Listen, honey, sailorboy4u:
DO NOT LISTEN TO ANYBODY!!!
(especially those who say "NO")
---- Everything we know is limited by precisely that -- what we know thus far!!!
Our understanding of reality is far from being complete.

We laugh at the scientists of the middle ages -- just as future scientists may laugh at the 20th cantury science...

I do not mean Reincarnation is real, but neither do I completely reject it. I just do not know. BUT I KNOW ENOUGH TO NEVER SAY "NEVER"!

JaneStar...Thks n Uve spoken like a true star understanding the underlying meaning of my statements. Im completely in agreeance with what you have mentioned.
We have not reached the stage where we can say for sure we know everything..life is forever a learning journey and the everchanging complexities of existence of all matter in the earth /universe remains fascinating n mysterious...at least until discovered.

I used to think about that stuff a lot

but then I quit smoking marijuana

Pavlov explained the OP's question pretty well, IMO.

I want to come back as Sophia Loren's bra.

Woody Allen

I always pitty folks who've stopped wondering about the existance (as if they know everything) -- getting old must be quite borring...
Yet, they never miss a chance of sharing their "great wizdom"!!!

You mean, like, when people who confuse thermodynamics with 'the energy of the soul' tell other people to 'update' themselves? Is that the kind of arrogance and narrow mindedness which leads to boredom with advancing years?

No, I didn't mean "Never making mistakes", but becomming content with those mistakes!!!

Yes, the OP sounded very content and certain in the position that reincarnation was proven, and that anyone who thinks otherwise just needs to go out and educate themselves.

What I'm driving at here is a pet peeve of mine...which is, I find many 'fans or woo' that I talk to to be amazingly closed minded and dogmatic in their entire worldview, while many rational and evidence-minded people are only closed-minded where their beliefs match the evidence, and the evidence is overwhelming.

Which is fine, until the 'fans of woo' start playing the 'open minded' card. Its just... so way beyond stupid and hypocritical, and yet so common, its disgusting. There is are legions of people out there who have mesmerized themselves into believing that its inherently more open-minded to believe in ghosts than to believe in aberrant nervous system/hormonal activity. How stupid is that?

To me, 'open mindedness' has something to do with being willing to change your mind when new evidence or new reasons are presented, and it has something to do with realizing the limitations of your current understanding.

To some others, it seems that 'open minded' means having a dogmatic, closed minded commitment to an anti-scientific worldview.




JaneStar, I fully respect your position as stated:



A careful reading of this thread will show you that I do not disagree with your position at all... in fact I have the same position - though I would add that there are many, many ideas about what
'reincarnation' might mean - and there is no solid evidence at all that people's 'past life memories' are actual memories of real events which survive death. I'm familiar with the claims to the contrary, but they don't wash.

Well, I'm glad we're "on the same page", so to speak. Nevertheless, when you say "no solid evidence", you forgot to add the qualifier "YET" (i.e. no solid evidence yet). I recently read the article where researchers claim that an organ of the brain (amygdala?) stores most of our experiences -- starting from the 1st man/woman ever lived -- althogh those particular experiences would be completely incomprehensible.

Perhaps, you might be interested in looking into "Hypnotic Regression:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Christine Nightingale

Past life regression is a form of therapy in which the subject is hypnotically regressed to a previous life. Typically the therapist (a trained hypnotist) discusses with the client what they wish to accomplish. They may, for example, feel that a fear of water, not based on any known traumatic experience, might be based on death by drowning in a previous life, or they may wish to know whether they knew their spouse in past life. The regressionist then typically takes the subject back in time to two previous childhood experiences, if these memories are able to be clearly described--preferably as if they are currently happening, in the present tense--then the person is ready to go further back. The majority of subjects can in fact be brought back to the events of a previous life. This can be very powerful, as it often includes dramatic events of death, loss, betrayal, or deep love and happiness. The person often finds themselves in a body of a different gender, age, or race. Typically the subject is advised not to re-experience traumatic vents, but to observe them from above. The function of the whole experience is to heal past traumas by understanding, forgiving and being forgiven. Very often understanding the roots of a phobia, illness , accident, or even birthmark is very helpful to getting on with the business of the current lifetime.

-------------- Here's the full aricle: http://www.themystica.org/mystica/articles/h/hypnotic_regression.html

I've been occasionally sarcastic so I want to be clear that this paragraph is not sarcastic at all:

Yes, I keep forgetting that there are so many people on here who don't read what other people actually write, but project their own meanings onto their words. We have to be careful about those people, and add all kinds of qualifiers to our words, otherwise they will think we are saying things that we aren't. Obviously, saying "there is no solid evidence" is completely different than saying "there can never be solid evidence", but you are correct, some people don't get that and failing to qualify our words for their sake will lead to misunderstandings.




Might be? Been there, done that, long ago.

IBYP, Mt, but what "other peope" are you referring to? When I communicate with you, I'm not concerned about others! I express my opinion regaedless of what others might think. If they can prove me wrong, I've no problem admitting my fault. Otherwise, they're gonna have a hard time trying to convince me! However, if you're concerned with the others' opinion, then, perhaps, you can always send me a private email -- safe and secure!
For example, you said "Been there, done that, long ago".
I don't know where you've been, and what you've done -- regarding the "Hypnotic Regression", but, if you have, I don't understand your persistant denial of the phenomenon's validity??? Is it because you only trust the confirmed & veryfied data?
Actually, there have been a few cases when a regressed person has recalled the details known only to the professional historians! Thus, it might be more valid than you think!!!

"Now it's over I'm dead and I haven't done anything that I want
Or, I'm still alive and there's nothing I want to do"

from "Dead" - They Might Be Giants - Flood CD

Couldn't have said it better myself

Oh, all I was saying was that: to my mind qualifying our words for greater clarity is only necessary because people so often don't read what other's actually write. As far as 'who' does this, ultimately most people are guilty at some point, including me. (This has nothing to do with privacy or concern with others' opinions - only effectiveness of communication).



Which phenomena, exactly? Reincarnation? Memories surviving death? HR yielding incredibly detailed 'memories' which seem to be of another life? Something else?



Long, long ago I read a huge amount of material about reincarnation and past life memories; the conversation and the 'research' is just packed to the brim with people who want to believe and who do not demonstrated decent investigative skills nor critical thinking skills. Reading the works of people who think there is tangible evidence for 'past life memories' is more depressing than reading Christian apologetics.

Oh yeah, your question was:



Of course I only trust data that meets certain standards. Some psychologist with a PhD who claims to have 'regressed' a person that provided a very specific description of historic events which turns out to be historically accurate (and 'impossible' for the child to know) does not provide proof for 'past life memories'.




See, this is what I'm talking about. If by 'it' you mean 'past life memories', then the second sentence doesn't follow from the first sentence.

By the way, you say that I persistent deny somethings validity. What is is exactly that you think I am denying?

Mt:
I was under the impression that you don't believe in "Hypnotic Regression" -- from your respose to my suggestion:
(becase you sgrugged it off with a typical "teenage attitude", ). Perhaps you weren't old enough when you've "been there, done that".
I admite it's been awhile since I have been there/done that myself... But ever since those times I view everything from a different perspective. I mean, it's not something you can forget (or disregard), if you really "been there, done that" -- rather than
There are different degrees of involvement, and from your words, I can only conclude your's hasn't been deep enouph to really appreciate the power of the human mind, or the "magic" of Hypnosis!!!
*** However, I'm going to let you in on a secret:
The reason Hypnosis is not populaized (and even discouraged) is because it is so overwhelmingly powerful (though quite complex) a technique!!! It is on a verge with Mind-reading, etc. And that is countre-productive to the current state of human affairs that's frequently based on the fact of taking advantage of others!!!
The whole system would've crumbled, if evetbody knew the "power". For that reason, it is reserved mainly to the psychiatrists (although some high rank polititians are also familiar with it) and only partly known to the professional sales-people.

However, the major obstacle to successfuly deceiving others is that most of people are equiped with the ability of perceiving the intentions of others -- what I term as the name of my thread, Intuition

You haven't really answered my question, not with any degree of precision or meaningfulness. The word pair "hypnotic regression" isn't a belief - its not even a sentence. I don't deny word pairs. Intelligent investigation and discussion requires an interest in an appreciation for precision - one of many qualities I've found lacking in the 'documentation' of 'past life memory' evidence.




"It" isn't? What isn't? Your experience? Or the dogmatic assertions of the person that introduced you to the technique? Or other?




Where did this come from? Did someone, somewhere say these words? Or is this just a fictional creation used to illustrate your thought process?




This is the epitome of confirmation bias. Open minded people would see a greater spectrum of possible conclusion to reach based on that evidence.




Hey, that almost sounds like an advertisement.

I want to come back as a BBQ rib!

I want to come back as a creature that lives on another planet, in another solar system.

Or maybe back to the same one from last time. All my past life regressions involve fond and beautiful memories of Blork and eating snoogish in the mid-duntrahg by the Ioontirig. What great times those were!