I don't understand your question.
What is there to philosophise about? — Gary Enfield
Look out, kid
It's somethin' you did
God knows when
But you're doin' it again — Robert Zimmerman
Once again, the so-called scientific community has tended to try and smear the evidence rather than debate its nature.... and why? — Gary Enfield
In Western cultures where the metaphysical norms are derived from Abrahamic religions.It's up there with astrology, ghosts and UFO research, all generally categorised under the heading woo-woo. — Wayfarer
First answer why it would be necessary to "convincingly justify it in philosophical terms".However, supposing we accept reincarnation either as fact or as theoretical possibility, how would we convincingly justify it in philosophical terms? — Apollodorus
We come back to testimonies. — Manuel
The point about testimonies is that they can be tested against evidence. — Wayfarer
I accept the possibility, but I don't think too much about it. — Wayfarer
I'm not well read on the topic of Reincarnation, but I do have a general hypothesis for why the theory of body-hopping souls arose among philosophers & sages concerned with Ethics. Almost all cultures on Earth have devised some explanation for the inequalities and injustices of the world : The Problem of Evil. For example, ancient Greek cultures were feudal societies. "As above, so below" : they typically assumed that humans were like slaves or servants to their feudal Lords in heaven. In that case, humans were subject to the mercurial whims of their whip-wielding slave-owners, and free-will was a pathetic illusion of the downtrodden. So, the Greeks, both slaves & lords, tended to be fatalistic, and/or pessimistic, about their long-term future prospects, and held no hope for any afterlife beyond the grave. Thus, they saw no reason to expect personal justice in this life or any other. Those "typical" Greeks also tended to be materialistic & deterministic about the mechanics of the world, in which humans were mere grinding cogs.I think there was a discussion on reincarnation some time ago. However, supposing we accept reincarnation either as fact or as theoretical possibility, how would we convincinglyjustify it in philosophical terms? — Apollodorus
I believe all of these arguments are sound, though only one needs to be. — Bartricks
Our minds are strongly indivisible. Half a mind makes no sense. As our minds are strongly indivisible, they have no parts. An object that has no parts does not come into being - for there is nothing from which it can be formed - and thus if it exists, it has always existed. Thus our minds have always existed. As our lives here had a beginning, we - the minds undergoing them - must have existed previously, for we have always existed. — Bartricks
Those are states of mind or processes involving minds. Obviously. You do not divide water by freezing it, even though that changes its state. Likewise you do not divide a mind by changing its state from thought to desire or whatever. — Bartricks
Hmm déjà vu – guess I'm the skunk at the woo party again. — 180 Proof
If you view consciousness as a form of energy then it can be explained empirically. — Pantagruel
All this to say, the road is not as clear as has been presumed. — Banno
You do not divide water by freezing it, even though that changes its state. — Bartricks
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.