If you had the power to decide whether there was or wasn't such a thing

[raccoon]

as reincarnation, (regardless of whether you believe there is or not; I don't) what would you decide?


I would decide against it. I think belief in an afterlife, heaven or successive lives in earth, can be a deterrent to people pushing for social justice in their present lives.

Another, I don't want to be reincarnated. I used to want to be; I thought, well, this life was kind of shitty, so next time I'd have a really good one. Now I'd be afraid I'd be born into some Third World hellhole.

[tekisui]

1. There is no difference to me.

If I had a previous life I don't remember it, so I doubt I will remember this life.

I think of re-incarnation as just life. We, collectively, come from a place, and we, collectively, go to a place. Call it Universe, Supreme Consciousness, God, Nature, or Nothing.

In a way, we are all the same. At this moment, life is incarnated as me, and my cat and the tree, and my neighbor. Time, as in before or after, is irrelevant.

[yellowdogintexas]

2. I could be wrong but the point of reincarnation is to improve your lot based on

how you lived your life. So, if you learned from past mistakes and redeemed yourself, next time around you reach a higher level, which if you continue to elevate your spirit, moves you to an even higher level. Ultimately your soul reaches Nirvana and you are retired, at peace.


Sort of a Cliff Notes version.

One of the most intriguing things about all religions, even the pagan mythologies, is that they all have some sort of ultimate peace with the creator objective. Achieved in different ways but still the desired outcome. This is especially fascinating in light of the multiple origins of all these theologies, in a time when communication was strictly word of mouth over long distances.

[raccoon]

5. So I've heard.

" the point of reincarnation is to improve your lot based on
how you lived your life. So, if you learned from past mistakes and redeemed yourself, next time around you reach a higher level, which if you continue to elevate your spirit, moves you to an even higher level. Ultimately your soul reaches Nirvana and you are retired, at peace."

But how do you know what/who you used to be? You could've been St. Francis of Assisi or Joseph Stalin. What I'm saying is, If you used to be some monster, you have a lot of payback to dread.

[Occam Bandage]

6. Well, you have a fair idea of how you used to be

based on your birth.

Let's adopt for the sake of argument Hindu beliefs as regards resurrection. As a human, I know I at least did adequately in the previous life; a Stalin would be sent pretty far down the ladder for his murderous paranoia--perhaps as a weasel; that fits his predatory and yet fearful nature in that life.

Since I was born a middle-class American, I am largely shielded from great suffering by my birth. Therefore, I was likely a virtuous human in my prior life. I ought to pursue my final enlightenment in this life; my path is much easier than that of, say, a subsistence farmer. I achieve that by following my duties and living a virtuous life. Should I squander this life in petty hedonism or cruelty, my next life will be far less pleasurable.

[John Gauger]

29. How does the weasel improve his lot?

What are the duties of a weasel? By what metric do we gauge the behavior of the weasel? How do we know what to expect in the weasel's next life? What could weasel morality possibly be like?

[Occam Bandage]

33. I prefer to let the weasel figure it out for himself.

No sense setting up a philosophy for weasels, since weasels won't understand it. Humans ought concern themselves with human affairs, and weasels with weasel affairs.

But tongue-in-cheek declarations of practical limitations aside, the philosophy kinda goes into the weeds here. See, the spark of the soul/Buddha-nature/Krishna-consciousness/whatever still exists in all beings. A weasel might not have much consciousness, but it has some. Therefore, if it comes closer to realizing its mystic nature during its time on earth, it moves up. If it goes further from that, it moves down. I think this is very suspect.

[John Gauger]

34. That's all it has to do, is realize it's mystic nature?

I thought there was more to it than that. That's not setting the bar too high, I guess. And if it's the same requirements for everything, that's fair, in a way.

The only major hole is the other kingdoms of life. They don't have anything resembling consciousness.

[GliderGuider]

35. Re: "They don't have anything resembling consciousness"

They certainly don't have anything resembling our definition of consciousness. Is this perhaps a bit too anthropocentric? Of course we're talking about human systems of philosophy and morality here, so that human definition applies.

I'm sensitive to the issue of unrecognized anthropocentrism since it causes so many other species so much grief when it's embedded in our ecological actions.

[John Gauger]

37. What other definitions of consciousness are there?

The kingdoms of life have no neurological structures. They have nothing that can house consciousness.

[GliderGuider]

40. This assumes that consciousness is a unique emergent property of neurological structure

I grant you that this is the only place we have so far identified it, but it's not that much of a stretch to imagine that some form of consciousness could arise from other complex molecular organizations.

Heck, since this is a religious forum, why not bring God into it. Is God conscious? Does God have a neurological structure?

[Occam Bandage]

43. Well, we have no evidence that it's anything but, so... nt

[John Gauger]

44. I can imagine it, but that doesn't make it true.

You seem to think that the fact that we have identified the brain as the seat of consciousness is inconsequential. It is not. If you are going to propose that consciousness exists independent of neurological structure, you had better be prepared to prove it.

"Is God conscious?" This question is meaningless, so I'm not really able to answer it.

[yellowdogintexas]

7. the soul is supposed to store the knowledge gained each trip around the cycle nt

[Occam Bandage]

9. I've heard that vaguely, but never attributed to any particular religion or sect.

[agent46]

8. in order to stop reincarnation

You must first destroy the alien base on the eighth level and return the golden ring of the Nibelungen to its dwarf maker in the crystal fortress of the Neverglade Elves. Only then may you retire in peace to Faerie Dale with the milkmaid of your desire.

:evilgrin:

[frogmarch]

12. you're wrong

You must first destroy the alien base on the SEVENTH level... ;-)

[agent46]

16. Oh yeah, you're right. But that's only if...

...only if you're running Microsoft Church V2.3 with the Alien Apocalypse(tm) plug-in on your PC. The Gameboy spin-off has more levels but the aliens are pussies.

:smoke:

[edhopper]

3. That's the strange thing about it

What exactly is being reincarnated. If all your memories and sense of self are gone, what part of you is brought back. If the essence, or spirit, or soul or whatever has no connection to the things that make you, you, what part of you survives?

[John Gauger]

30. That's very astute.

In what sense are you even still you, if your whole identity is erased?

[cosmik debris]

4. I'd rather die happy than not die at all. n/t

[Boojatta]

21. Would you be happy for at least 24 hours if you won a huge lottery jackpot?

Suppose you discover at 11 am that you won. The next morning you suffer a heart attack at 10:59 am and die. Does that sound good to you?

[cosmik debris]

22. I stand by my original statement. n/t

[Boojatta]

23. What does "die happy" mean?

[cosmik debris]

24. Learn to use a dictionary.

I'm not going to look up words for you.

[Boojatta]

25. Is it an idiomatic phrase that is listed in dictionaries?

Perhaps you can tell me whether or not it's possible that a person who had a wedding scheduled for some time of day on September 11th 2001 or September 12th 2001 and who didn't cancel the wedding might have discovered what it means to wed sad. I will of course presume that you know the meaning of the verb "wed" and the adjective "sad."

[cosmik debris]

26. Just because you try very hard to avoid being understood

Doesn't mean that others do the same thing.

[Boojatta]

31. No. In fact, I try very hard to write clearly.

I don't intend to distort the ideas that I want to express in order to replace them with ideas that are more easily understood.

[cosmik debris]

32. Then you are a failure.

How many times have you read replies to your posts from rational, normal, educated people who express absolute consternation at the lack of clarity in your posts?

If you are trying to be understood, you are a failure. Seriously. That's why I assumed that you were trying to be cryptic, enigmatic, and incomprehensible, and to obfuscate with obtuse examples and suppositions, because that is what you accomplish.

If you are unhappy with those results, perhaps you should change your approach to writing clearly.

[Boojatta]

36. "rational, normal, educated people"

"Rational" is a word that Randroids apply to themselves in celebration of the fact that they are Randroids.

"Normal" has a number of different meanings. For example, it can be used to exclude people like Schrödinger and Heisenberg on the grounds that they were too many standard deviations from the median performance of the general public both with respect to knowledge of an academic subject area and with respect to making original contributions cited by researchers.

Are you using the word "educated" to refer to formal, academic education? Surely you realize that the educated of one generation tend to laugh at and ridicule ideas that will later be accepted as being true beyond a reasonable doubt.

[cosmik debris]

38. Epic Fail n/t

[Boojatta]

39. Who is failing more: the one who fails or the one who devotes time

to absorbing and evaluating and judging the performance that is a failure?

[cosmik debris]

41. Typical

As soon as you recognized that I was right and that you have failed, you change the subject.

Now you want it to be all about me.

But at least you are communicating coherently now.

Keep up the good work. There is always hope for you.

[Boojatta]

42. Do not...

waste many words on a Boojatta. Avoid Boojattas and you will find rest and not be exasperated by their folly.

Paraphrase of:
part of Ecclesiasticus Chapter 22
(Not to be confused with Ecclesiastes)

[Boojatta]

45. Are you serious?

Did we agree that the subject under discussion is Boojatta and that cosmik debris isn't part of the subject matter under discussion?

Quoting cosmik debris:

24. Learn to use a dictionary.

I'm not going to look up words for you.

26. Just because you try very hard to avoid being understood

Doesn't mean that others do the same thing.

32. Then you are a failure.

How many times have you read replies to your posts from rational, normal, educated people who express absolute consternation at the lack of clarity in your posts?

41. Typical

As soon as you recognized that I was right and that you have failed, you change the subject.

Now you want it to be all about me.

But at least you are communicating coherently now.

Keep up the good work. There is always hope for you.

Note: I will put you on ignore for Private Messages after I post this message, but I will continue to read your replies posted in this thread.

[cosmik debris]

46. .

:rofl:

[Az]

10. The idea of a persistent identity is a serious problem

It allows various belief systems to create constructs of what defines this persistent identity and in that way they usurp our natural instinct of survival. Instead of working to keep our bodies alive the system hijacks us to keep the belief system that sustains the soul or spirit concept around. In this way people can be brought to do horrible things to each other in an attempt to save this immortal soul. The inquisition is just one example of this sort of brutality brought about by concern of saving souls being placed over saving lives. Killing a person was acceptable and even promoted if it stood a chance of saving their soul from some unspeakable evil.

[SidneyCarton]

11. I'm not a fan of reincarnation.

No offense to any Buddhists, Hindus, and others on this board for whom this is an article of faith. If there is no afterlife, I would just as soon that the Atheists are right, the thought of having to do this over and over again seems far more hellish than any fire and brimstone location.

[Occam Bandage]

14. Buddhists are not fans of reincarnation either.

Buddhism takes unending, inescapable suffering as a given, and then asks how we might stop the process.

[redqueen]

17. How can you stop an unending, inescapable situation?

I thought it defined suffering as simply part of life, and said that there is no escape, only acceptance.

[Occam Bandage]

18. By ceasing to exist.

Now, it depends on what you mean by "acceptance." If you mean "acceptance of suffering as an intrinsic part of existence as a Self," then yes. If you mean "acceptance of suffering occurring to one's own Self," then Buddhism isn't *quite* about accepting suffering (though accepting suffering is part of the package.) Rather, it's about detaching from the causes of suffering, with the end goal being the extinguishing of the Self and therefore escape from the endless cycle.

[redqueen]

19. Definitely the former.

I see now what you're saying, and it falls right in line with my understanding of Buddhism. Thanks. :)

[Az]

13. Interesting article in the current issue of Scientific American: Mind on this subject

More specifically on the common belief that the mind survives the body.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=never-say-die

Excerpt/Key Concepts:

* Almost everyone has a tendency to imagine the mind continuing to exist after the death of the body.
* Even people who believe the mind ceases to exist at death show this type of psychological-continuity reasoning in studies.
* Rather than being a by-product of religion or an emotional security blanket, such beliefs stem from the very nature of our consciousness.

[Marrah_G]

15. I already believe in it.

If it were up to me I would keep it as is.

[ZombieHorde]

20. Would our memories reincarnate as well?

[GliderGuider]

27. I have an odd problem with the traditional notion of reincarnation

"Re"-incarnation implies that time is linear and those multiple lives are sequential. I rather suspect that this view of time has more to do with the physical nature of the particular universe we're inhabiting rather than reflecting an essential reality.

I'm kind of fond of the idea that what we see as a unique individual personality is just one of several fragments of a larger entity -- all of which inhabit different areas of space and time, not all necessarily within the walls of these four dimensions, and all happening simultaneously (for extremely abstract values of "simultaneous", of course). Anyone who read "Seth Speaks" back in the '70s will understand what I'm getting at.

Given that structure, we might as well treat this life as if it's all there is, since the goal of living is just to live, not to accumulate karmic brownie points. Of course the same thing applies if the whole idea is just a particularly insidious acid flashback, and what we see is really all we get.

[John Gauger]

28. It's a tool for oppression.

The doctrine of reincarnation exhibits memetic fitness in this respect. That is to say, the idea has a quality that acts to promote itself irrespective of its veracity.

Reincarnation is the ultimate method of suppressing dissent; it does this by convincing people that they deserve their low position on the social scale. It convinces people that they are being righteous by accepting their oppression. It tells them that they will be rewarded for allowing the powerful to continue their exploitive ways. And since it's the powerful that are telling the story of reincarnation, this fact works to keep the idea around.

Now if you look at the idea of reincarnation without Karma or some other retributionary influence, it kind of becomes meaningless. It's just an endless string of successive lives having no effect on one another. Without Karma, it doesn't really have any effect on social justice, because the whole thing becomes meaningless.