| Topic: |
Science > Philosophy |
| User: |
"Brian Fletcher" |
| Date: |
10 Nov 2005 06:38:40 PM |
| Object: |
.Acknowleging reincarnation. |
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
I get the impression, some are all about self awareness (the pro reincs.),
and the bal are about society shaping, the anti's).
I never felt the urge to read beyond "Socrates Last Days" by Plato.
Everything, since that reading 25 yrs ago, has been a continual flow of
confirmation.
BOfL
.
|
|
| User: "Milan" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
10 Nov 2005 07:28:01 PM |
|
|
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
What does philosophy have to do with reincarnation?
regards
Milan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 12:26:19 AM |
|
|
"Milan" <mtklima@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3tiajgFsu2vvU1@individual.net...
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
What does philosophy have to do with reincarnation?
regards
Milan
Would the knowlege of such reality, alter your philosophy to life?
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Milan" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 01:37:06 PM |
|
|
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:fQWcf.14522$Hj2.9910@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Milan" <mtklima@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3tiajgFsu2vvU1@individual.net...
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm
curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
What does philosophy have to do with reincarnation?
regards
Milan
Would the knowlege of such reality, alter your philosophy to life?
BOfL
If I had solid evidence of what happens after death maybe such evidence
might have an impact on the way I conduct my life. I doubt it, though.
However, please note that here you are using the term "philosophy" in a
rather loose way, meaning something along the lines of "attitude", not
really philosophy. My point remains that reincarnation is not a
philosophical issue.
regards
Milan
.
|
|
|
| User: "minus" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
12 Nov 2005 06:49:35 AM |
|
|
Milan,
I think it fits nicely in 2b, probably elsewhere, but in 2b, clearly.
Webster's online:
Main Entry: phi=B7los=B7o=B7phy
Pronunciation: f&-'l=E4-s(&-)fE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -phies
Etymology: Middle English philosophie, from Old French, from Latin
philosophia, from Greek, from philosophos philosopher
1 a (1) : all learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical
arts (2) : the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law,
and theology <a doctor of philosophy> (3) : the 4-year college course
of a major seminary b (1) archaic : PHYSICAL SCIENCE (2) : ETHICS c : a
discipline comprising as its core logic, aesthetics, ethics,
metaphysics, and epistemology
2 a : pursuit of wisdom b : a search for a general understanding of
values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational
means c : an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing
fundamental beliefs
3 a : a system of philosophical concepts b : a theory underlying or
regarding a sphere of activity or thought <the philosophy of war>
<philosophy of science>
4 a : the most general beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an
individual or group b : calmness of temper and judgment befitting a
philosopher
.
|
|
|
| User: "Milan" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
12 Nov 2005 07:29:47 AM |
|
|
"minus" <underwearallthetime@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131799775.222802.166580@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Milan,
I think it fits nicely in 2b, probably elsewhere, but in 2b, clearly.
Webster's online:
Main Entry: phi·los·o·phy
Pronunciation: f&-'lä-s(&-)fE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -phies
Etymology: Middle English philosophie, from Old French, from Latin
philosophia, from Greek, from philosophos philosopher
1 a (1) : all learning exclusive of technical precepts and practical
arts (2) : the sciences and liberal arts exclusive of medicine, law,
and theology <a doctor of philosophy> (3) : the 4-year college course
of a major seminary b (1) archaic : PHYSICAL SCIENCE (2) : ETHICS c : a
discipline comprising as its core logic, aesthetics, ethics,
metaphysics, and epistemology
2 a : pursuit of wisdom b : a search for a general understanding of
values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational
means c : an analysis of the grounds of and concepts expressing
fundamental beliefs
3 a : a system of philosophical concepts b : a theory underlying or
regarding a sphere of activity or thought <the philosophy of war>
<philosophy of science>
4 a : the most general beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an
individual or group b : calmness of temper and judgment befitting a
philosopher
'''''''''''
Perhaps I wasnt clear enough. I didnt mean that to use the term "philosophy"
to denote a certain worldview or an attitude towards life was inaccurate;
what I mean is that he was using the term in two different ways.
regards
Milan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Accidental" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 02:20:18 AM |
|
|
Brian Fletcher wrote:
"Milan" <mtklima@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3tiajgFsu2vvU1@individual.net...
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
What does philosophy have to do with reincarnation?
regards
Milan
Would the knowlege of such reality, alter your philosophy to life?
BOfL
There is no way to determine such things through the conventional tools
of philosophy, therefore we must assign it to the realm of unsupported
conjecture or religion (which is just a subclass of unsupported
conjecture that includes the supernatural).
In my opinion, people should live by what they can reasonably determine
to be correct. Things that can not be determined to be reasonably
correct should be left open to being possible, but absolute judgment
should be withheld. We can observe which methods of determining things
tend to be more accurate than others, and so those are the methods we
should use. Simply guessing is empirically not a good way of learning
about anything, therefore, serious philosophy does not concern itself
with that.
Anyway, it is always a good idea to read other people's philosophy, or,
even better, people's ideas about logic, philosophy of the mind,
philosophy of language, and epistemology. These are the best ways to
come about learning or determining all other aspects of philosophy, in
my humble opinion.
So, do you have any reason for suspecting reincarnation, or does it
just sound appealing to you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 06:59:37 AM |
|
|
"Accidental" <Philip.Kooistra@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131697218.735449.60320@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Brian Fletcher wrote:
"Milan" <mtklima@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3tiajgFsu2vvU1@individual.net...
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm
curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
What does philosophy have to do with reincarnation?
regards
Milan
Would the knowlege of such reality, alter your philosophy to life?
BOfL
There is no way to determine such things through the conventional tools
of philosophy, therefore we must assign it to the realm of unsupported
conjecture or religion (which is just a subclass of unsupported
conjecture that includes the supernatural).
One mans supernatural is another mans "normal".
I know of some philosophers who subscribe to the "reality" of reincarnation.
Based on your definitions above, with which, I have no argument, one could
say they are philosophers "and" acknowledge reincarnation.
My main point is how dominating that "fact" is when developing ones
philosophy.
Theosophy comes to mind, but there is also a "non acknowledgers view" of
that perspective
In my opinion, people should live by what they can reasonably determine
to be correct. Things that can not be determined to be reasonably
correct should be left open to being possible, but absolute judgment
should be withheld.
I totally agree, while acknowledging that some are not developed enough to
embrace that logic.
We can observe which methods of determining things
tend to be more accurate than others, and so those are the methods we
should use. Simply guessing is empirically not a good way of learning
about anything, therefore, serious philosophy does not concern itself
with that.
There are however some very "conflicting" philosophies around. I cant
conceive anything more conflicting than this however.
Anyway, it is always a good idea to read other people's philosophy, or,
even better, people's ideas about logic, philosophy of the mind,
philosophy of language, and epistemology. These are the best ways to
come about learning or determining all other aspects of philosophy, in
my humble opinion.
Agreed. As I stated earlier , I have an "irrational" understnding of each
pov I come across.
So, do you have any reason for suspecting reincarnation, or does it
just sound appealing to you?
I have had enough evidence to put it beyond doubt. I have had enough
experience also to respect those who don't have the same evidence (or their
version).
Anecdotally (fwiw), since that reality opened up, there is nothing that
doesnt make sense to me anymore, and has improved my empathy with those who
dont see it.
There is a natural resistance to any breakthrough, particularly when an
individual has a great deal of vested interest in his current pov.
I often make ref to the "martyr syndrome" with good reason :-).
I really appreciate the nature of your response. There are a few here who
could take lessons in civility from you.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "minus" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 05:38:41 AM |
|
|
Many philosophers would argue that there is no way to determine such
things as God, the existence of others, ethical precepts, etc. via
philosophy, but philosphers have chimed in for centuries. There is no
reason why reincarnation could not be the subject of a philophical
discussion.
andy-k's question above, while similar to other philosophical questions
that do not relate to reincarnation, could open up one line of
discussion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 07:01:03 AM |
|
|
"minus" <underwearallthetime@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131709121.693308.44060@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Many philosophers would argue that there is no way to determine such
things as God, the existence of others, ethical precepts, etc. via
philosophy, but philosphers have chimed in for centuries. There is no
reason why reincarnation could not be the subject of a philophical
discussion.
andy-k's question above, while similar to other philosophical questions
that do not relate to reincarnation, could open up one line of
discussion.
Agreed min. Can you think of anything more fundemental than this subject?
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "minus" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 07:59:42 AM |
|
|
Not really, no.
It bleeds into questions like: What is the meaning of life? What is the
Self?
It implies a strong yes to the idea of the self continuing through
time.
It is to some degree at least an essentialist philosophy, despite the
fact that we in the west often associate it with Buddhism which, to me
at least, does not posit essentialism but rather passing and
inessential forms against an essential background.
It reframes relationships, especially if one believes that contacts and
important relations are being partially repeated from former lives and
patterns in this lives are variations on the theme of patterns in other
lives. This would make belief in reincarnation a metaethical and
metapsychological issue.
Or to look at it from the vantage of a believer in reincarnation, which
I am, belief that there is no reincarnation itself is a specific kind
of metaethics and metapsychology with its own implications about
meaning, selfhood, etc.
Reincarnation is not limited to the East, there are references to it in
Western mystical texts and I have heard that references to it were
removed from the Bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stu" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 06:19:30 PM |
|
|
On 2005-11-11 05:59:42 -0800, "minus" <underwearallthetime@hotmail.com> said:
Reincarnation is not limited to the East, there are references to it in
Western mystical texts and I have heard that references to it were
removed from the Bible.
I have read these interpretations as well. There is also evidence for
polytheism. But we have to go by the edited version of the bible,
everything else is speculation. And given the mythic fiction that is
the bible, adding speculation only muddles matters.
For the most part the bible suggests a cosmology were peoples souls are
firmly connected to their bodies. Two prophets ascend to heaven.
Elijah and Jesus. When Jesus goes they make a big deal of him moving
open a cave door so he can take his body with him. Elijah shares a
similar story. Supposedly when Judgement Day comes all the souls will
rise up in their bodies, in a "Night of the Living Dead" scenario. In
all cases, death is a one way ticket.
Some Kabbalists and Mystic xtians have some discussion of
reincarnation. But these are truly part of the most esoteric forms of
the religion. For mainstream Judeo-xtian believers, reincarnation is a
heresy.
--
~Stu
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "RyanT" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
10 Nov 2005 07:53:20 PM |
|
|
We'll most of us here are pretty steeped in the Westen philosophical
tradition. I don't particularly buy the idea either, but maybe a few
Eastern philosophers have had a few things to say about it.
There were enough philosophers who believed in God but that didn't seem
to impede their ability to come up with good ideas...
.
|
|
|
| User: "RyanT" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
14 Nov 2005 12:53:44 PM |
|
|
Huh? I was just pointing out that you love feeling sorry about
yourself. Nobody gives a *****, Mike.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stu" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
10 Nov 2005 10:03:15 PM |
|
|
On 2005-11-10 17:53:20 -0800, "RyanT" <yidijm@hotmail.com> said:
We'll most of us here are pretty steeped in the Westen philosophical
tradition. I don't particularly buy the idea either, but maybe a few
Eastern philosophers have had a few things to say about it.
There were enough philosophers who believed in God but that didn't seem
to impede their ability to come up with good ideas...
My understanding is that reincarnation is a belief so entrenched in
Eastern culture that it is accepted without question. The only texts I
have read about reincarnation deal with the law of Karma written for
westerners.
I do know that Socrates was a believer. I am not clear that
reincarnation was part of the Hellenistic religion. I don't know why
it would be any different than other polytheistic religions.
As for other Western philosophers, most who subscribed to Plato, were
devout xtians, Jews, or Muslims (think Thomas Aquinas, Maimonides,
Averroës). They generally used Plato's notions about reason, politics
and the immortal soul and wrote off all the
reincarnation-multiple-god-stuff to paganism.
Schopenhauer is an exception. He reinterpreted Kant's *a priori
knowledge* as reincarnation.
And Camus may have been a believer. He died just as he was beginning
to become interested in Eastern philosophy.
I am reserving my judgement about reincarnation until the next life.
--
~Stu
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 12:25:16 AM |
|
|
"Stu" <Nospam@towel.com> wrote in message
news:2005111020031516807%Nospam@towelcom...
On 2005-11-10 17:53:20 -0800, "RyanT" <yidijm@hotmail.com> said:
We'll most of us here are pretty steeped in the Westen philosophical
tradition. I don't particularly buy the idea either, but maybe a few
Eastern philosophers have had a few things to say about it.
There were enough philosophers who believed in God but that didn't seem
to impede their ability to come up with good ideas...
My understanding is that reincarnation is a belief so entrenched in
Eastern culture that it is accepted without question. The only texts I
have read about reincarnation deal with the law of Karma written for
westerners.
I do know that Socrates was a believer. I am not clear that reincarnation
was part of the Hellenistic religion. I don't know why it would be any
different than other polytheistic religions.
As for other Western philosophers, most who subscribed to Plato, were
devout xtians, Jews, or Muslims (think Thomas Aquinas, Maimonides,
Averroës). They generally used Plato's notions about reason, politics and
the immortal soul and wrote off all the reincarnation-multiple-god-stuff
to paganism.
Schopenhauer is an exception. He reinterpreted Kant's *a priori
knowledge* as reincarnation.
And Camus may have been a believer. He died just as he was beginning to
become interested in Eastern philosophy.
I am reserving my judgement about reincarnation until the next life.
--
~Stu
Thanks Stu.
Where did the Platonians believed the "immortal soul" hung out ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stu" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 05:37:17 PM |
|
|
On 2005-11-10 22:25:16 -0800, "Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> said:
"Stu" <Nospam@towel.com> wrote in message
news:2005111020031516807%Nospam@towelcom...
On 2005-11-10 17:53:20 -0800, "RyanT" <yidijm@hotmail.com> said:
We'll most of us here are pretty steeped in the Westen philosophical
tradition. I don't particularly buy the idea either, but maybe a few
Eastern philosophers have had a few things to say about it.
There were enough philosophers who believed in God but that didn't seem
to impede their ability to come up with good ideas...
My understanding is that reincarnation is a belief so entrenched in
Eastern culture that it is accepted without question. The only texts I
have read about reincarnation deal with the law of Karma written for
westerners.
I do know that Socrates was a believer. I am not clear that
reincarnation was part of the Hellenistic religion. I don't know why
it would be any different than other polytheistic religions.
As for other Western philosophers, most who subscribed to Plato, were
devout xtians, Jews, or Muslims (think Thomas Aquinas, Maimonides,
Averroës). They generally used Plato's notions about reason, politics
and the immortal soul and wrote off all the
reincarnation-multiple-god-stuff to paganism.
Schopenhauer is an exception. He reinterpreted Kant's *a priori
knowledge* as reincarnation.
And Camus may have been a believer. He died just as he was beginning
to become interested in Eastern philosophy.
I am reserving my judgement about reincarnation until the next life.
--
~Stu
Thanks Stu.
Where did the Platonians believed the "immortal soul" hung out ?
Aristotle thought the brain was an organ designed to cool the blood.
As in most cultures they believed the immortal soul resided in the
heart area. If you ask a child of ancient China or Africa where their
"self" is they will point to their hearts. This habit of thinking the
"Self" resides in the brain is a 19th century notion.
Much of Plato's philosophy is about the concept of "The Forms". This
is where ideals reside. It is the place for Pythagorean mathematical
truths about the world, it is also the place where ideals like truth,
courage, piety, goodness reside. I don't remember if Plato ever had a
specific space for The Forms or the soul. Interestingly towards the
end of his career he began to doubt this thesis.
Plotinus who interpreted Plato around 200 CE had a terrific cosmology
based on Platonic thought. If I remember right it, there where four
nested spheres, "The One" in the center. Around this orbited another
sphere called "The Divine Mind/Intellegence". And outside this rotated
"The Soul". On the very outside of these nested spheres were the faces
of humans looking out into the physical space.
--
~Stu
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "babylee" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 09:30:27 PM |
|
|
I watched a program about epigenesis last week. Horizon, BBC 2, I
think.
The tag on genes is either switched off or on depending on the
experiences of the parents/grandparents. In other words, we don't just
inherit the looks/mannerisms/health etc from our ancestors, we also
inherit their feelings. It's not reincarnation per se but it could
explain why some people feel that they have been here before.
After watching it, I asked my husband to give up smoking. He hasn't
yet. He is trying.
babylee
.
|
|
|
| User: "babylee" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 09:36:09 PM |
|
|
here is the link for the epigenetics programme on Horizon
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/ghostgenes.shtml
babylee
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Miller" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
10 Nov 2005 07:46:18 PM |
|
|
I would say that most people would agree that reincarnation, pro or con, is
firmly in the realm of religious dogma, not philosophy per se.
But what sort of impression do you hope to create by beginning with the
admission that you have not read much philosophy?
Scott
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
I get the impression, some are all about self awareness (the pro reincs.),
and the bal are about society shaping, the anti's).
I never felt the urge to read beyond "Socrates Last Days" by Plato.
Everything, since that reading 25 yrs ago, has been a continual flow of
confirmation.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 01:10:05 AM |
|
|
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:%VRcf.6463$GT3.2001@fe02.lga...
I would say that most people would agree that reincarnation, pro or con, is
firmly in the realm of religious dogma, not philosophy per se.
Dogma is dogma. Either you have first hand knowledge or you dont.
But what sort of impression do you hope to create by beginning with the
admission that you have not read much philosophy?
Scott
Admission ???
To you, possibly a sense of superiority. To open minded people, a suggestion
that philosophy comes from within ; that ultimately 'we each write our own'.
When I do come into contact with different 'streams', I invariably have an
understanding of thier perspective, which is why I see confirmation very
differently to information.
BOfL
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
I get the impression, some are all about self awareness (the pro
reincs.),
and the bal are about society shaping, the anti's).
I never felt the urge to read beyond "Socrates Last Days" by Plato.
Everything, since that reading 25 yrs ago, has been a continual flow of
confirmation.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miller" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 08:22:14 AM |
|
|
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:htXcf.14544$Hj2.14283@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:%VRcf.6463$GT3.2001@fe02.lga...
I would say that most people would agree that reincarnation, pro or con,
is
firmly in the realm of religious dogma, not philosophy per se.
Dogma is dogma. Either you have first hand knowledge or you dont.
But what sort of impression do you hope to create by beginning with the
admission that you have not read much philosophy?
Scott
Admission ???
To you, possibly a sense of superiority. To open minded people, a
suggestion
that philosophy comes from within ; that ultimately 'we each write our
own'.
When I do come into contact with different 'streams', I invariably have an
understanding of thier perspective, which is why I see confirmation very
differently to information.
BOfL
I think you use a definition of philosophy that is uncommon. Most people
would not define it so narrowly as to include only their own personal take
on whatever information comes thier way. But I appreciate the difference
between confirmation and swallowing everything whole that comes along.
I would like to emphasize that for confirmation to not be wholly subjective,
one needs to allow for a certian amount of digestion before making a final
decision on what stream is valid or not. Just because you write something
of your own, it is not necessarily the last word.
Scott
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brian Fletcher" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 07:16:07 AM |
|
|
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:Z10df.8458$GT3.3277@fe02.lga...
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:htXcf.14544$Hj2.14283@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:%VRcf.6463$GT3.2001@fe02.lga...
I would say that most people would agree that reincarnation, pro or con,
is
firmly in the realm of religious dogma, not philosophy per se.
Dogma is dogma. Either you have first hand knowledge or you dont.
But what sort of impression do you hope to create by beginning with the
admission that you have not read much philosophy?
Scott
Admission ???
To you, possibly a sense of superiority. To open minded people, a
suggestion
that philosophy comes from within ; that ultimately 'we each write our
own'.
When I do come into contact with different 'streams', I invariably have
an
understanding of thier perspective, which is why I see confirmation very
differently to information.
BOfL
I think you use a definition of philosophy that is uncommon.
But far from unique. Many are reluctant to express their views. With the
understanding, comes a sense of self protection (been there, done that).
Most people
would not define it so narrowly as to include only their own personal take
on whatever information comes thier way.
Narrowness is of course, relative, but there are some (metaphysically known
as) grand divisions.
Biblically (I'm not a Bible basher btw), seek ye first the "kingdom" and all
things will be added onto you.
All philosophers ONLY include their own personal take on what comes their
way How else could it be?
Again, I'm not talking about 'believers' as such.
But I appreciate the difference
between confirmation and swallowing everything whole that comes along.
I would like to emphasize that for confirmation to not be wholly
subjective,
one needs to allow for a certian amount of digestion before making a final
decision on what stream is valid or not. Just because you write something
of your own, it is not necessarily the last word.
Love the language, and how it has evolved.:-)
It is the last word...so far. The next word is yet to 'arrive'. There is a
time where the individual "transends" (I hate the word also :) the external
source of knowledg, and actually conceeds that the source was never external
in the first place.
The opening up of world of genetics was just more evidence of this whole
process.(to those who already knew of the reality of "life after life".
Science has already "connected" with metaphysical reality.(Someone should
tell George hehehe)... But many "fish" are still searching for the ocean.
Not an arrogant statement, but can totally understand why some would think
so.
Been there, done that :)
BOfL
Scott
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miller" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 09:31:03 PM |
|
|
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:rQ0df.15017$Hj2.11147@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:Z10df.8458$GT3.3277@fe02.lga...
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:htXcf.14544$Hj2.14283@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:%VRcf.6463$GT3.2001@fe02.lga...
I would say that most people would agree that reincarnation, pro or
con,
is
firmly in the realm of religious dogma, not philosophy per se.
Dogma is dogma. Either you have first hand knowledge or you dont.
But what sort of impression do you hope to create by beginning with
the
admission that you have not read much philosophy?
Scott
Admission ???
To you, possibly a sense of superiority. To open minded people, a
suggestion
that philosophy comes from within ; that ultimately 'we each write our
own'.
When I do come into contact with different 'streams', I invariably have
an
understanding of thier perspective, which is why I see confirmation
very
differently to information.
BOfL
I think you use a definition of philosophy that is uncommon.
But far from unique. Many are reluctant to express their views. With the
understanding, comes a sense of self protection (been there, done that).
Most people
would not define it so narrowly as to include only their own personal
take
on whatever information comes thier way.
Narrowness is of course, relative, but there are some (metaphysically
known
as) grand divisions.
Biblically (I'm not a Bible basher btw), seek ye first the "kingdom" and
all
things will be added onto you.
All philosophers ONLY include their own personal take on what comes their
way How else could it be?
Again, I'm not talking about 'believers' as such.
But I appreciate the difference
between confirmation and swallowing everything whole that comes along.
I would like to emphasize that for confirmation to not be wholly
subjective,
one needs to allow for a certian amount of digestion before making a
final
decision on what stream is valid or not. Just because you write
something
of your own, it is not necessarily the last word.
Love the language, and how it has evolved.:-)
It is the last word...so far. The next word is yet to 'arrive'. There is a
time where the individual "transends" (I hate the word also :) the
external
source of knowledg, and actually conceeds that the source was never
external
in the first place.
The opening up of world of genetics was just more evidence of this whole
process.(to those who already knew of the reality of "life after life".
Science has already "connected" with metaphysical reality.(Someone should
tell George hehehe)... But many "fish" are still searching for the ocean.
Not an arrogant statement, but can totally understand why some would think
so.
Been there, done that :)
!
Scott
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wordsmith" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 01:46:00 PM |
|
|
Agreed. Reincarnation relies more on faith than reason.
W : )
.
|
|
|
| User: "minus" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
12 Nov 2005 06:44:45 AM |
|
|
Faith has always seem an empty word to me. I will believe it despite
logic or my experience.
My belief is based on experience.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Miller" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
12 Nov 2005 07:05:39 AM |
|
|
All knowledge owes its existence to faith.
Scott
"minus" <underwearallthetime@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1131799485.096878.91830@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Faith has always seem an empty word to me. I will believe it despite
logic or my experience.
My belief is based on experience.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Milan" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
12 Nov 2005 07:30:36 AM |
|
|
"Miller" <chumley702@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:EMldf.20402$7s1.17360@fe04.lga...
All knowledge owes its existence to faith.
Scott
No.
Milan
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "andy-k" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
10 Nov 2005 11:13:53 PM |
|
|
What is it that is supposed to transmigrate?
"Brian Fletcher" <brianf8@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message
news:kKRcf.14308$Hj2.1810@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
Not having read much philosophy ( I prefer to write my own), I'm curious
about the % of established (published?) philosophers who acknowlege
reincarnation.(or transmigration of soul).
I get the impression, some are all about self awareness (the pro reincs.),
and the bal are about society shaping, the anti's).
I never felt the urge to read beyond "Socrates Last Days" by Plato.
Everything, since that reading 25 yrs ago, has been a continual flow of
confirmation.
BOfL
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stu" |
|
| Title: Re: .Acknowleging reincarnation. |
11 Nov 2005 06:06:53 PM |
|
|
On 2005-11-10 21:13:53 -0800, "andy-k" <spam.free@last> said:
What is it that is supposed to transmigrate?
I have heard a whole spectrum of answers to this. In one Hindu
scenario the whole personality moves on. Since historically, Indian
society is strongly striated with the caste system. One moves up the
hierarchy by performing well in this life. This myth works well to
keep the populace in line and happy with their lot in life.
Buddhists dumped the cast system. Still, after death a human is bound
to repeating the cycle. Buddhism puts a low value on the individual
unlike our society. An individual in Buddhist society strives towards
Dharma, which is the duty he has to his family and community. So,
again a good Buddhist is going to subject himself to the rule of Dharma
in order to move up through society through transmigration. There are
myths of Buddhist leaders, who can be identified in their next life by
examining children. Buddhist judges have tests to see if these new
children were in fact old leaders.
This conflicts with Buddha himself, who left his family to pursue an
answer to how to stop suffering. He had little respect for his Dharma
as an Indian Prince. The result of this conflict is that there is a
tension in the way Buddhist approach reincarnation. Some take it to be
the personality moving to the next body, other sects see the self
melding into the great Self after death, and then taking on a new form
of life. Much like water evaporates from a lake, condenses in a cloud,
and rains into a new lake. What transmigrates in this scenario is much
more amorphous than "soul" or character.
I must say that when one spends some time in meditation, and begins to
experience a dis-identification with the self. One begins to see that
they are part of a oness. Limitless in the infinite here and now.
However I am still of the mind that the jump from this observation to a
story about transmigration is a leap of faith I am not willing to take.
--
~Stu
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
