Observation? Perhaps the indigenous lifeforms visibly react to their presence through some sort of biological degradation? Maybe the first discernible effects are on flora, but then it’s discovered that the visitors have the same effect on all species on the planet? Maybe everything is allergic to them?
Just ideas, but I think you should finish writing it Bob, cause now I want to read it.
there is an easier way to prove Reincarnation.
If you assume there is no God and the Big Bang is true.
So the universe starts with a bang and there is no God and there are no life in the universe. Are you with me so far?
So the universe starts with no life in it for billions of years. No life and no consciousness. That’s the big sleep Gary. Nonexistence. Non-existence doesn’t exist.
Then eventually life, conscious life appears. One example of conscious life is your life Gary. So we went from non-existence into existence. This happened automatically, you did not sign a consent form to exist.
What reincarnation-deniers are saying Gary, is that when they die, somehow the death is an event, an action, that flips the switch of the Universe’s physics, that changes the entire physics of the entire Universe. Death is not an action Gary, it is the absence of an action.
Remember that the default physics of the universe, is to big sleep until consciousness appears. The default physics is to transition nonexistence into existence, unconsciousness into consciousness. And reincarnation deniers are saying… when their physical body dies it somehow changes the whole physics of the universe. That their death creates an invisible force field or bubble, that tunnels into the universe and prevents consciousness and existence from happening, and it projects this bubble field into the end of time. Occam’s razor Gary.
There is not a seamless whole. There are some things which are conscious and other things which are not conscious. Clocks aren’t conscious Fred.
Clocks in your mind are a virtual representation of reality, a duplicated recreation of external, separate reality which is physically outside of your brain.
I think he means that awareness-of-a-clock is added to the shared consciousness that the soul has access to. It wasn’t really about clocks.
Ah yes in that case he may be correct.
Good grief. Is there anyone here who has an academic education in philosophy, who actually knows anything at all about logic? This is more like a sci-fi forum.
Trying to reason with a Westerner about reincarnation seems fruitless and pointless. Its like trying to teach a high-school dropout calculus. No matter how you try to explain it they won’t get it. I might try asking Ai to explain it to you next, that’s my last hope.
The westerner logic is “if i dont see reincarntion in a lab, it doesn’t exist. I need PhD’s to tell me that reincarnation exists or i wont believe it.”
im a programmer so i know all about logic and almost everything there is to know about logic. I could school Spock about logic. I know more about logic than you do.
Yeah it’s probably as futile as a Christian trying to explain the trinity to me.
I assume the cycles repeat identically. But I suppose they could differ. And then I suppose the patterns of differences could recur in a far longer cycle. The force which propels the whole chain of incarnations is the force of reality itself. My point is that the force of reality moves life towards Paradise. That is where it is heading. And this vision of identity with others is what makes it possible for intelligent beings to avoid self-extinction, to live in bliss for a billion years.
I prefer reincarnation revolving around a mystical Nietzschean eternal return with modern physics in the backdrop pondering the variables of infinite with the entire concept of time being called into question.
Who? Was he Japanese? Jung sounds a bit Japanese.
Nah, I’m on about your boy Sigmund Nietzsche.
It was obvious bait and you were the first to fall for it..
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I don’t drink alcohol.
But that’s still existing in the same state for a billion years. What does that?
It really was not a bait, it was a test, but a simple one that searches for a difference between phenomenal and a phenomenal understanding , that can be staged as an either/or argument, subtly hiding a dynamic that is open to evolving interpretation.
So on deep search this came up:
Cycles, cycles everywhere, but some of them are fixed. Nah..
What applies to the rest of the Universe, would also apply to the soul.
I prefer plain direct forms of communication rather than riddled mental tests myself.
