Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Evidence for rebirth? Scientific or otherwise?
DaftChris
Spiritually conflicted. Not of this world. Veteran
You gotta love science; it explains the natural world around us and how the universe functions. It is also used (by some) to be the antithesis to religion and spirituality. While science has been used to explain how the world works, some have also used as supportive evidence for the things that it (at face value) disproves; like God.
Is there any interesting or credible evidence to support rebirth/reincarnation? Apologies in advance if this topic has been discussed before.
Is there any interesting or credible evidence to support rebirth/reincarnation? Apologies in advance if this topic has been discussed before.
0
Comments
Voltaire.
If it's a good enough assessment for him, it's a good enough assessment for me....
I have no answer, of course, but what science can measure/understand/study has continuously grown over the years, decades, centuries.
The scientific finding is ultimately accepted after some centuries of fierce resistance (example: astronomy; evolution).
2. Science finds something which confirms the religious idea.
It is used as support for the religious ideas. “”See? We were right! Even science is starting to understand this.” (Example: Ian Stevenson)
3 Science doesn’t confirm or disprove the religious idea (maybe because it is constructed in a not-falsifiable form in the first place).
The religious idea is maintained as being valid because science fails to disprove it.
And the bonus; science hasn’t solved other questions, like the “hard problem of consciousness” either.
That's between a rock and a hard place.
I have been studying this connection between Reincarnation / Buddhism and Science for about a year now and have found some rather compelling findings. I myself, am an extremely open minded person, as I'm sure so many of us are - and while I could accept some studies .... some were a little bias, or well ... highly questionable, so I chose to ignore those.
A good starting point is to refer to the work of the prolific French Philosopher and Social Theorist Michel Foucault. Foucault describes 'Society' in terms of 'Discourses' or what I would perceive as 'Societal Regimes' - (Discourses = Modes of thinking, which embody a phase of time)
To illustrate this we should look at Pre-Modern societies - in which Religion, was in many ways central to social life - as in the use of Shamans to 'cure' diseases. Then Europe experienced a scientific revolution, through a process of agricultural - industrial - and then scientific modernisation. This led to a new 'mode' or 'discourse' of thinking, in which disease was then perceived (on the whole correctly..) as a result of biological processes ... as opposed to something with religious connotations, i.e. spiritual possession.
Science then became a rational and littoral art ('The Enlightenmant'), as it still is today. Because our society has collectively shifted into this new Rational and Enlightened mode of thinking - many professional individuals (because of their education in Rational / littoral Science) associate anything remotely spiritual or metaphysical with religion, and thus a past discourse that is seen as 'backwards' and Primative.
Sorry I hope that makes sense! ... but Science / The Scientific World, from what I can see is going to have to get over this psychological barrier (perception of the 'metaphysical' = non-observable, as primitive and a 'no-go area') because they have reached a 'brick wall', so to speak, in following this purely rational and littoral discourse of Scientific Thought. To truly explain life in totality, a broader and potentially 'metaphysical' perspective, must be at least acknowledged. We are on the verge / entering an age where the unseen ... is just starting to be acknowledged..
Consciousness’, cannot be confirmed as a bi-product of of bio-cellular processes within the Brain. Quantum Physicists’ such as John Haglin from Harvard University (
All I can say is be open minded ... humanity as a race, are in their conception. We have much to learn ...
Sorry I hope this makes sense, I am a trained social scientist / researcher ... and I love both quantum physics and philosophy ... which is why I love Buddhism, because it embodies both.
With Kindness,
Claudie
enjoy..
This inherent limiitation of objective knowledge... the tail chasing quality of pursuing subjectivity as an object...is alarming for some people.. is if accepting it will leave them prone to supernatural belief..
that is what I mean by being between a rock and hard place.
....and re: behavourism... it is still the prevailing "objective" approach in the marketplace.. at least out in the field of intervention. ...as if whatever current data won't be superseded . anyway another topic, that.
but it's a thought.....
"A little respect, a little reverence, for the things we cannot 'see'..."
People believe what they WANT to believe.
He is indeed a highly credable academic, whom is not particularly well known, as he wished to approach the study of reincarnation from an unbiased, scientific perspective, so as to not alienate his study from mainstream academia ... because if anyone got wind of metaphysical connotations, his hard work would have most likely been dismissed as pseudo-science. Since his death, Jim Tucker, another modest academic has taken over his mission to explore reincarnation. In response to this, take a look at this video, an interview with Philosophy professor Dr. Robert Almeder of Georgia State University, whom talks about Dr Ian Stevenson. There is something called 'Falsifiability' in Philosophy, whereby until something is proven wrong .... who is to say it is, wrong? Thus it is potentially right....
If you had never seen a black swan, and saw only white swans. You might say only white swans exist. Until of course the day came you saw a black swan (Sir Karl Raimund Popper -regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century - black swan theory (-_-)
Peace and Love,
Claudia x
but the sheer quantity, volume and testability of his findings, coupled with the fact that his research is painstakingly accurate and widespread, lends it a great deal of credibility.
couple it together with his professional reputation, and the guy's pretty solid.
Alien abduction isn't so far, as reliable or believable as the work this guy has done.
by a long chalk.
All I can say is those who dismiss such beliefs .... do some research upon the topic, and try to refute it .... I could not refute it, thus the rational decision would be to acknowledge the possibility that such a mechanism, as reincarnation exists. There are many cycles in nature, thus it makes sense that a cycle of consciousness, might exist. And when I look at nature, humanity ... I see more than a biological accident, as some scientists would argue ... call me irrational if you like :-)
In my opinion, It's rational to accept the possibility of reincarnation, given the quantity and quality of the evidence ..... and some might say a little ignorant to dissmiss it (in saying ignorant, I don't mean you are ignorant, mearly sceptacle, which is human nature ... and I am very sceptacle too when it comes to some things)
(^_^) Much love x x x
Mini, I'll only say that one person's "rather compelling" findings are another person's "unscientific", "anecdotal" evidence. We've been 'round and 'round on this forum with Stevenson's and his successor's studies, and the arguments pro and con. Although I'm a fan of those studies, I've found that neither side is going to convince the other.
However, the OP asked for any evidence, not just scientific, so the thread really isn't about convincing anyone, it's about providing source info for the OP.
There's nothing wrong with "anecdotal evidence", depending on the level of evidence one is seeking. There are things I choose to believe based on anecdotal evidence.
But anecdotal evidence is not proof. And there are things with anecdotal evidence I choose not to believe, or -- more likely -- remain open-minded about.
Stephen Jay Gould put forward the concept of non-overlapping magisteria, i thnk it applies here:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-overlapping_magisteria
When i think of behaviourism i think of Skinner. That kind of behaviourism has certainly been superseded by the ideas of Turing, Ryle and Dennett (a mathematician and 2 philosophers respectively).
Seems like a good way to approach this. You can be happy with Stevenson etc and I can be happy without all that.
Why the need to convince me of what you believe?
From my POV it's only hear-say. You are believing what he believes what others believe and so on....
(None of this is new - the man and the issue has been discusses in great detail on this very forum ad nauseum.)
Regarding behavourism... the kind I encounter... or to be more accurate.. my wife encounters in her field.... has little to do with reflective philosophy... and is more like an undoubted given.
No proof, because gravity is an invisible field, like consciousness, and electromagnetism. Intangible and non-observable, except in their effects. Like rebirth, maybe.
BTW, just because no one has yet discovered them, that doesn't mean graviton particles don't exist. Of course, like evolution, global human-induced rapid climate change, and the spherical earth, that's just a theory.
I'm not sure what category rebirth would belong to. If we have some way too measure it, then we can proceed to prove/disprove it. If we cannot measure it, then we can only believe or disbelieve it. Personally i would not take the account of children's memories as evidence, but i believe that has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere.
So a prior question might be, where is the scientific evidence for consciousness?
All in all it's a mess. Science really does need to get its act together on this one. Having followed progress in scientific consciousness studies for ten years I can report that there hasn't been any.
Not sure about rebirth myself. I've read some usually trustworthy sages who say it's a story for the masses or the simplification of a more subtle idea. I hope so.