As to theory when it comes to things like reincarnation....theories
are like comic books. Entertaining, and keep one distracted.
As to proof...the only proof would be if one remembers experiencing
it. I have nothing against those who make such a claim.

On Mar 6, 4:32 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 4 Mar, 16:04, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > This may be a silly question that has already been answered by those
> > who posit reincarnation, or you may have an answer, Slip.
>
> > But it just occurred to me that the world population keeps growing,
> > over time.  So let's begin to flesh out the mechanics of reincarnation
> > theory. Since the world population keeps growing, new souls must be
> > coming into being (on the starting premise that souls exist, of
> > course).  What is your belief as to whether all souls reincarnate? Is
> > it that, each year, of the 300 million people who die (I'm guessing
> > here, not bothering to look up how many people actually die each
> > year), those 300 million souls immediately reincarnate?  Is there some
> > lag time?  Given that the world population grows by, say, 200 million
> > a year, does this mean that 200 million entirely new, non-reincarnated
> > souls are generated each year?
>
> > More importantly, when a new baby is born, how is it decided whether
> > that new baby gets a reincarnated soul, or an entirely new soul?
>
> > The basic premise of my e-mail is that the number of people dying
> > falls short of the number of people being born, so not every new birth
> > can have a reincarnated soul. How does reincarnation theory think
> > about this?
>
>   Firstly, whose theory?  There are theories that don't limit
> reincarnation to only human form.  If you count ALL the lifeforms in
> existence (and, not just Earthbound ones), THEN you'll see how full
> the pool of souls, as it were, is.  Whilst I take your point, an Earth-
> limited view must be thrown out.  Odds are that there's a huge
> whopping amount of life out there that could re-incarnate (or re-
> invegetate, for that matter!).
> Although there IS the Jewish view of 'The Guph', or 'Hall of Souls'
> where souls wait for (re-)incarnation.  There is also a belief that
> the Guph can be emptied and soulless individuals born.  This is
> explored in the Juergen Prochnow/Demi Moore film "The Seventh
> Sign" (Great film!).
>
>
>
> > On Mar 3, 10:51 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Slip, can you clarify what you mean by saying "Thought, as I see it, is 
> > > > not physical or tangible<<<<<MB
>
> > > Simply for me thought is not something that you can put in a box and
> > > ship out or place in a zip lock bag for storage.   I feel thought and
> > > imagination are homologous but not identical in that thought itself
> > > may be considered more of a process, which imagination uses to create
> > > ideas, concepts, theories etc.
>
> > >  though it is the subject of multiple scientific experiments." ?<<<MB
>
> > > I may have hastened to use the expression scientific experiments, no
> > > intended reference to "thought experiments", but more so leaning
> > > towards the nature of thought, it's use as in telekinesis, telepathy,
> > > clairvoyance, the overall power of thinking, and the law of
> > > attraction, much of which  admittedly, is speculative and/or
> > > hypothetical.
> > > Discovering the physical nature of thought is aside from what I am
> > > projecting because once thought takes place it becomes independent of
> > > it's originating source as does the light emanating from a dead star.
>
> > > > As I understand you, you posed that perspective in opposition to the
> > > > contention that "all thought
> > > > and consciousness dies with the death of the physical mind."  Are you
> > > > arguing that when a person is alive, his thoughts are extra-physical,
> > > > or are you also arguing that consciousness / soul survives death?<<<MB
>
> > > I'm not arguing as much as I am suggesting that thoughts are not
> > > confined to our physical being.  As I posted early on, we do see light
> > > from stars that are physically non existent. I believe thoughts,
> > > imaginations and subconscious manifestations do continue to exist
> > > beyond the physical demise.  I feel very strongly that the soul
> > > survives physical death and also retains life experiences.  I believe
> > > that some people have lived past lives but not all, as some people are
> > > Old Souls, ie: child prodigies, brilliant scientists etc., while
> > > others are New Souls ie: idiots without a clue who are easily
> > > identifiable.   I would not consider reincarnation in the sense that
> > > our soul returns in the form of a different species but contend the
> > > soul returns as another human being.  A human soul does not return as
> > > a cow in my opinion.  I think we retain life experiences within our
> > > soul and believe that life might be occurring simultaneously within a
> > > parallel universe and further that there is a level at which time is
> > > of no consequence.
> > > Belief in certain aspects of death may give credence to what some know
> > > as Heaven and the Immortality of the soul. For atheists, pantheists,
> > > materialists and rationalists there would be no question and
> > > conversation of such idea would be moot. So what meaning does death
> > > have to us as we are living?  Perhaps it is a reminder that life is
> > > temporary and that we should pay heed to what lies ahead without
> > > paying as much attention to amassing materialistic treasures over
> > > spiritual values.   Is death just a marker between lives?  Possibly
> > > and for me most likely,  no one has ever come back to tell us anything
> > > about it.  Is there a Karma that carries from one life to the next?  I
> > > would think that if the soul retains it's accumulated properties then
> > > it might also retain the aspects of retribution.  Upon new life in the
> > > new physical frame is there a clean slate with which to develop?   I
> > > often wonder why some people are born into extreme poverty and pain
> > > while others live wonderful lives.  While both will have to commit to
> > > death the interim of life seems to have significance in the fact that
> > > maybe there is for them a lesson to be learned.  I would also have to
> > > examine why it is that a person is born and dies within hours of
> > > living if there is any significance to life between birth and death.
> > > Some believe that what we do in this life influences our lives to
> > > come, so I have to wonder what has that person done within it's few
> > > hours of life to influence it's future life. Can we lay down a
> > > prospective for person's future life based on general observation of
> > > the person's current life.  IF so then where might be Hitler, Dahmer,
> > > Saddam and what are they doing in their future life?  Have they
> > > returned already and are they living among us as we speak?  The
> > > question begets more questions which beget even more as the question
> > > surrounding the most mysterious aspects of human life remains
> > > enigmatic; what of death?
>
> > > > As for the Noggin article, it's an interested experiment, to be sure,
> > > > but did you have a particular perspective on it? To me, it isn't
> > > > particularly surprising that different parts of the brain light up
> > > > based on your preferences. Presumably, imaging equipment will
> > > > eventually be able to see which pictures send more dopamine through
> > > > your brain and hence are the ones you like. Did you have a different
> > > > perspective?
>
> > > > On Mar 3, 7:35 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > You are indeed the arbitrator, wood.
> > > > > We had some discussion on thought not long ago.  I started a thread
> > > > > titled "Noggin News or Nonsense" in which I presented a study.
> > > > > I'd be interested in your "thought" on it.
>
> > > > >http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,490606,00.html
>
> > > > > On Mar 3, 12:01 am, wood <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > WoW! WoW!  Slip & Michael
> > > > > > Putting the rotten cheese aside, you gentlemen are not worlds apart 
> > > > > > in
> > > > > > your frame of thinking. What I’m seeing here, are two smart guys who
> > > > > > clearly have a lot ideas and theories to be told, and I think it 
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > make an interesting discussion. Somewhere along the line,  in turn 
> > > > > > we all can benefit from
> > > > > > each other’s intellect. Maybe afterward we can all have some cheese
> > > > > > and crackers.
>
> > > > > > On Mar 2, 8:28 pm, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Response to Slip:
>
> > > > > > > "There is no evidence that thought itself does not exist
> > > > > > > within a subconscious realm beyond that of the cognitive self."
>
> > > > > > > There is also no evidence that thought is not made of green 
> > > > > > > cheese.
> > > > > > > The absence of evidence against something isn't nearly as 
> > > > > > > compelling
> > > > > > > as the presence of evidence for something.  Moreover, the absence 
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > evidence against something counts for nothing unless we have 
> > > > > > > strong
> > > > > > > extrinsic reasons for believing that thing.  There may be strong,
> > > > > > > extrinsic reasons for believing in thought that exists withing a
> > > > > > > subconscious realm, but you haven't articulated them; at least not
> > > > > > > that I can glean.
>
> > > > > > > On Feb 22, 11:27 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Welcome Jodie, We see light from stars that are physically non
> > > > > > > > existent.  There is no evidence that thought itself does not 
> > > > > > > > exist
> > > > > > > > within a subconscious realm beyond that of the cognitive self.  
> > > > > > > > As in
> > > > > > > > dream consciousness, perhaps within a parallel universe, death 
> > > > > > > > may be
> > > > > > > > a threshold through which the mind continues on, transitioning 
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > another level.  You are here because you perceive yourself to 
> > > > > > > > be here
> > > > > > > > and so as it is, sometimes, in the dream world you perceive 
> > > > > > > > yourself
> > > > > > > > to be somewhere else.  Returning to the conscious mind upon 
> > > > > > > > waking
> > > > > > > > does not negate the possibility that the dream consciousness you
> > > > > > > > experienced is still there, you simply are not in touch with it
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to