Coming Back- The Science of Reincarnation

[Burner]

When you see a big guy coming at you with a big knife and run is your preemptive action a result of your thinking "this doesn't look good/looks dangerous?

The word "thinking" used here is the problem. You are using it in the context of rationalizing particular factors and making a decision seeing this happening in the brain and labelling thinking. You are also taking the preemptive action spoken about as the same brain enacting measures for self preservation and equating the two.
Yes, they both occur in the brain but the processes are different. Being startled by a loud noise suddenly happening near isn't you thinking "i must move" as it is an automatic and natural response initiated from the brain.

 

[Mwalimu-G]

as it is an automatic and natural response initiated from the brain.

What is the work of the brain?

 

[Burner]

What is the work of the brain?

Its a command centre basically for a body. It would be a mistake to say it is for thinking. Because thinking is a very specific term. There are portions of the brain that can be removed and inhibit thinking but you would be very much alive.

 

[Aviator]

These are all assertions with no justified evidence.
1. You say the soul makes the body function. How? Demonstrate that "something" leaves the body.
2. You say it cannot be measured empirically but it is known to exist? Prove it.
3. There is something different when death happens..what is this? And how can you demonstrate it.
4. You have still not given a definition of a soul. Saying it makes the body function is like defining a shoe as something your foot enters. It is vague and doesnt tell us alot

Stop arguing for the sake of argument.
You surely want to tell me you don't know the difference between a corpse and a living person?
Do a simple experiment then. When an acquittance dies, go to the morgue and try to feel their heartbeat, temperature or even tickle them. See the reaction.
Then, try the same on a living person.
Whatever differences you observe is as a result of one person being alive (consciousness) and the other corpse lacking life (lacking consciousness).

 

[Mwalimu-G]

Its a command centre basically for a body.

The commands are rationalized decisions?

 

[Budspencer]

Personalities are malleable. Either by consciously by repeated behaviour or unconsciously via external factors e.g labotomy. So do souls change at a whim?
The soul is housed in the brain? Show where and this intergration that you speak of?

I dont know what you mean by special.
Apes and other animals are capable of expressing emotions as well. Self-awareness is also an attribute that has been shown among apes.

Aren't apes our closest relative? I didn't say humans are the only ones capable of those traits I mentioned. So which other animal/plant/ algae/virus/ bacteria expresses all that I mentioned? Transient, emotions, regret, conscious, superior cognitive function etc. The fact that you can change your behaviour doesn't mean you can swap souls. Even people with dissociative identify disorder can't do that.

 

[Mwalimu-G]

You surely want to tell me you don't know the difference between a corpse and a living person?

Death is a total systems shutdown, not the result of some imaginary "soul" deciding to exit for I don't know where.
We have had football players collapse and die on the field. One died for 14 minutes but was revived with CPR. The soul returned?

 

[Burner]

The commands are rationalized decisions?

Not all. E.g seeing is not a rationalized decision. Yet it happens in the brain.

 

[Burner]

Stop arguing for the sake of argument.
You surely want to tell me you don't know the difference between a corpse and a living person?
Do a simple experiment then. When an acquittance dies, go to the morgue and try to feel their heartbeat, temperature or even tickle them. See the reaction.
Then, try the same on a living person.
Whatever differences you observe is as a result of one person being alive (consciousness) and the other corpse lacking life (lacking consciousness).

I dont know what you going on about. I have not brought up the fundamental difference between being alive and being dead.
You made several assertions about something leaving the body, and controling the body. You are unable to define or explain what this something is, how it works or how you know it exists.

 

[Budspencer]

Its a command centre basically for a body. It would be a mistake to say it is for thinking.

Very interesting senator.

 

[Mwalimu-G]

Not all. E.g seeing is not a rationalized decision. Yet it happens in the brain.

Seeing (done by eyes) is an input of the rationalization process. Commanding the head to turn to look and the eyes to see (to gather more input data) is part of the rationalization process. What the eyes see, what the nose smells, your skin feels, your tongue tastes etc is part of the input data that your brain combines with knowledge in it's library (experience) to form rational commands. Sometimes the brain even revises it's commands (self-doubts like when you are running intending to jump across a stream but hesitate at the last moment).

 

[Burner]

Aren't apes our closest relative? I didn't say humans are the only ones capable of those traits I mentioned. So which other animal/plant/ algae/virus/ bacteria expresses all that I mentioned? Transient, emotions, regret, conscious, superior cognitive function etc. The fact that you can change your behaviour doesn't mean you can swap souls. Even people with dissociative identify disorder can't do that.

The reason i brought up apes is because you claimed we were special. I see nothing special about us if other animals exhibit the same traits. Dogs will show all manner of emotions.
Superior cognitive function is a subjective superfluous term. Superior to what? If we are comparing ourselves to a bee, then sure. But what about if you compare a chimp to a new born baby?

You directly tied a "soul" to the personality. I have shown you that personalities are malleable. Do you now retract your earlier claim? Because if it isnt the personality, you have yet to define what it is and show that it is a thing.

**Unless you are speaking in purely colloquial terms e.g that girl has a beautiful soul meaning she is a genuine good hearted person.

 

[GuyNextDoor]

1) OK, let me put it another way.
The soul is what makes your body function.
Or that which leaves your body when it dies. Whatever you call it, I will call it the soul.
2) Whereas this can not be measured empirically like a battery voltage, we know it exists since there is something different that happens when death happens.

If you really are a follower of that church you keep claiming you belong to, then I think you miss a lot of their Bible's understanding by acres. This is not me asking for any proof. Carry on

 

[Budspencer]

The reason i brought up apes is because you claimed we were special. I see nothing special about us if other animals exhibit the same traits. Dogs will show all manner of emotions.
Superior cognitive function is a subjective superfluous term. Superior to what? If we are comparing ourselves to a bee, then sure. But what about if you compare a chimp to a new born baby?

You directly tied a "soul" to the personality. I have shown you that personalities are malleable. Do you now retract your earlier claim? Because if it isnt the personality, you have yet to define what it is and show that it is a thing.

**Unless you are speaking in purely colloquial terms e.g that girl has a beautiful soul meaning she is a genuine good hearted person.

If you were an MD, PharmD or DDS, I'd be tempted to troll you. Hii ingine let me watch na popcorns.

 

[Pseudonyms]

The Science of Reincarnation

Can this "science" of reincarnation withstand repeated and identical observations every time? Can it be proven with systematic and measurable experimentation? No.

Then it's NOT science.

 

[mzeiya]

When you see a big guy coming at you with a big knife and run is your preemptive action a result of your thinking "this doesn't look good/looks dangerous?

That's a fight/flight response.

 

[Aviator]

Death is a total systems shutdown, not the result of some imaginary "soul" deciding to exit for I don't know where.
We have had football players collapse and die on the field. One died for 14 minutes but was revived with CPR. The soul returned?

You just said it. Total systems shutdown.
Why can't every corpse be resuscitated? If it is a damaged heart, why can't you replace the heart and get everything up like you can do with a car engine? What is this in living things that cannot be replaced for death to be reversed?

I dont know what you going on about. I have not brought up the fundamental difference between being alive and being dead.
You made several assertions about something leaving the body, and controling the body. You are unable to define or explain what this something is, how it works or how you know it exists.

I don't claim to have a 100% understanding of the soul (something). But I can tell it exists by inference. Comparison between the living and the dead. It is that simple to me. I fail to understand how you can't see something quite obvious.

 

[Burner]

I don't claim to have a 100% understanding of the soul (something). But I can tell it exists by inference. Comparison between the living and the dead. It is that simple to me. I fail to understand how you can't see something quite obvious.

What inference? All you have said is a living thing did certain things while alive and it does not do those things when dead.
From that you have come to the conclusion that it has something extra i.e
This is a complete non-sequitor. It does not follow as you have provided no basis nor evidence for this extra thing.

 

[Burner]

If you were an MD, PharmD or DDS, I'd be tempted to troll you. Hii ingine let me watch na popcorns.

Im clearly none of those. Feel free to troll away

 

[Aviator]

What inference? All you have said is a living thing did certain things while alive and it does not do those things when dead.
From that you have come to the conclusion that it has something extra i.e
This is a complete non-sequitor. It does not follow as you have provided no basis nor evidence for this extra thing.

Now read chapter three of the book