Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!ucbvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper
From: cooper@pbsvax.DEC (Topher Cooper HLO2-3/M08 DTN225-5819)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Reincarnation.
Message-ID: <676@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 3-Oct-85 13:27:26 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.676
Posted: Thu Oct  3 13:27:26 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 4-Oct-85 06:49:50 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 48

Actually, to complicate the issue somewhat, there IS objective evidence
(I said evidence, NOT proof) for reincarnation.  The most complete body
of such evidence that I know of can be found in the following books.  All
are by Dr. Ian Stevenson, all are published by the University Press of Virginia.

    _Twenty Cases Suggestive of Reincarnation_, 1980
    _Cases of the Reincarnation Type_ ...
	_Vol. 1: Ten Cases in India_, 1975
	_Vol. 2: Ten Cases in Sri Lanka_, 1978
	_Vol. 3: Twelve Cases in Lebanon & Turkey_, 1980
	_Vol. 4: Twelve Cases in Thailand & Burma_, 1983

I must admit that I have only skimmed these books, and read papers which
discussed them.  What they deal with are cases where a small child appears to
have memories which "belong" to some deceased person.  Such stories are, of
course, common and are very poor evidence.  These cases have, however, been
carefully investigated: extensive interviews with everyone involved, claims
checked and compared, possible ways the child could have learned the relevant
facts investigated.

The result is a body of case reports, the "simplest", most straight-forward
explanation for which is reincarnation.  The problem is, of course, that there
are other, more complex explanations.  If reincarnation is considered a priori
"not unlikely", then this would probably be good enough evidence to establish
it as "scientific fact."

This is relevant to the discussion of Occam's razor: which is multiplying
the number of entities more; reincarnation, which seems to contradict a
number of successful metaphysical world-views (Materialism and variants); or
the materialist alternate theories which involve assuming, without independent
evidence, such entities as widespread, complex conspiracies, created for no
noticeable gain?

My own belief?  Thank you for asking.  I am a materialist who believes that
there are certain as yet unexplained, but ultimately physically explainable,
phenomena which are referred to as psi.  I think that these cases illustrate
an aspect of psi (specifically ESP), which is, that under completely unknown
conditions, it manifests at a level much higher than has ever been demonstrated
in the laboratory.  This is known in parapsychology as the "super-psi"
hypothesis.

		Topher Cooper

USENET: ...{allegra,decvax,ihnp4,ucbvax}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-pbsvax!cooper
ARPA/CSNET: cooper%pbsvax.DEC@decwrl

Disclaimer:  This contains my own opinions, and I am solely responsible for
them.