Past Life Regression

We don’t have to discount every single past life story-you, by virtue of your extraordinary claim, have to come up with one real and provable story.

Science in the courtroom? I wouldn’t have it. I would never have gotten out of that murder rap if it weren’t for my phrenologist.

lekatt said:

The two systems exist for different reasons. Science tends to be a slow process, which obviously wouldn’t work well with a criminal justice system. But that need for speed sometimes goes against the evidence. For example, look at the lawsuits against breast implant makers. There was a claim that they caused all sorts of diseases. The courts accepted the personal testimony. A company went bankrupt. The science, which took a little longer to do, showed that they were not responsible for the claimed diseases. Whoops.

It’s been quite well shown to be true. I’d find some references for you but I suspect you’d just ignore them anyway. Hey, wait a minute! I’ll just personally testify that it’s true. Then you’ll believe me!

It implies no such thing. Another straw man. You are getting very good at that. Past lives are contradicted by the evidence. EVIDENCE. Are you familiar with the term?

Don’t let the door hit ya on the way out.

Whoa. Stating something on the order of “if someone claims he’s a psychic, he’s clearly a phony” (not that anyone said precisely that, but it’s the implication of several posts) is making a false presumption that no such thing as psychic abilities can exist.

Now if you alter that statement to “if someone claims he’s a psychic, you can make good money off the credulous by offering long odds that he’s a phony,” I’d buy into it. Most “professional psychics” are (as evidenced by investigative reporters, including the skeptics group for whom David B. sometimes writes) scam artists making money off the credulity of others.

But that fact does not rule out the possibility of “real” psychic abilities – and to assume that they don’t exist is to presume a total-materialist metaphysic with no room for the existence of things such as gods, angels, psychic abilities, etc. – a reasonable belief but at rock bottom a belief, not a demonstrable state of affairs.

I want to stress that – one must be credulous to buy into the evidence for any given “supernatural” phenomenon, to be sure, but the alternative is that “no such phenomena have been proven,” not that “no such phenomena can really exist.” To assert the latter is a matter of belief just as much as any intricate and paradoxical theological statement is – it’s presuming a metaphysic by which you judge claims about the world, whether your metaphysic is “YHWH created the world in six 24-hour days six thousand and change years ago” or “The entire world is governed by natural law, chaos theory, and chance, with nothing in it but matter and energy interacting in complex ways.”

I personally think that there is some evidence suggestive of valid past-life regressions, together with quite a lot of evidence that complies with Cecil’s and David’s analyses of what’s going on – confabulation, suggestibility, hoaxes, subconscious recall of early-childhood events and learnings masquerading as “facts from the past,” and all the rest.

(BTW, the opposition of Christianity to reincarnation is based on the theory of God’s grace wiping out all penalty for sin, hence the karmic-resolution concept of why reincarnation happens and why particular lives lead to particular other lives in that theory, is not a valid nor just mode of how God operates. There have been various Christians over the years who did subscribe to reincarnation as a means of purgatorial atonement for sin, including one or two leading theologians – though anything that suggests itself as effacing Christ’s atonement or leading to a purgatory concept is not going to sit well with most Christians.)

I guess at bottom what I’m saying here is that skepticism entails questioning the validity of things, not presuming their invalidity on the basis of a metaphysic – that’s the business of the True Believer, not of your discipline – while on the other hand, keeping an open mind means accepting the possibility that something might be true, not accepting a doctrine out of whole cloth because some (but not all) possibly-controverted evidence suggests that it may be true.

But how many twenty dollar bills does it take you to change your beliefs from “Damn the luck! Another dishonest three card monte dealer.” to “Another three card monte dealer? I’m keeping my money and calling the cops!”

Well, Czar, if I had a particular interest in investigating the hypothesis “There are in fact a few honest three card monte dealers among the conmen,” I’d simply get a grant from a foundarion to provide the seed money to test the hypothesis! :wink:

Technically, it never does. However, one can say, “You know, 3 Card Monte is quite probably a scam, based on the preponderance of evidence. I see no purpose to test this hypothesis, when instead I can use this money to purchase goods and services. Mmm. Beer.”

I suppose, like the earlier example of Lib’s, in some thread I misrecall, with the drunk guy claiming there were giant spiders, there is a certain level where a statement may be true, but the judged probability of it is so low you are unwillling to test it.

Technically, the drunk guy may be telling the truth. It is not impossible. However, the probability of it is so low that it is not worth the effort to get off me buttocks and look. Someone else, with an interest in giant spiders, however, might.

Psychic powers, in my personal opinion, are near but barely over that limit, where I think it’s worth reasonably investigating their existance. Unfortunately, none yet withstand reasonable testing.

Sad, really.

The thread E-Sabbath is talking about, considering the source, was one I started. It would be applicable if all of Lekatt’s sources for proof of Past Life was, for example, Miss Cleo.

“Past-life regression” would be basically the same thing as “recovered memories” (of childhood abuse, et. al.), wouldn’t it? Here is the AMA Statement on “Recovered Memories”.

This article mentions how you can easily create a false memory in a friend - and mentions several criminal cases based on “recovered memories” that were disproven by DNA evidence.
False Memory easy to create
Does anyone here think that DNA evidence (“science”) should be ignored in favor of so-called “recovered memories”?

Here is an entire page of links to various articles about False Memory Syndrome: False Memories
This one is particularly informative.
And here’s anABC news story about some research into memory and hypnosis.

Hypnosis is not some mystical power or magic trick - you cannot hypnotize someone against their will. The subject must cooperate with the hypnotist and follow his/her suggestions in order to enter and remain in the trance state. This leads the subject to cooperate with the hypnotist in everything, and if the hypnotist is looking for a repressed memory or a past life, the subject will obligingly invent one in order to please the hypnotist. The more intelligent and imaginative the subject, the more elaborate and detailed the ‘memories’ they will create.

Only when not contradicted by the scientific evidence or the personal testimony of more numerous or reliable witnesses.

Interesting . . . I do live in a fearful, frightening world, but it’s also a world full of love and laughter. I try to keep a reasonable and sane balance between my awareness of both conditions.

Who was it who originally said something about keeping an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out? :slight_smile:

Keeping an open mind is a virtue, but not so open that your brains fall out --James Olberg

coosa said:

Precisely what I was talking about above. It falls into the same category as alien abduction as well.

I’ve done past life regression and had some very real vivid memories come up. But my personal favourite was the session where I ‘recovered’ memories of alien abduction.

The ‘therapist’ declared these to be screen memories for sex abuse as he didn’t believe in alien abduction.

Heh.

Eeeeep. I used the word ‘real’ in the above post and ummm I didn’t mean ‘real’ as in Real but real as in realistic seeming.

Or perhaps it isn’t penalty being dished out but simply reaping what you have sown so that you will learn to love. Your post was a breath of fresh air in a very stuffy room. Thanks, Poly!

Stentor

Lekatt is correct that one must be very careful concerning those who claim to be psychic and secondly that knowing past experiences probably not help you in this experience. It may even hinder you.

Lekatt

I’ve learned not to discuss topics such as this with those who do not even acknowledge the existance of their own spirit. :slight_smile:

Edlyn said:

In other words – Eeek! Horrible evil skeptics who actually ask for evidence! Run away! Run away!

In 1992 had a boss that was into this kind of thing, and swore by this person who would read into you, and give you a 1 hour discussion on your past lives.

I went because I wanted an in with the boss.

So I called, and she asked for my date and place of birth. I went there and she held my hand and looked into my eyes, and channelled or whatever.

Then she told me I was a Swedish Doctor two lives ago, one that was responsible for an important medical breakthrough and was beloved by those around him, because he devoted his life to helping those in need instead of capitalizing on his fame. He was handsome and strong and very smart with a beautiful wife and lots of childred, and he died at a ripe old age.

This sounded pretty good to me.

Next though I was a failed japanese businessman, and that I was in the business world in this life as well to correct the failure of my past life. Before I could move on to the next level I would need to succeed in business.

Than she told me that I was constantly underestimated by those around me, who didn’t see my inner gifts.

I was trying my best not to give her any info, and after sitting there quietly and motionless for a while she did this thing again about people underestimating me, and not being appreciated, and then she told me I had issues with shyness.

Then she asked me if this sounded like me, and I told her not in the least, at which point she started offering various character traits to see which ones I responded to in pretty transparent fashion.

Then she told me a whole bunch of other things and predictions.


To me, this is clear evidence of paranormal ability. She really could not have gotten me more completely wrong. I’m one of those confident on the outside, scared on the inside types, but most startling was that not a single one of her predictions came true.

She told me I would rise to power in my current job, but had not yet met the woman I would marry. I was also supposed to stay in NYC, and have all boys.

Thanks Edlyn, I didn’t intend to discuss with him, I was having a discussion with Stentor when the skeptics took it over and bashed everything. No room on the dopers for spiritual things.

Love
Leroy

Thanks, stpauler. I recently saw this attributed to Albert Einstein, and I knew that was wrong! Off it goes to my quotes file. :slight_smile:

I encountered an interesting perspective on psychics in one of John Douglas’s books. (John Douglas is one of the original three FBI agents who ‘invented’ criminal profiling, a la Silence of the Lambs) Douglas mentions having a psychic visit the Behavioral Science Unit and sit in on some classes several times. He then said that he never discounted information from psychics and gave them serious attention! :eek:

I was shocked until I read his explanation - he doesn’t really believe in ‘psychic powers’, but after careful observation of some uncannily accurate psychics (involved in police cases) he concluded that they were unconciously ‘profiling’ a criminal, missing person, etc., and so could make valuable contributions to a police investigation. Their proclamations were often nearly identical to the statements made by BSU agents. (Sorry, I can’t provide the specific cite for this as I don’t remember which book it was in, and I think I’ve loaned most of mine out. I can look in the ones I still have, if someone wants a confirmed cite.)

Some people have a natural talent for this; however, because the ‘psychics’ don’t understand what they are doing they attribute their talent to something supernatural. (Just as technology can appear magical to the uneducated.) I don’t think every so-called ‘psychic’ is a quack or a crook; some are simply mistaken and/or deluded. I’m sure many of those performing past-life regressions believe that they are really uncovering people’s past lives. Maybe they are, but there has certainly never been any undeniable evidence that proves it.

No, David. We are prepared to discuss anything any time and work with the evidence available. What we are not prepared to do is to assume someone else’s restrictions on what evidence is valid and on what metaphysics we will presume in the testing of hypotheses against our available evidence.

Purely and simply – if you are prepared to assume that nothing exists but what can be detected through the use of existing scientific instruments, that’s your privilege – but you are not free to demand that others assume the same in order to discuss with you topics where the question of whether something (or Someone) exists that cannot be so detected is relevant.

I grant that a great deal of the stuff attributed to “the supernatural” is the result of fraud, misinterpretation of perceptions, false assumptions, and just plain naivete. But “a great deal” is not necessarily all.

I learned from Heinlein and had reinforced by my acquaintance with you the value of healthy skepticism. I try to maintain that in the course of discussing outre topics such as this.

But I am not prepared to accept, e.g., a proof of the absence of God that begins by assuming that nothing exists but matter and energy; God cannot be detected as matter or energy; therefore God does not exist. There’s an assumption in there that is not a given among all of humanity. For the same of argument, I am prepared to stipulate in such a discussion that my experiences of God, the testimony of persons I know to be reliable and honest as to their experiences of God, and the evidence of persons throughout history of their experiences of God, might all be mistaken, erroneous, fraudulent, or whatever. But what is required to determine whether that speculation is in fact the case is not to assume it to be the case, but to decide how one may investigate an entity which is not amenable to the normal modes of investigation. In other words, to devise an empirical theology that creates a methodology for sifting wheat from chaff in reports of God experiences.

The same holds true for situations like this – many people have reported memories of past lives, some (including one personal acquaintance and several reports of small children) not under any suggestibility by a hypnotist or other authority figure. Are those memories valid? Perhaps not – but one cannot investigate their truth or falsity by assuming the latter.

Again, I will concede that, e.g., if 3,486 of 3,486 reports of U.F.O.'s investigated have been demonstrated to be either fraudulent or misinterpretations of natural phenomenal, the likelihood that the 3,487th report is an actual extraterrestrial spacecraft is pretty darn slender. But I am prepared to keep an open mind (and no, not so open that…) and ask for extraordinary proof of the extraordinary assertion that it is. (BTW, in this regard may I observe that Jimmy Carter never claimed to have seen a flying saucer – his claim was the quite true statement that he had seen a U.F.O. – because he was unable to identify it. That it was Venus seen under atmospheric conditions that caused it to apparently move, or whatever was the case, resolves the sighting. It does not make him a saucer nut – he reported a sighting he had participated in, perhaps (my assumption) in order that it be properly identified.)

I’m prepared to take the statement of X that he has experienced vivid memories of a previous life at face value – that it is an experience of his. Whether it has reference to an actual previous life is a quite different question, which calls for investigation by those having the time, interest, and detached temperament to establish its validity or invalidity.

I experience something within myself that I refer to as my spirit – an aspect of self distinct from bodily sensation or abstract cogitation. That is a datum. What the objective referent of that experience may be is subject to debate – that I have that experience is my testimony, and not so subject (unless you have handy a psychic prepared to investigate by telepathy my own memories and experiences! ;))

An irritation to me about past life regressions is that by law of averages, by far the most common past-life for any person in any demographic should be that of a peasant farmer (especially Asian or African), and yet that’s the least common in the books on past lives. Instead, people were John Wilkes Booth, a Russian princess, or a corrupt Cardinal during the Renaissance (or at least a mistress or servant to same).
I went to a New Age seminar in Montgomery, AL a few years ago. Montgomery only has a major snowfall perhaps twice a decade, but this was one of those times. Many of the psychics were unable to make it because the roads were closed, and those who arrived early were unable to leave for the same reason, which sort of makes you wonder about their prescience right off the bat.
In any case, there was a seminar on past life regression led by a Mr. Rogers-ish hypnotherapist in which we were all instructed to “remember only good memories” from past lives and to “focus on a single happy memory”. I was a semi-believer at the time and really wanted to see something, but nothing came that couldn’t be attributed to mild imagination and wishful thinking.
Afterwards we were asked to share what we’d seen. One older lady recalled a long life as a witch in 18th century England from birth to death with “freeloving” romances and persecution throughout. Another woman recalled being a “princess of Germany during the Middle Ages who was distraught because she was engaged to marry a man I didn’t love”. One effeminate young man in quasi-drag and lots of ankhs recounted a life as a Greek priestess that ended when a spear was tossed into him/her. Then another man recounted how in his “regression” he was being taken as a slave into Rome and his hands were tied in front of him, and that even today he puts his hands together when troubled and now he knows why.

The thing that bothered me at the time: while I think some of these people were telling the truth in so much as they believed they saw what they were describing, they ignored the instructions. They didn’t limit it to “happy thoughts” (leastwise if getting impaled with a spear or tied and sold into slavery, etc., was their “happy time”, I’d hate to see them recall a bad day) and they saw entire lives, not just vignettes therefrom. As for the German princess,
1- there was no Germany in the Middle Ages
2- what romance novel is that the plot of? Oh, I remember… all of them.
A