Mimsey Borogrove
Crusader
I am at a loss to be able to communicate it seems.Mimsey. I'm sorry that you think that I have an "idealized view of how science is done." I am quite sure how it is done, but I'm not going to sit here and type out how and how many and where and who makes the probabilities on which subjects. Bottom line, science is not based on belief and then finding evidence to prove that belief, whereas your little arena of expertise is.
The subject for the thread is: past lives, real or imagined, is it not? And you're trying to push that it's real. Fine. I'm "narrow minded" and have an idealized view of how science is done if I have done 17 years of study since I've been out of Scientology about how powerful ones imagination can be (which is great), but how dangerous that can wind up in the hands of a manipulator. Believing you have lived before, on your own accord, is pretty harmless. It's when someone starts guiding you through a bunch of belief and telling you it is all reality and starts taking you into states of disassociation when it becomes a problem. My opinion, which I have a right to.
I read article after article in which scientists are frustrated by other scientists rejecting their work out of hand. Not just in the paranormal, but other fields as well. Fields with reputable scientists with degrees and prestige who can not get any traction for their work because it does not conform to the accepted norm, no matter how illogical the accepted norm may be.
They largely have the same complaint - that science is closed to other ideas. And you say - no Mimsey, science accepts other viewpoints. Why then are all these many reports to the contrary? Surely you have seen them? Or am I merely deluded?
But, lets move on to re-incarnation.
If you have some 2000 plus cases in which you have interviewed children about their previous life, and have gone and seen the graves, gone to the towns and had the child recognize people from his narrative, which in some cases the child has never visited in this life. At what point do these 2000 plus cases dissolve into mere belief? Are these cases, no matter how well researched, relegated to be mere belief, forever and ever more?
What would be the bridge to make reincarnation a science? What would be the accepted standard? What would you accept as proof of it being real?
Edit - I am not being accusatory your of being prejudiced against reincarnation BTW, just curious if you are open to proof or not and what would constitute said proof. No pressure.
Mimsey
Last edited: