Which one is the normal way of things?

[Lynnette]

If you were to take a large, representative sample of the population and regress them, what would be the norm? Would the majority be able to remember things/regress? Or would only a few be able to do so?

In which case, say the former was true, and therefore suggestive of the fact that being able to regress was the norm, why do so few people remember? and second, why should there be such opposition to the concept?

....and if the latter was to be held, that only a minority of that population were regressable, and therefore suggestive of the fact that regression was an anomolay or abnormal concept? Then why do some people regress, or dream, or have visions, which can be verified, if in fact this is not a normal variance of the human population?

Then, taking the former view again, that it is normal? Why do we regress? why do we have dreams or visions? what is it for? why do some folk struggle to remember and may not remember anything at all, while others have to work hard to remember, and yet others have dreams and visions and recalls quite spontaneously?

And once again, taking the latter view... then why is it some people do so, and to truth?

????

 

[stardis]

Hi Lynnette.

If you were to take a large, representative sample of the population and regress them, what would be the norm? Would the majority be able to remember things/regress? Or would only a few be able to do so?

I would expect that most everyone would have some sort of experience but that experience would be an internal or inner experience and only the individual experiencing those internal events could apply meaning to them. I suspect that the meaning that people would give to inner experience would depend to a large degree on what their belief system is. The statistics and details would have to be gathered through self-reporting and that is a questionable method. That people have internal experiences which can be called past life experiences is not in doubt, but the accuracy of those memories or visions can become subject to scrutiny. It is important to realize that absolutely everything that we human beings know is filtered through a mechanism called the human mind and that is something that we know very little about.


Also, consider that reality - whether this reality that we are sharing right now or some other reality that we can only speculate about - may not be experienced in exactly the same way by everyone or even any two people. The facts or details of some other event that is possibly past life related would probably not be reported in the same way by different people and would be be subject to misinterpretation.


If you recalled being in a green room when you passed away in your past life but the historical record stated that you died in a brown painted room, who is to say what the truth really was. I can assure you that few people see color exactly the same way and while they can agree on a detail in general, they can each make an argument on the specific details. The entire picture can become clouded and whether you were ever there can become suspect. The historical facts of the past should never be the final arbiter but rather just a piece of the puzzle.


Also, consider a possibility that is in no way universally held: that all of your lifetimes are occurring simultaneously in a "timeless now". Don't ask me how that would work because I certainly don't know - but why not "think outside the box" and let your imagination visit places that you didn't know existed. In a reality of simultaneous lifetimes, facts and details may be very hard to pin down.


In short, there is no way to reach an agreement on what the "norm" would be. All experience is internal and what experience we do share may not be experienced in exactly the same way.

... why do some folk struggle to remember and may not remember anything at all, while others have to work hard to remember, and yet others have dreams and visions and recalls quite spontaneously?

Maybe they try too hard. I read once that when you want something really bad you can't have it, but when you no longer want it, you can have it. I think there is some truth to that.

 

[Rod]

I, too, have wondered...


The question has run through my mind on occasion. Could most people, with some encouragement, access any memories or details of their past lives. This is something that could be easily determined, but would require a large unbiased study.


Since I have learned about reincarnation through finding details of my own past lives, I have shared this information with various friends, family, and acquaintances. While only a few others specifically said "yes, I have past-life memories", many more admitted that certain dreams, thoughts, or preferences fit the patterns I described, even though they had never considered the possibility that past lives were involved.


While it is not possible to know, at this time, the exact answer to your questions. It is reasonable to conclude that many people have past-life knowledge that they disregard due to a societal rejection of serious consideration for the concept. Thus if we can do the right research, show enough cases, etc. to bring the idea to widespread popular thinking, many more people will recognise things they see now but do not notice.


...Rod

 

[stardis]

I think that's the heart of it - people who don't think about or believe in reincarnation will have a different explanation for some of their experiences compared with those who do.

Yes, in my opinion, that is probably true, but it doesn't just stop with past life experiences. I think that every subjective experience that we have can be interpreted in a variety of ways and that no one interpretation can be considered more valid than another. For instance, psychic experiences like premonitions, are to me the brain calculating all possible outcomes of an event that may happen; to someone else, the premonition is the seeing of the future; to some people there is no such thing as a premonition; etc...


This tendency to interpret includes about everything in our lives. The danger in interpretation is when we let other people interpret for us. When someone says that you did not see a UFO, as an example, and then attempt to prove that you did not see one, then you might as well be in a cult-like church being brainwashed into believing the "approved" version of events.


Most everything is subjective experience and the ability to decide for yourself what is valid to you is a precious gift that you should claim as your right as a human being and not be unduly influenced by others because they don't really have any greater understanding than you do yourself.

 

[stardis]

And I would like to add just a little bit to the above post I made. When we pick something apart that is a belief held by another human being, we are doing something that is really quite contemptible. It is not the right of anyone to claim superior knowledge about something and then use that claim to destroy another person's ideas or beliefs.


I am thinking in particular about three incidents, in this forum, where I did that to someone and I very much regret doing that. It is just wrong to treat another human being that way. I wish that I could go back and redo my conversation with those people because in the scheme of things it was a petty thing to do and accomplished nothing in the long run. In fact, I consider that a great negative for me because I have tried to build people up since I consider all of us to be the same thing: a spark of the original Consciousness.


It is really difficult at times to be a nice person but a good start is to be respectful of others experience because they are equal to us in every way.

 

[torrd25]

Some people remember some do not.


Hi,


The way I understand it, everyone has different capability in remembering. Even in the very same life.


Say in a classroom. The lecturer teaches the same topic and


content, yet some student can remember what has been taught better than others. If we apply this further to life after life, I guess there is no mystery.


Also, I think a carefree person might recall less. A careful & more sensitive person might remember more.


From what I read, generally if a person die of old age, they tend to remember less. Tragic or Joyous ocassions tends to get imprinted in the mind stronger and can be remembered more easily. Again this does not apply to every case because for some people their ability to remember stuff is just stronger than others.


Torrd

 

[dlorde]

This tendency to interpret includes about everything in our lives. The danger in interpretation is when we let other people interpret for us. When someone says that you did not see a UFO, as an example, and then attempt to prove that you did not see one, then you might as well be in a cult-like church being brainwashed into believing the "approved" version of events.

I agree with your description of the different ways we perceive and interpret things, but it's important to distinguish between the perception and the interpretation. If you see a UFO, you have seen something you couldn't identify that seemed to be flying. That's the perception, and it can't really be argued, because it's your raw data. The interpretation is another matter. Someone can attempt to show that it probably wasn't a bird, or aliens, or that it might have been a mirage or a reflection, or whatever, and you're entitled to make up your own mind - but it's important to consider all the possibilities before doing so. For example, jumping straight to 'it's aliens' just because you wish it was, without considering the alternatives, would be unjustified.

Most everything is subjective experience and the ability to decide for yourself what is valid to you is a precious gift that you should claim as your right as a human being and not be unduly influenced by others because they don't really have any greater understanding than you do yourself.

I agree with that, with the emphasis on 'unduly influenced', and always assuming that the relevant others don't have any greater understanding than you do yourself. If you looked up and saw a UFO, and your pilot friend said "Oh look, that's characteristic of the sun glinting off a Sikorsky CH-53 helicopter flying a standard ground search pattern..." would you consider that interpretation no more valid than your own?

 

[dlorde]

When we pick something apart that is a belief held by another human being, we are doing something that is really quite contemptible. It is not the right of anyone to claim superior knowledge about something and then use that claim to destroy another person's ideas or beliefs.

Surely that depends on the belief? If someone believes a child is a witch because the cows died of disease, or that HIV/AIDS isn't transmitted by unprotected sex, isn't there a duty to try and dispel that belief? I agree that if you want someone to change their beliefs, you must be very careful and try to carry them with you - and a reasoned explanation doesn't always work; as someone said, it's hard to reason someone out of a belief they didn't reason themselves into...

It is really difficult at times to be a nice person but a good start is to be respectful of others experience because they are equal to us in every way.

The way I see it, we all have equal rights (and right to respect), but if we were all equal in every way life would be dull indeed. We all have different skills, abilities and experience, and potentials that we have realised to different extents.

 

[Sunniva]

Guys


I see the same discussion going on in different threads now...Could you please discuss Lynnette's question or continue the discussion in the Debunker-thread?


Thanks :thumbsup:

 

[stardis]

Surely that depends on the belief? If someone believes a child is a witch because the cows died of disease, or that HIV/AIDS isn't transmitted by unprotected sex, isn't there a duty to try and dispel that belief? I agree that if you want someone to change their beliefs, you must be very careful and try to carry them with you - and a reasoned explanation doesn't always work; as someone said, it's hard to reason someone out of a belief they didn't reason themselves into...
The way I see it, we all have equal rights (and right to respect), but if we were all equal in every way life would be dull indeed. We all have different skills, abilities and experience, and potentials that we have realised to different extents.

Well, I would have thought that you could see that I am generalizing about the philosophical beliefs that people have about the nature of reality. But, since this must be a difficult thing for you, let me state that talking about every aspect of every belief would indeed become tedious and beyond my ability.


Please, don't try try to pin me down with questions about unprotected sex! :freak:


The way I see it, is that if we were all skeptics the world would be a very dull place. I mean, who could we argue with? I suppose the ignorant (such as myself) people of the world were put here to provide the intelligentsia with something to do - must be my karma, eh? Oh, what do you think of karma, btw? (Probably keep you busy for a few hours formulating a 500 line response - just kidding! You are a super funny person!

 

[dlorde]

Well, I would have thought that you could see that I am generalizing about the philosophical beliefs that people have about the nature of reality.

Sorry, as an ex-programmer, I tend to have a very pedantic and literal approach to these kinds of discussions - it saves misunderstandings and talking at cross-purposes

The way I see it, is that if we were all skeptics the world would be a very dull place. I mean, who could we argue with?

Oh absolutely! Variety is the spice, and all that :thumbsup:

Oh, what do you think of karma, btw?

I don't really know enough about it to comment

You are a super funny person!

I'm glad someone thinks so! :angel:

 

[Lynnette]

Hi, thank you all for your answers to my question here, though I didn't realise when I wrote it that I would spark off quite such debate/discussion. Although, I am sure that can only be a good thing - as long as it doesn't turn arguementative, since that would serve nobody's purpose, and I would hate to be associated with any kind of violence :cool


Tord 25, I really like the way you have illustrated your answer. The classroom analogy paints a perfect view for me. Thanks!


I suppose that really there is not yet any definite answer to my questions, though I posed it hoping for some good thoughts to ponder on. But I guess in the end all I can wonder is what? why? what? 'Cause despite my quetionings, experience has told me I should/do believe in something, but I just don't entirely know in what! : angel