it justifiable to answer this question with "of course"?

I see reincarnation as a distant possibility. A doubtful one. I don't see its possibility as spiritual, but the result of the possibility that the universe is a closed system. If the universe lasts infinitely in cycles of big bang - big crunch, it is possible, just as a million monkeys typing on typewriters could possibly write Shakespeare, that I could be born again.

 

I'm mostly a non-believer on it, all that said.

Edited December 8, 200718 yr by Tale

I see reincarnation as a distant possibility. A doubtful one. I don't see its possibility as spiritual, but the result of the possibility that the universe is a closed system. If the universe lasts infinitely in cycles of big bang - big crunch, it is possible, just as a million monkeys typing on typewriters could possibly write Shakespeare, that I could be born again.

 

I'm mostly a non-believer on it, all that said.

 

Evidence suggests the big-bang/big-crunch scenario is unlikely. Recent findings predict large amounts of dark energy exist (a repulsive force) which would prevent such a scenario in a closed universe (density parameter less than 1). In an open universe, (hyperbolic) expansion occurs forever regardless of positive dark energy. Of course if there is an opposite attractive force (like gravity but separate) there would be a big crunch, but that would only occur if the universe underwent a phase transition... which has happened before - namely the start of the universe). In a flat universe (Euclidean, density parameter equals one), the same applies as in an open one, but in the end much of the universe would be a BEC - which I guess you COULD call a big crunch.

 

But yeah most evidence suggests we are in an open universe. Furthermore, in a universe which followed a big crunch, you'd get an entropy build up which would eventually cause heat death after the nth universe.

"Of course"? In what sense is it justifiable to answer this question with "of course"?

 

No more so than 'of course not', yet you havn't picked on any posts that have said that.

I know what Glenn Hoddle thinks of reincarnation.

"Of course"? In what sense is it justifiable to answer this question with "of course"?

 

No more so than 'of course not', yet you havn't picked on any posts that have said that.

 

I beg to differ. I would contend that the majority of people on this forum do not believe in reincarnation, due to rational disproof. As such, I am curious to know why Lucian thinks reincarnation is so definite. I don't mean to pick apart his reasoning, if that's what your getting your pants in a knot over.

I beg to differ. I would contend that the majority of people on this forum do not believe in reincarnation, due to rational disproof. As such, I am curious to know why Lucian thinks reincarnation is so definite. I don't mean to pick apart his reasoning, if that's what your getting your pants in a knot over.

 

May I ask what is "rational disproof"? What does "rational" mean to you?

 

Because no proof in favor of something does not equate to a disproof.

Edited December 8, 200718 yr by Qwerty the Sir

I need some kind of tanglible evidence to believe in an immortal soul. Now, I haven\t seen any UFOs, ghosts, any Santas not paid by a department store, so I guess i\m waiting on that.

 

Can\t rule it out though, I don\t know for sure that these things don\t exist.

I need some kind of tanglible evidence to believe in an immortal soul. Now, I haven\t seen any UFOs, ghosts, any Santas not paid by a department store, so I guess i\m waiting on that.

 

Can\t rule it out though, I don\t know for sure that these things don\t exist.

 

Yup, for many people to believe in most things, some sort of tangible physical evidence that can be perceived by human senses is needed. This heuristic is used for most beliefs people form (at least what I've seen by myself and others around me). If a claim cannot pass that heuristic, it is usually not believed in.

 

Of course, there are some (similar and related) beliefs that have no perceptual basis, yet the majority of people who use that heuristic to form most of their beliefs ignore it in these special cases of beliefs.

 

All very interesting, but too profound for me...

I suppose that, in order to accept the possibilty reincarnation, you first have to be willing to accept the concept of a "soul". That is, some kind of container which holds the essence which is you, preserving it past the duration of your physical body.

 

Not really necessary - Buddhism accepts reincarnation, while explicitly rejecting the soul.

 

Assuming for a moment that souls exist, what would the consequence be for the "You" when you are reborn? Would you be a sequel to your previous life, rediscovering memories from previous lives, or would you start with a clean slate, in which case, I would ask, what is the purpose of reincarnation then? In quite a few belief systems, there is a place set aside for you, and most people get exactly one chance to determine where your soul end up in the afterlife.

 

Thats an interesting question. I have heard lots of Westerners critiquing reincarnation on the basis of it just being a result of people wanting to live beyond death just like the concept of heaven, few seem to realize that when the soul reincarnates, it is a completely different individual.

 

Is there some kind of benefit to leading a good life and if so, who determines what a good life is? Is it a divine judgement what you are reborn as or is it just a set of natural laws? What if you lead a bad life, do you then get reborn as a worm destined to go fishing? If the reincarnation is a divinely inspired mechanism, does intercession happen? If so, is it then really that different from those who believe that you get one lifetime, apart from the no second chances part?

 

Karma is normally conceptualized as being a natural law. Some theists accept the idea of intercession on the devotees behalf. However, in the end, salvation/liberation/enlightenment depends entirely on ones own efforts at achieving such a state.

 

Assuming for a moment that reincarnation is real, is it a good or a bad thing? I would say, that depends on the ultimate goal. If the cycle is endless, are we then really living (ok, I sound like a Dustie now) or are we trapped for eternity in a prison yearning for oblivion? If the cycle isn't endless and there is some different planes of existence (heaven, hell, somewhere in between), then I don't really see it as much of a difference to say Christianity or Islam. The methods and the trappings may be different, but the goal is ultimately the same. Live a good life according to your faith and get some goodies in the end.

 

Well, reincarnation is in fact percieved as being a trap. Whether getting out of this trap leads one to heaven, to becoming a part of god, or to oblivion depends on the sect.

I suppose that, in order to accept the possibilty reincarnation, you first have to be willing to accept the concept of a "soul". That is, some kind of container which holds the essence which is you, preserving it past the duration of your physical body.

 

Not really necessary - Buddhism accepts reincarnation, while explicitly rejecting the soul.

What is the purpose of reincarnation then? Mind you, I know very little of Buddhism. Is it to enforce a "good lifestyle" without the benefit of previous accomplishments? How do Buddhist faith work with people in elevated positions within their ranks then? Is that based entirely on merits in their current lifetime? I would think so if previous actions are discarded together with the previous soul.

Not being a Cartesian Dualist or any analogue that conceives of an ethereal "mental stuff" or "essence" removed from physical space, I don't believe in reincarnation. The very idea doesn't make sense. When we die and decay that which makes us up becomes something else (as Tale alluded to, a bit confusingly), but that something else isn't necessarily living, and the idea of being reincarnated into rocks or plants or oil wells is not appealing. I'm sympathetic to the idea that what constitutes "me" in the sense we're talking about is contained within my brain, in its states and dense forests of neurons. When that ceases to function, I cease to exist. My assorted particles are dispersed, but I wouldn't say that whatever receives those particles is "me" in any meaningful sense.

 

I'm not able to fully understand it at present, I can't look at a brain scan and say that is who I am at any given time, but it's a leap to go from that to there in all actuality being a ghost inside of me or some representation of my personality and mind that persists after my death.

Edited December 9, 200718 yr by Pop