Hey guys, for some reason I'm always late for the party. Thank Gawd(?) you kept it going on this site.

So, I've searched but found out the idea of Rebirth gets dissmised easily as "mumbo jumbo", I could see why, and try to but just can't see it. Maybe I'm still deluded after all, if you guys could help me out I'll be really greatful.

There seems to be more evidence for rebirth than there is for nihilism or eternal perpetuity as a permanent form. I'ts wierd actually I want to belive in nihilism since eternal life is way more frightening.

No, I'm not completely insane (just a tad bit), by evidence (sorry for using this term I know it dosen't qualify, but can't find any other term) I mean, past remembrance wich are verifiable of past lives. Children able to speak various languages with no formal training. Shakespeare, Gauss, etc.

English is my second language, so I apologize in advance if me riting sems funny.

I didn't ment to say Shakespeare and Gauss spoke various languages. Just that I'm amazed at their humble beginings and yet could achieve so much. From illeterate parents Shakespeare could portray humans very realisticly. Gauss was correcting his father's account books when he was 3 and so on.

Autumn Clouds wrote:So, I've searched but found out the idea of Rebirth gets dissmised easily as "mumbo jumbo", I could see why, and try to but just can't see it. Maybe I'm still deluded after all, if you guys could help me out I'll be really greatful

Lack of compelling evidence springs to mind as the most obvious reason people dismiss rebirth/reincarnation as "mumbo jumbo". I don't see how it can be positively ruled out tho so I'm sure it's just a "colloquial" way of dismissing stuff you lack belief in.

There seems to be more evidence for rebirth than there is for nihilism or eternal perpetuity as a permanent form

While I'm pretty sure what you are getting at here, I'm pretty sure "nihilism" is not the right word to use in this context. Maybe more @ "materialism"? Anyway, I'm sure the idea is that, to quote Burach's Half Way Round, "when you're dead, you're dead", right?

Anyway, let's have a look at this "more evidence" there is for rebirth above that for "dead-is-dead" or "eternal perpetuity" then, shall we? I do hope Shakespeare and Gauss aren't "it"... Over to you.

Don't get me wrong, I don't have a dogmatic belief in it. It just seems to explain much more that materialism as you say or eternalism.

Lack of compelling evidence springs to mind as the most obvious reason people dismiss rebirth/reincarnation as "mumbo jumbo". I don't see how it can be positively ruled out tho so I'm sure it's just a "colloquial" way of dismissing stuff you lack belief in.

There is lack of compelling evidence for I dunno, the existance of electromagnetic monoploes. That dosen't mean we should consider them "mumbo jumbo" and throw the entire quantum theory out of the window. I'm just trying not to be so Descartian in my approach to consider anything to do with the mind (technically soul, which I don't really belive) something only the Church should handle, and anything to do with nature something science should.
Child prodigies are one of the points but for instance let me quote a book I read some time ago:
Dr. Ian Stevenson, Carlson Professor of Psychiatry at the Universite of Virginia, has investigated over 2000 cases of (spontaneous recall of past lives), which are documented and published. There are several other reasearchers who have carried out such investigation on children who spontaneously recall past lives. Many of these researchers belong to religions that do not accept rebirth.
These children speak volubly, accurately and with unanswerving conviction about their previous lives, and histories related have been verified. In most cases these children voice their past life memories between the ages of two and five. They small and free from memories crowded with information of their current lives. They often use phrases such as "when I was big" and often grumble about their small bodies and even speak resentfully of not being of the same sex as before. (...)

My favorite thing about past life anecdotes is how rare someone claims that in a past life their job was picking corn out of shit, or some such thing. No, you always here how someone's past life was that of someone of note.

What evidence?

That a tiny proportion of people display incredible gifts in certain areas is certainly not evidence of reincarnation, it's to be expected that with a massive population there will be some outliers. And given that people don't tend to get ever and ever more brilliant once they reach adulthood, there's no reason to suggest that rebirth would give people cognitive advantages if it did happen.

Autumn Clouds wrote:There is lack of compelling evidence for I dunno, the existance of electromagnetic monoploes. That dosen't mean we should consider them "mumbo jumbo" and throw the entire quantum theory out of the window

Existence of magnetic monopoles has been predicted by certain theories of physics but there is no evidence at all for their actual existence, or even a solid methodology for their detection ATM. The "entire quantum theory" wouldn't go "out of the window" however even if they aren't discovered or can be shown not exist as quantum physics is based on empirical obsevation of certain properties of matter and energy.

Child prodigies are one of the points

What other possibilities beyond rebirth have you considered for child prodigies?

Dr. Ian Stevenson, Carlson Professor of Psychiatry at the Universite of Virginia, has investigated over 2000 cases of (spontaneous recall of past lives), which are documented and published. There are several other reasearchers who have carried out such investigation on children who spontaneously recall past lives. Many of these researchers belong to religions that do not accept rebirth. These children speak volubly, accurately and with unanswerving conviction about their previous lives, and histories related have been verified. In most cases these children voice their past life memories between the ages of two and five. They small and free from memories crowded with information of their current lives. They often use phrases such as "when I was big" and often grumble about their small bodies and even speak resentfully of not being of the same sex as before. (...)

Care to present a specific case?

You make a great point, and to be honest I don't think I can explain it without dabbling into some philosophical nonsense. In other words I simply don't know. And I would be prone to agree with you if the only incredible gifts we see are logical based ones such as for instance gauss with mathematics. But to have complete knowledge of memes?, a six year old playing for the first time a musical instrument and nothing less than a masterpiece comes out?. What about those cases mentioned in the other post?. And how about Cicero's argument that maintains that the speed which children grasp inumerable facts is strong proof of men knowing things before birth?.

How about a four year old girl that speaks 3 languages, programs her computer and reads shakespeare?.

My favorite thing about past life anecdotes is how rare someone claims that in a past life their job was picking corn out of shit, or some such thing. No, you always here how someone's past life was that of someone of note.

Completly agree, but if a three year old can give accurate descriptions of their gruseome deaths, without any manifestation of grandeour and embelishment of the ego, since its not quite developed at that age, it would raise a couple eybrows.

What it seems, at least what this hypothesis states, is that for some reason some children from ages three to seven, can recall past events, and learn at a much faster rate. Then they completley forget everything.
Another important "proof" according to Stevenson is the presence of birth marks and defects in perfect correlation with the wounds of the deceased.
The thing with absolute theories, such as materialism or eternalism is that of all these cases, you just need one, and that one will be enough to disprove both. Is rebirth acceptable then? absolutley not. Is it the most plausible to explain these phenomena? certainly more than the other two options.
We're simply limited by our imagination, maybe there's another explanation for these things.

Existence of magnetic monopoles has been predicted by certain theories of physics but there is no evidence at all for their actual existence, or even a solid methodology for their detection ATM. The "entire quantum theory" wouldn't go "out of the window" however even if they aren't discovered or can be shown not exist as quantum physics is based on empirical obsevation of certain properties of matter and energy.

I know, I study physics, wast just trying to make a point. But there's little empirical evidence for quantum mechanics as a whole, since most observable phenomena occur way beyond the reach of its premises.

Care to present a specific case?

In one instance, Stevenson chronicled the case of a Beirut boy who described his life as a 25-year-old mechanic in minute detail, down to the names of friends and relatives and the particulars of his death in an automobile accident. Such a man was found to have existed and to have predeceased the boy by several years, though there was no clear reason that the boy or his family should have known about this man.

Autumn Clouds wrote:I know, I study physics, wast just trying to make a point. But there's little empirical evidence for quantum mechanics as a whole, since most observable phenomena occur way beyond the reach of its premises

Sorry, you lost me there I'm afraid. Quantum physical phenomena have absolutely been observed

In one instance, Stevenson chronicled the case of a Beirut boy who described his life as a 25-year-old mechanic in minute detail, down to the names of friends and relatives and the particulars of his death in an automobile accident. Such a man was found to have existed and to have predeceased the boy by several years, though there was no clear reason that the boy or his family should have known about this man.

Does this boy have a name so I can go digging up information on him or is his identity only known to Stevenson?

Sorry, you lost me there I'm afraid. Quantum physical phenomena have absolutely been observed

Sorry about that one, /hits me lol. Ment String theory, in both cases. Anyways being a statistical theory it could never be absolutely observed.

As for the child I can't find his name anywhere (and I looked), they must be protecting his privacy, I'll try to keep looking and tell you if anything comes up. But here's a literal quote from the article meanwhile:
"In a fairly typical case, a boy in Beirut spoke of being a 25-year-old mechanic, thrown to his death from a speeding car on a beach road. According to multiple witnesses, the boy provided the name of the driver, the exact location of the crash, the names of the mechanic's sisters and parents and cousins, and the people he hunted with -- all of which turned out to match the life of a man who had died several years before the boy was born, and who had no apparent connection to the boy's family."

Ok can't find that boy's name but here I got another interesting case, there are several if you look for them:

A notable case of this is the famous Hollywood actor Glenn Ford. Under hypnosis, he recalled five previous lives - one in particular as a French cavalryman under Louis XIV. The astonishing part was that though Ford said he knew only a few basic phrases in French, under hypnosis he spoke French with ease while describing this life. And when recordings of his regression were sent to UCLA (University of California), they discovered that not only was Ford speaking fluent French, he was in fact speaking the Parisian dialect from the 17th century.

Thanks, I'll look into the Glenn Ford case

Autumn Clouds wrote:Sorry about that one, /hits me lol. Ment String theory, in both cases

Ah quite. Well, magnetic monopoles aren't solely in the province of string theory, or should I say, M-theory.

Anyways being a statistical theory it could never be absolutely observed

ORLY?

Well, perhaps we'll not go there as this is not a discussion about M-theory. I'm sure Rome Existed for example would be happy to discuss its (lack of) merit with you if you opened a dedicated thread on it. Wink wink. Nudge nudge.

As for the child I can't find his name anywhere (and I looked), they must be protecting his privacy

Unfortunately this ethical concideration also makes the story quoted rather anecdotal as we have no corroborating facts to check up on. Not a feature uncommon in the context, unfortunately. Well, at least we have Glenn Ford now.

What it seems, at least what this hypothesis states, is that for some reason some children from ages three to seven, can recall past events, and learn at a much faster rate. Then they completley forget everything

Like imaginary friends from childhood, maybe? Or are they also, in your opionion, evidence for rebirth? Memories of friends and relatives from former lives? Has it really been consistently tested if the children who exhibit this "much faster rate" of learning retain their ability to assimiliate knowledge and skills in later life or not? And for that matter, how much faster is "much", really?

Well, perhaps we'll not go there as this is not a discussion about M-theory. I'm sure Rome Existed for example would be happy to discuss its (lack of) merit with you if you opened a dedicated thread on it. Wink wink. Nudge nudge.

Love to, but at a later time, got a thermodynamics parcial, uhm mid term I think is the translation, and well didn't do so hot, so I'll try to get my mind off it first.

Like imaginary friends from childhood, maybe? Or are they also, in your opionion, evidence for rebirth? Memories of friends and relatives from former lives? Has it really been consistently tested if the children who exhibit this "much faster rate" of learning retain their ability to assimiliate knowledge and skills in later life or not? And for that matter, how much faster is "much", really?

Agreed, but he's a trained psychiatrist with impecable creedentials, I'm sure he can tell between imaginary friends, santa and his cousin in beirut (which child in their right mind would invent a cousin that lived in beirut? lol my imaginary friend was native american, so who am I to tell? hehe).
The latter point has been proven pshycologically, and there's an obivious evolutionary explanation for it. Learn fast or die sums it up easily. But thats the problem itself, there's a huge lack of reasearch in this area cause it involves the mind, thing that science has gave up (phsycology isin't really a science, at least it dosen't uses the scientific method), since the time of Descartes.

Autumn Clouds wrote:Agreed, but he's a trained psychiatrist with impecable creedentials, I'm sure he can tell between imaginary friends, santa and his cousin in beirut

Trained psychiatrists with impecable credentials (which for this particular one I haven't yet taken time to establish, if indeed it can be established with my resources) are know to be lead astray by their patients. See par example the very good "UFO cautionary tale" of The Jet-Propelled Couch where "Kirk Allen" began to convince his psychiatrist Robert Lindner that he really was a space alien hero.

The latter point has been proven pshycologically

That these children who remember their former lives learn faster than their peers, you mean? Interesting, if true. Got any links to articles on this subject I could read?

But thats the problem itself, there's a huge lack of reasearch in this area cause it involves the mind

Indeed as can be seen by the vast number of consciousness thread on this forum (e.g. one I present below) alone. Zoon described attempts at answering the question of the human mind "a huge mess" IIRC and I tend to agree.

thing that science has gave up (phsycology isin't really a science, at least it dosen't uses the scientific method), since the time of Descartes.

Hmm, fond of controversial subjects, you are

Just go here and present your case for "no science of consciousness since Descartes" (if that was what you were implying) --> philosophy/another-consciousness-topic-t1487.html

Ok here's another prominent one hope I don't mess up with the translation, its from the book Twenty cases that suggests reincarnation.
His name was Ravi Shankar, January 19th of 1951 a barber and a uhm lavandero (which translates as the guy who washes your clothes in a laundrymat), tricked and killed with a knife a guy called Ashol Khumar. known as Mmunna. The victim, with only six years old, was the only heir of a guy named Prassad, which apparently was the main motive behind the murder. The severed head of the child was identified by the father. (...) The assasins were realeased due to lack of evidence. Some years later Prassad heard there was a three year old claiming to be his son. And that a barber and the lavandero killed him. Ravi (the child) was asking for toys left in his former house. After they encountered, the child aknowledged him to be his father. But the weird thing comes now, after the child turned 11 he was rememberd of the case, and he said he had absolutley no memory whatsoever of the incident.

This case was severly tested, and no conexion between both families was found.

That these children who remember their former lives learn faster than their peers, you mean? Interesting, if true. Got any links to articles on this subject I could read?

No, no no. I ment that children DO learn faster the us grown ups .

Hmm, fond of controversial subjects, you are

lol been kicked out of catholic high school cause of it I asked them in cathequesim or somethingn like that... "uhm why an omnicient god would need angels?", four more questions later and was expelled hehe.

And I know what you mean but, this thread is getting interesting, I'll focus on that one later. Just because some hippies and new age uhm... hippies use reincarnation for everything dosen't mean we should completly dissmised it.

I require something unambiguous. For example: lift stone number 12,234,222 in the Great Pyramid, you will find my name chiselled into the stone. Something that is not simply unlikely for the subject to have known, but something that was completely unknown by anyone.

In the case of this guy Stevenson's study of a Beirut boy, what that boy or his family should have known about the dead mechanic is of no relevance. What they could have known is what makes it a useless anecdote.

Autumn Clouds wrote:... Just because some hippies and new age uhm... hippies use reincarnation for everything dosen't mean we should completly dissmised it.

Agreed, and I don't think anyone here is dismissing it for those reasons.

I require something unambiguous. For example: lift stone number 12,234,222 in the Great Pyramid, you will find my name chiselled into the stone. Something that is not simply unlikely for the subject to have known, but something that was completely unknown by anyone.

Problem is, if it was completly unknown by anyone you'll discard him as a nutcase with good reason, since there's no way to verify it. If he made some claims about ancient history and justified it with some vague archeological evidence (as are most of all archeological evidence regarding meaningles individuals throughout history) you'll discard him as a nutcase.

Verifiable by others in the immediate past would prove much valuable evidence in my opinion. Then a guy claiming to be one of Ghenkis khan horseman. But I'll try to indulge your point by stating yet another case. This one isin't really verifiable, so it should be discarded as evidence.
Her name is Jetsunma a girl from a ghetto house in brooklyn. Her entire childhood was marked by abuse, from alcoholic parents. She never had exposure to buddhism whatsoever, but was able to teach tibetan buddhism at a very high level. Yet she never named it buddhism, just called it "Center for Discovery and the New Life".

How could she have known advanced buddhist teachings, never having access to them?.

Autumn Clouds wrote:

I require something unambiguous. For example: lift stone number 12,234,222 in the Great Pyramid, you will find my name chiselled into the stone. Something that is not simply unlikely for the subject to have known, but something that was completely unknown by anyone.

Problem is, if it was completly unknown by anyone you'll discard him as a nutcase with good reason, since there's no way to verify it. If he made some claims about ancient history and justified it with some vague archeological evidence (as are most of all archeological evidence regarding meaningles individuals throughout history) you'll discard him as a nutcase.

What do you mean, no way to verify it? Go lift stone number 12,234,222 and see what's chiselled into the bottom of it. If that stone hasn't been moved in 6000 years, and what the subject said would be there is actually there, it would be a pretty good case of evidence to support something like reincarnation.

The people who would probably consider him a nutcase are those who actually own the pyramid now. They're not about to start dismantling it to look for shit that in all likelihood is not there.

Nonetheless, that would be some good evidence.

Autumn Clouds wrote:Verifiable by others in the immediate past would prove much valuable evidence in my opinion.

Why? All that would do is support the truth of the fact, not how the subject came to know it.

Autumn Clouds wrote:Then a guy claiming to be one of Ghenkis khan horseman. But I'll try to indulge your point by stating yet another case. This one isin't really verifiable, so it should be discarded as evidence.
Her name is Jetsunma a girl from a ghetto house in brooklyn. Her entire childhood was marked by abuse, from alcoholic parents. She never had exposure to buddhism whatsoever, but was able to teach tibetan buddhism at a very high level. Yet she never named it buddhism, just called it "Center for Discovery and the New Life".

How could she have known advanced buddhist teachings, never having access to them?.

If that knowledge existed (and it did), and it was even possible for that kid to learn of it, it is nothing more than a trick. There are no Buddhists in Brooklyn? This kid couldn't have read this material somewhere? No one at all could have taught it to her, the neighbor down the hall, perhaps?

Look to the most likely scenario, and you'll find the answer.

Cut away the bullshit with Occam's razor.

There are mentalists that can do shit like this out of hand. I don't know how they do it, but they do it, and very well.