On 9 Mar, 15:11, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just to make sure I get your soul concept right, Pat, how would you
> describe the difference between a ghost story and a fairy tale?
>
A ghost story is a story about ghosts; a fairy tale is, usually, a
folktale derived from some local folklore. There is some overlap, as
ghost stories may develop into fairy tales and some fairy tales
(because of the former reason) contain ghosts. None of this, though,
has anything to do with the soul. My concept of a soul or spirit is
'a coherent field of energy'. And, in the above, I extrapolated that,
in order to maintain coherence, the field MUST exist within space-
time, therefore making it a spatio-temporal object. In fact, in order
for it (or anything) to exist, it must exist at some place and at some
time (feel free, though, to put forward an exception if you can think
of one). Existence itself is the property that places us (and
anything) within the confines of space-time.
> On 9 Mrz., 14:00, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 6 Mar, 18:54, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Speaking purely theoretically - I accept Orn's point completely, that
> > > discussions about reincarnation are pure theory - I don't see the
> > > problem. If there is a soul (theoretically speaking, since I have no
> > > idea what a soul IS), upon disincarnation it (presumably) leaves space-
> > > time. That's space-TIME. So, theoretically, there's no reason not to
> > > assume that a soul experiencing disincarnation in 2009 might not be
> > > reincarnated in 1909. Wow, I could even be Albert Einstein in my next
> > > life. Or Helen of Troy. Or my own grand-dad.
>
> > If the soul/spirit is a coherent field of energy, then it must,
> > somehow, retain coherence. It could only do that given space and
> > time. That is, there is no 'coherence' outside of time (or space).
> > Ghosts, if disincarnate souls, would stand as evidence that spacetime
> > is STILL a factor after disincarnation.
>
> > > Personally, I have never found speculation about reincarnation
> > > particularly useful for living in the here-and-now.
>
> > > Francis
>
> > > On 6 Mrz., 16:36, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > 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.
>
> ...
>
> read more »- 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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
