The Life Between Lives - Dr. Michael Newton

[Danny_D]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

And we all have similar cultures. You're being awfully judgmental about this for a guy who is supposedly keeping an open mind. I get the feeling some of you folks really need to have this be true. Perhaps you just talk that way.

Culture does not come into this. The reports dont reflect any of the western culture, and most of Newtons patients were form north america or canada.
You would have known this also if you took the time and looked into it.
That is why i'm so "judmental", you presume to know the evidence and lay down generic talking points that every skeptic uses.

This is what many if not most of Rupert Sheldrakes skeptics do also, they like to argue against hes experiments, but dont want to look at the data.

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

Yeah, and everyone is rolling their eyes at string theory until they can come up with an experiment that will distinguish their model of the universe from other ones. Theory does not trump data.

It's not proven by any means, but its logically sound.
Just pointing out that other dimensions are possible in theory.

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

The problem here is that I don't trust the data. Mere matching of experiences doesn't do the trick.

Ofcourse not, not for science. Next step is then to give it an alternative explanation. And that starts by reviewing the cases.

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

If you're the sort of person that trusts every story about past lives, then you think there is a lot of good data. If you're the sort of person that trusts some stories but not others, then you might help us by explaining your criteria. If you're the sort of person who thinks it seems like cold reading, then the data needs to be accompanied by analysis of the data.

~~ Paul

Havent been too interested in past life experiences before, thought they were interesting. I think Newtons cases give it more merit, because of the consitency of the reports. Thats what made Newton also take it seriously, he started out as an atheist skeptic in this stuff.

[Larry Boy]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

I'm sorry, but even saying "This might be memories of past lives" is making an unproven claim. It might also be memories implanted by our overlord denizens of the hollow earth.

A therapist should be neutral, in my opinion, neither dismissing nor endorsing the past life memory claims of his patients. His job is to help the patient deal with whatever problems he has, not to decide whether reincarnation is a possibility or not. That's for scientists to investigate. And of course, the therapist shouldn't speculate about memories implanted by "our overlord denizens of the hollow earth", but surely that's not what we're discussing here?

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

If you can't come up with criteria for placing extraordinary claims on a possible/outrageous spectrum, then I see no reason to treat some of them with more respect. Well, except for homeopathy, which is patently absurd.

So we should invent criteria for deciding what is possible and not prior to investigating claims? Evidence isn't what we should base our judgments on then?

[Ariannel]

Originally Posted by Paul C. Anagnostopoulos

None of that sort of "evidence" would matter to me. I either need corroborating evidence of the existence of reincarnation, or I need a probability calculation showing that the matches are stunningly improbable. Otherwise it's just an exercise in cold reading.

Well, it's too bad that you can't even try to listen to what's been found when people have been regressed. I really don't know how you can argue against it when you really don't know what it's truly about. If you're not willing to actually look what's out there in terms of information, then I really don't see the need to discuss this with you anymore.

As far as people talking during hypnosis, I see no reason to give that any weight at all. People make up great stories even when not hypnotized. Why should they do any different under hypnosis?

Yeah, sure. Why not take that a step further and just not listen to or believe what anyone says ever because, you know, people can lie and make up stories. You just can't trust what anyone says. I'm sure human society can really benefit from that line of reasoning.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by Breanainn

Some people certainly fear oblivion, but I'll bet just as many fear judgement, reincarnating or existing as pure consciousness without time. If even some of what some people say is true, then the afterlife scares the crap out of me... I don't like change.

I know exactly what you mean, but I do think our ideas are distorted by Christianity, which could be said to have evolved (in the sense of memes) to be as scary as possible, so as to keep its followers from thinking too deeply!

David

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by David

I don't think that Paul acknowledges the corrosive effect that 'heroic' efforts to dismiss some experimental results have on the whole scientific process. Science is far more based on common sense that some people seem to realise.

And common sense would lead us to believe ... that we have repressed memories of past lives. Yeah.

Paul (in the role of resident skeptic) would dismiss each piece of evidence separately, as though none of the rest were present. Taken together, they make a much more convincing case that the orthodox position has to evolve somehow.

The plural of anecdote is not evidence.

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by majinrevan

Let me get this straight, the reason that children seem to remember
past lives is because children do weird things.

And because the hypnotic context plays on their imaginations.

The reason that adults seem to remember past lives is because they're
delusional.

I never said any such thing. The hypnotic context plays on their imaginations.

The reason that certain hypnotherapists seem convinced that their
patients are recollecting past lives is because they're incompetent or
fraudulent.

Correct.

The reason that the patients themselves tell similar stories is because
they have similar brains and/or similar cultures.

And the context is the same: Please imagine your past lives.

The reason people like Ian Stevenson found the evidence for reincarnation
compelling is because they were uncritical in conducting their research.

I don't know about the rest of the people, but I picked up one of Ian Stevenson's books and read the story touted as the best example. The event happened years ago, but the family was telling the story when Stevenson interviewed them. They had had 40 years to (innocently) agree on the story.

Is this a fair summary of your position?

Is this a fair summary of hypnosis?

Originally Posted by Wiki

Although a popular misconception is that hypnosis is a form of unconsciousness resembling sleep, contemporary research suggests that it is actually a wakeful state of focused attention[2] and heightened suggestibility,[3] with diminished peripheral awareness.

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by majinrevan

When I present the evidence, you make endless complaints about the absence of a mechanism.
When I point out that the mechanism isn't the point, you say that you agree, yet you aren't convinced of the evidence.

Both.

I'm not convinced by the evidence.

If everyone is so convinced by the evidence, then they should be working on a theory. I would have expected some useful bits and pieces of a theory by now.

Be that as it may, it's not the fact that you aren't convinced that's frustrating, it's the fact that you ARE convinced of it being nonsense, or at least appear to be.

I feel fairly certain that it is nonsense.

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Ariannel

Would this not be a Fallacist's Fallacy?

It would indeed by fallacious of me to reject an idea uncategorically simply because I didn't like the evidence. However, there is a lot of room between "uncategorical rejection" and "giddy acceptance."

~~ Paul

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Breanainn

I've met as many atheists who were terrified by the possiblity that Big Skydaddy really was watching them ...

I will admit to being somewhat put off by the idea of eternal life. I cannot imagine how boring it would get after a few billion years.

Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with
themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon.

---Susan Ertz

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Originally Posted by Danny

Culture does not come into this. The reports dont reflect any of the western culture, and most of Newtons patients were form north america or canada.

Of course culture comes into it: The culture of the afterlife. It's Friday evening. If I was in the mood I could watch "Ghost Whisperer" followed by "Medium."

You would have known this also if you took the time and looked into it.
That is why i'm so "judmental", you presume to know the evidence and lay down generic talking points that every skeptic uses.

You're thinking of culture in too narrow a sense.

It's not proven by any means, but its logically sound.
Just pointing out that other dimensions are possible in theory.

Well, at least infinitesimally small dimensions. Sure, there might be other dimensions in which souls could reside. Or maybe it's impossible. Remember, I didn't say it is logically impossible. I asked for the logic.

Ofcourse not, not for science. Next step is then to give it an alternative explanation. And that starts by reviewing the cases.

As I'm sure many parapsychologists have. Time to start developing theories.

~~ Paul