1. ## Probabilities of reincarnation?

Reincarnation might exist, or it might not. The later would give us the situation the demon spoke of in Nietzsches writings, about having to relive the same life again & again. If were to be impartial about things, its 50/50% if reincarnation exists or not. Either it does, or it doesnt. I, for one, cant imagine any other possibilities so its either/or. Assuming it does exist, what other probabilities are we faced with?
Reincarnating into this same universe, or not. By another universe I mean one with different laws of physics.

Reincarnating into the same timeline of the same universe, or not. Quantum mechanics wouldve it that even if the laws of physics are unchanged, there are multiple potential parallel dimensions of this universe. Is there any reason to believe multiple universes can exist at once? Perhaps this universe has to live its full lifespan before any othe universe comes into being. But one may be able to skip that if reincarnation goes forward or backwards in time.

Reincarnating backwards, forwards or smoothly in time. Well differentiate forwards in time from smoothly by how forward jumps from the point of death till some future point (for example a decade), while if smooth, youd reincarnate instantly after your death. So if you died in in year 2000 8:00 pm, youll reincarnate at that exact same time too.

However, arent we faced with the possibility it might not be the time of our deaths that determined when we will reincarnate? Perhaps it is at the midpoint between our death & birth at which we reincarnate? So if you were born in 2010, died in 2020 youd reincarnate in 2015. Or one might reincarnate after ones birth, so whoever was born immediatelty after you, you would reincarnate as. It doesnt have to be physical birth btw, because as the abortion debate shows theres so much controversy surrounding all of that. If theres a soul (which reincarnation needs) then there might be some point where the soul "merges" with the body (or perhaps the soul manifests itself physically, who knows) so we can speculate that instead of physical birth in this paragraph.

What about location? Is one as likely to reincarnate here as one is to reincarnate somewhere else in the universe, assuming other intelligent lifeforms exist out there? What about ones birth place & place of death? Is there any reason to think one would reincarnate at the same places one died or was born? or that there might be some midpoint thing again, for example if one was born in London & died in Paris, one would reincarnate somewhere between them? Or, one might reincarnate anywhere but at the exact point where one was born, died, or just have been throughout ones life. Or one may be limited to reincarnating anywhere one has been to throughout ones life.

Could one possibly be reincarnated as a lower lifeform, like an animal? I have a hard time seeing myself with much weaker cognitive faculties; it just seems like that wouldnt even be me.
What about the death method - should one prefer cremation or burning to death over preserving the body? One could speculate the soul has an easier to time moving on when the body is destroyed, but couldnt it just as easily be the other way around?
If one reincarnates into another, totally different world, some would imagine that to be hell, some would imagine it to be heaven. But these are extreme worlds. Wouldnt it be more likely for sth in between to be where one ends up?

Is there a reason to believe there might be different "soul types"? If so, then it might not be a coincidence that one has the biological mother & father one has. Perhaps this explains why some reject implants too. I know therere scientific reasons for that but if we knew more about reincarnation then that might be scientific too after all & be connected to genes, etc. If such soul types exist, are some types inherently given to reincarnating in particular ways over the others?

Theres also the chances theres some luck involved to. So, if one wanted to change universes one would have to try a few times before succeeding.

Is there any reason at all to assume that humans, or perhaps other beings affect the reincarnation probabilities in any way, shape or form? For example, some conspiracy theorists would have it that conspirators have access to magic, & one application of magic would ofc be to manipulate reincarnation. Our planet, if life is viewed from a dramatic, literary, genre-based, etc perspective, does appear far more sinister & "conspiratorial" then, say, a world which only has pristine nature, innocence, & natural cycles every year, with no "history/metanarratives" & no top secret informations. OTOH, couldnt our world appearing like so all just be a coincidence, or, if theres a creator (of the universe), be a a prank/red herring? The same could be applied to those who claim those who live virtuously are heaven-bound in the afterlife, couldnt it just as easily be the opposite, that is, the vicious going to heaven, or no correlation at all that is purely random where people end up? Could simply desiring to reincarnating in one way over another give one the power to do so?

Overall, with all these considerations to take into account, if one wanted to be reincarnated in an universe totally different from this one, is there a reason to favor one way of dying over another? One location to die in than another? One time to die then another? Outside of these, are there any other factors that should be taken into account? I know only a little about probability theory & I know one of the main questions is the treatment of priors. Bayesian decides on priors before? & there are multiple other approaches to probability but perhaps that might not be relevant to this thread. I was hoping one of you have the insight to determine if it has.

A final question, are multiple lives, at least for the individual, inevitable simply because he can imagine it? Is sth bound to happen, given enough time, as long as one can imagine it? Fantasy comes from the unconscious, perhaps the unconscious is simply what is far removed from us in space, time & other dimensions. Going by that, our fantasies of all these other worlds could be interpreted as these worlds "calling" to us or "echoing/reverberating" thru to us, yes? The downside of this, ofc, is that one will experience all the boredom one has ever imagined as well as the worst of tortures one has imagined... unless theres some "rule" or whatever that locks out these, but one can imagine a time when this rule wont exist anymore too, so....

2. William. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, let's say we simply won't ever find evidence, thus it comes down to probability. This makes sense, for how could you possibly gather indubitable evidence on the afterlife? As you say, it might be 2%, 80%, etc. We can't say 100% or 0% tho, as we don't know for sure, neither against or for. The average of everything from & including 1% to & including 99% is 50/50%.

idk about a soul living in multiple bodies, seems bizarre to me.

as for bayes, what about other approaches?: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...raw-data/page2

edit:

the russell teapot https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot, unlike reincarnation could theoretically be verified w/ epistemically objective methods like seeing thru telescopes & sending probes, but reincarnation may still metaphysically objectively exist, yes? Before we didn't know of UV rays, but now have epistemically objective verification. Wouldn't reincarnation depend on epistemic subjectivity to know for sure?

rationale austhink.com/rationale2.0/ib/exercises/tok/objective_subjective.htm:
Roughly speaking, 'objective' means 'independent of the individual', and 'subjective' means 'pertaining to the individual, or peculiar to a particular personal perspective on the world'.

We apply these terms in two very different ways:
Firstly, we use the terms to talk about two ways that things exist. We do this to make metaphysical claims - claims about what is real or has being, or in what sense something exists.
Metaphysically objective things exist independently of being experienced.
Metaphysically subjective things are those whose existence depends on their being experienced.

Secondly, we can apply these terms to talk about two different kinds of knowledge. When we do this we're making epistemological claims - claims about how we know things.
Epistemically objective statements have a truth value decided by public methods.
Epistemically subjective statements have a truth value decided by reference to individual perspectives.

3. Either it is or isnt, in some ways, is adequate representation of odds. However, in this case, there might be variables or options not added into the equation. For instance, nothing happens after death or heaven or hell. If all are mutually exclusive and equally possible (in this case, the absence of evidence does allow for equally possible), its one in four, more than 50/50.

In my opinion, the variety of the unknown and the infinite variations found in the universe of just about anything leads my probabilities to the land of 1 out of infinity, moreso than 50/50. The same with every option. Odds are, everything everyone has ever thought about the afterlife, is wrong.

4. heaven & hell I count as being under the 50% that says sth happens after death, opposing nothing aka eternal return.

5. Here`s another dilemma. Say you had sth you wished to share with your potential future or smooth reincarnation in same universe, on same timeline. However, sharing it would entail some practical effort, which ideally one would want to skip, but in this scenario, one cannot eat & have cake. Rationally, should one go thru the effort? After all, it is possible one reincarnates in future or smooth senses, in same universe, on same timeline. But then again, there might be a rule which says youĺl reincarnate into ANY timeline but this one. Should one go thru the effort despite this possibility simply because of the sheer chance of one reincarnating in future or smooth senses, in same universe, on same timeline?

6. Another question: we know for sure THIS world exists due to own experience. By experience, we know time moves linearly forward. Based on this, is it more likely that reincarnation happens in future or smooth senses, in same universe, on same timeline? The alternative is that all bets are off upon death. Since death is the great unknown, does it make more sense to assume all bets are off? Or is this another 50/50%?

7. Based on what we have observed about energy conservation, reincarnation in any meaningful way is impossible: we do not move onto any higher plane or return in some form without something being lost. We may return in some form, but our sentience as we know it goes, making such a comeback meaningless to us.

We should not live our lives on the expectation of something happening that there is zero evidence for.

8. in the view that makes sense to me, reincarnation is propelled by one's karma, a cosmic force propelling you in certain directions. every action/thought/choice etc. of yours adds to your karma, and it's kind of like your spiritual rudder. unfortunately in each lifetime there's already a lot of momentum built up from the previous lives and so you kind of just have to play a lot of it out (there's a drag force), but you can make for a better direction by adding more "good karma" through your choices/thoughts/acts.

"bad karma" isn't evil but involves acts that get you even more stuck in the cycle of reincarnation (evil acts involve more desire and grasping and so they are the worst), and the consequences are thus experienced as greater suffering (in the current lifetime and/or in future ones). "good karma" moves you towards an exit of the cycle of reincarnation, and so the more good karma accrued, the less suffering for you. it doesn't always work out linearly though. for instance, perhaps you were an evil bastard 10 lifetimes ago, and have been a beacon of benevolence in the ones that followed. the bad karma from your evil lifetime may not come up until a great many rebirths later (probably because of the good karma preceding it and the direction it had set you on), although you may be able to "burn off" some of the bad karma in the meantime (which i wonder if that's just really making compensating course corrections).

i think maybe in this view, after death you float without direction, propelled by everything from your past (you lose your rudder), and that's terrifying. you're desperate to get back to the physical existence just to regain some control and ability to make sense of things again (or whatever the sources for your grasping). how long you float about lost may depend (on what, i'm not sure). perhaps after a dreadful suicide in your last life, you float about in soul shell shock for 100 years before finally "deciding" to be reborn. and many belief systems have other realms you could be reborn in, like hell realms, and so you could blip out of this particular physical realm for millennia even. mainly i think it's all the product of past karma and choices.

and actually, if there are infinite dimensions repeating everywhere with every possibility ever, well, there's little limit to the horrible or wonderful places you could be reborn into. you could pop into any place in the universe, or any dimension. i don't know if you could pop into any time in the past too.

(ps: i don't necessarily believe in any of this.)

9. Is there even a "you" that could re-incarnate to begin with?

That's the real question.

10. Originally Posted by inumbra
in the view that makes sense to me, reincarnation is propelled by one's karma, a cosmic force propelling you in certain directions. every action/thought/choice etc. of yours adds to your karma, and it's kind of like your spiritual rudder. unfortunately in each lifetime there's already a lot of momentum built up from the previous lives and so you kind of just have to play a lot of it out (there's a drag force), but you can make for a better direction by adding more "good karma" through your choices/thoughts/acts.

"bad karma" isn't evil but involves acts that get you even more stuck in the cycle of reincarnation (evil acts involve more desire and grasping and so they are the worst), and the consequences are thus experienced as greater suffering (in the current lifetime and/or in future ones). "good karma" moves you towards an exit of the cycle of reincarnation, and so the more good karma accrued, the less suffering for you. it doesn't always work out linearly though. for instance, perhaps you were an evil bastard 10 lifetimes ago, and have been a beacon of benevolence in the ones that followed. the bad karma from your evil lifetime may not come up until a great many rebirths later (probably because of the good karma preceding it and the direction it had set you on), although you may be able to "burn off" some of the bad karma in the meantime (which i wonder if that's just really making compensating course corrections).
e are infinite dimensions repeating everywhere with every possibility ever, well, there's little limit to the horrible or wonderful places you could be reborn into. you could pop into any place in the universe, or any dimension. i don't know if you could pop into any time in the past too.
Nah, enlightenment is always available no matter what the karmic imprints.

11. Originally Posted by wacey
Nah, enlightenment is always available no matter what the karmic imprints.