If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Past life or not...?
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
I don't know if this is the right place so please move it if it's not...!
What are people's views/opinions on having experienced a "past life"?
Do you believe you have lived previously? If so, do you think your experiences from that have helped shape your behaviours/characteristics/personalities/traits that you now display?
Discuss...!
What are people's views/opinions on having experienced a "past life"?
Do you believe you have lived previously? If so, do you think your experiences from that have helped shape your behaviours/characteristics/personalities/traits that you now display?
Discuss...!
0
Comments
Fiend, I really liked that story.
Agreed, in a way. The human mind cannot comprehend nothingness, in the same way it cannot comprehend infinity.
As an unorthodox buddhist, i suppose i should be inclined to believe in reincarnation, but i think i don't.
It would be something of a matter of faith, which unfortuntely i don't have.
Well sure it may be one day that I'm akin those who were adamant the world was flat. But as it stands I can see no logic or science behind it, just as the coathanger puts it, the fear of the finality of death. Its far too intangible a notion.
I hoped you might. I really enjoyed it when I saw it for the first time
Agreed. A load of bollocks.
Well, no. There is absolutely no evidence that people have past lives, so I'm entirely sure that it's not true. The same way that I'm sure that Wolverine isn't a real live person. Or the Hulk. But your stance seems to be that I should be open to the idea of them actually existing until someone provides conclusive proof that they don't exist.
How can someone provide evidence of something that doesn't exist? The burden of proof is on those who say it does exist. If I say that Odin pulls clouds across the sky in an invisible chariot, it's up to me to prove that's true, not the people who say I'm wrong.
Yes. It makes me sound less like a child/lunatic to say that I know Wolverine isn't real. This is becoming a first year philosophy student argument. To be sure of something is to be without doubt. I am without doubt that there is no such thing as past lives, so yes, I am sure that they don't exist. Just as I am without doubt that the world is not held on Atlas' shoulders or that Santa is real. I am without doubt Wolverine is not real.
Belief and fact are very different things. I believe and I know are not interchangeable statements. In the hypothetical world you are suggesting, there is no such thing as fact. I.e, there is a chance that it was a robot duplicate of Abraham Lincoln that was assassinated in the Ford's Theatre to cover up that the real honest Abe had left for Cybertron to broker peace between the Autobots and Decepticons, so we can only believe that Lincoln is dead. In this world, text books would all have to read that we believe that the Allies fought the Nazis in WW2 because there is a chance that the war was actually between Bob Holness and a small animatronic penguin.
The big thing about being sure is this: Forget Wolverine and and robot aliens. Suppose that you have a very close friend named Bob, who you trust like no one else. Then one day the police come to your house and tell you that Bob is wanted for murder. You could easily say "No way! I know that Bob would never do such a thing!". Just like many other people have said in the past in similar circumstances.
The thing is, in many cases these people were wrong. If they didn't feel so sure Bob was innocent based on nothing else than what's really a belief (that Bob would never kill somebody -which is only a belief as Bob is physically able to kill), when they heard the police say that they might have actually considered the possibility and saw Bob under a very different light: Something he once said, or something he did, could be interpreted differently and so they'd understand that perhaps Bob really would kill somebody. Or, that there really has never been any indication that he would and so there's no reason to mistrust him any more than there was before.
Instead, by mislabelling a belief as fact, they dismiss the possibility and make it more difficult for themselves to accept the truth, supposing that Bob did kill somebody, which can only lead to shock and trauma they could have been spared or have lessened.
All I did was dig out the underlining mindset if "you" (in the hypothetical story above) that caused this "problem" (the quotes are there because it's not a very big problem, although that's no reason not to try and "fix" it) and apply it to everything.
This example, shortened: You don't have evidence or proof Bob didn't kill anyone, you just trust him because you don't have any indication he would. You believe he wouldn't do it. In truth, evidence (or proof) could come about that he did it.
The above argument, generalised: You don't have any evidence or proof about something, you just reach a conclusion based on the lack of evidence/proof for the opposite. You believe that's the right conclusion. In truth, evidence (or proof) could come about that overturns it.
The generalised argument applied to reincarnation: You don't have proof that reincarnation doesn't happen, you just feel "sure" it doesn't because you have no indication that it does. You believe it doesn't happen. In truth, evidence (or proof) could come about that it does.
Likelihood plays no part here.
Being sure about something does not mean that a person can never be wrong. Your mind blowingly insane argument logically leads to everyone having to prove that aren't murderers. I can only be sure that someone isn't an axe murderer when they show me that they have no bodies dissolving in a bath tub.
I am 100% convinced that there is no such thing as reincarnation. Same way that I'm 100% convinced that there are no such things as ghosts, psychics are liars, and there isn't a monster under the bed trying to eat me. Therefore, I am SURE that there is no such thing as reincarnation.
The potential existence of proof is not the same as actual existence of proof.
This has become ludicrous semantic jousting.
I remember once reading this book in Year 8 about this girl who dies, after being accused of so and so, and basically they all look for clues and what not, and basically, she was reborn as someone else, another little girl, who helps them clear her name, etc...because she was that person O.o
Can't actually remember what book it was now, but was a immensely amazing book
Just sharing my random personal view~
:yes: On that TV show (can't remember what it's called) where they get celebs to "look back at their past lives" they were never just a cleaner or something!
That's a shame...sounds like a really interesting book!