Ian Stevenson’s magnum opus, published in 1997, was a 2,268-page, two-volume work called Reincarnation and Biology. Many of his subjects had unusual birthmarks and birth defects, such as finger deformities, underdeveloped ears, or being born without a lower leg. There were scar-like, hypopigmented birthmarks and port-wine stains, and some awfully strange-looking moles in areas where you almost never find moles, like on the soles of the feet. Reincarnation and Biology contained 225 case reports of children who remembered previous lives and who also had physical anomalies that matched those previous lives, details that could in some cases be confirmed by the dead person’s autopsy record and photos.
A Turkish boy whose face was congenitally underdeveloped on the right side said he remembered the life of a man who died from a shotgun blast at point-blank range. A Burmese girl born without her lower right leg had talked about the life of a girl run over by a train. On the back of the head of a little boy in Thailand was a small, round puckered birthmark, and at the front was a larger, irregular birthmark, resembling the entry and exit wounds of a bullet; Stevenson had already confirmed the details of the boy’s statements about the life of a man who’d been shot in the head from behind with a rifle, so that seemed to fit. And a child in India who said he remembered the life of boy who’d lost the fingers of his right hand in a fodder-chopping machine mishap was born with boneless stubs for fingers on his right hand only. This type of “unilateral brachydactyly” is so rare, Stevenson pointed out, that he couldn’t find a single medical publication of another case.
Of course. Religion and science are NOMAs.Your suggestion is that differing areas of discussion - you have listed chemistry, mathematics and religion - are incommensurable? — Banno
Sure, there are some generalities that many of the scientific disciplines have in common (there used to be just one science which was later broken down into disciplines). Still, the point is that each scientific discipline has areas or modes of interest that do not overlap with those of other scientific disciplines. That's why there are different scientific disciplines, ie. biology, chemistry, physics, etc.And yet chemistry makes use of mathematics.
I wouldn't "segregate it from critique" -- implying that it's "too good to be criticized" or some such.It's really only religion you would segregate from critique. You are apparently indulging in special pleading. I don't buy it.
Really? You think you understand reincarnation or dependent co-arising? On whose terms of understanding? Yours or the Hindus'/Buddhists'?The notion of incommensurate conceptual schema did survive Davidson's criticism. Non-overlapping magisteria overlap. Otherwise we could not understand them. — Banno
But in that case, you'd actually have to prove the causal link between religious view X and action A.If religious views have consequences for what one does in the world, then those views are subject to criticism on that basis.
“No sensible man would insist that these things are as I have described them, but I think it is fitting for a man to risk the belief ...” — Fooloso4
It is from the Grube translation:http://cscs.res.in/dataarchive/textfiles/textfile.2010-09-15.2713280635/file — Fooloso4
So, why are you using the Grube translation that is obviously faulty? — Apollodorus
Why should I give you my translation — Apollodorus
Once again, there are no missing words. I left the words out — Fooloso4
It looks like you have deliberately chosen another, incomplete translation because it suits your agenda. Sedley & Long’s translation and commentary would have demolished your theory. — Apollodorus
I used the translation I have and online translations I found. If I had used Sedley and Long I would have skipped the introduction. — Fooloso4
Myth or silence.
— Banno
My first reaction is different audience. With Christianity there was by the time the Tractatus was written more than enough myth. — Fooloso4
It's pretty clear that there is no account of reincarnation in which what is typically called the self comes, after death, to be found in a different body, because the things that go together to make the self do not survive death. Even were we to take on board the evidence cited by Wayfarer, the conclusion could only be that reincarnation was a very, very rare event. — Banno
I think those accounts are at best merely weak evidence of karma.Even were we to take on board the evidence cited by Wayfarer, the conclusion could only be that reincarnation was a very, very rare event.
What is reincarnated is the soul. You true self, the who you really are is a soul, and as such you're an eternal servant of the Lord. — baker
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.