Atheists that believe in reincarnation?

[Red Rabbit]

Buddhists aside, are there any atheists that believe in reincarnation? Perhaps any that are here?

Reason I'm asking, you' don't have to believe in a god to still believe in reincarnation, similarly to Buddhism, so I'm curious if there's any non-Buddhist atheists that do believe in it.

If you do, would you say it's more akin to the Buddhist view of rebirth, or more like in Hinduism, or completely different?

[The Jay]

I don't know any personally, and I was a part of an Atheist/Agnostic group. There may be some, but at least in the West they're a vast minority.

[Vyacheslav Brolotov]

I guess there can be atheists who believe in reincarnation, but they would be in the minority and that would exclude them from being materialists. I do not believe in any of that shit. When I die, that's it. I better make as much of a difference and enjoy life as much as I can now, because I only get one try.

[Capitalist Octopus]

My atheism does not just separate me from a belief in god, but also from a belief in spiritual bullshit.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

Buddhists aside, are there any atheists that believe in reincarnation? Perhaps any that are here?

Reason I'm asking, you' don't have to believe in a god to still believe in reincarnation, similarly to Buddhism, so I'm curious if there's any non-Buddhist atheists that do believe in it.

If you do, would you say it's more akin to the Buddhist view of rebirth, or more like in Hinduism, or completely different?
No... for two reasons. It's contrary to any scientific axioms to prove this belief. Also in the reincarnation process, by myth, you become something in regards to your 'heart'. For instance, if you were a jerk your new life will consist of being a follicle on a bovines rectum.

[Red Rabbit]

I have heard that there actually is a materialist view on reincarnation. I believe it had to do with energy converting to matter, or something like that.

Sorry, it's been a while since I've talked to my Buddhist friend so I don't quite remember what he said about it.

[The Jay]

I have heard that there actually is a materialist view on reincarnation. I believe it had to do with energy converting to matter, or something like that.

Sorry, it's been a while since I've talked to my Buddhist friend so I don't quite remember what he said about it.

As a physics student, that sounds like bologna right there.

[Left Leanings]

I have heard that there actually is a materialist view on reincarnation. I believe it had to do with energy converting to matter, or something like that.

Sorry, it's been a while since I've talked to my Buddhist friend so I don't quite remember what he said about it.

I am an atheist, and a former member of the National Secular Society, the most strident and outspoken organization in the British freethought movement.

I have never come across an atheist who believes in reincarnation.

This view you have come across, concerning energy converting to matter, resulting in reincarnation. I think this is just pseudo-science, and may well be an attempt by the religious, to put their beliefs on a 'scientific' footing.

[Sperm-Doll Setsuna]

Sam Harris like to fancy himself an atheist and believes in reincarnation, but the reality, is that he's a religious fundamentalist and as far as you can go from having materialist positions. He's perhaps not alone in this amongst the so called "New Atheists", most of whom are just apologists of imperialism like Hitchens and Harris and the like who just can't stop rambling about "islamo-fascism".

[Sasha]

When I was a confused stoner some 16 years ago I played for a while with the whole "ghost in the shell" ideas, never went so far as to believe in reincarnation but it was not that far off. After I cut down on the weed and pretentious movies and books I accepted reality.

[Red Rabbit]

When I was a confused stoner some 16 years ago I played for a while with the whole "ghost in the shell" ideas, never went so far as to believe in reincarnation but it was not that far off. After I cut down on the weed and pretentious movies and books I accepted reality.

So you don't think that someday we will be able to transfer the human consciousness into a cyborg?

[Railyon]

Closest I ever heard of would be

"We live in a simulation. When we die, our data gets recycled."

Obviously that idea presupposes some kind of programmer god though...

[dodger]

So you don't think that someday we will be able to transfer the human consciousness into a cyborg?

When yer dead, yer'r dead! Dodger.

When you're dead, you're dead. That's it.
Marlene Dietrich

The 2nd a perhaps more authoritative quote,Red Rabbit, the good lady has passed away. End of the afterlife, 500yrs ago they have been trying to put the genie back in the bottle. Passing Trolls, few fanatics apart, who really believes God created the earth and who really believes that there is a heaven and a hell? Life after death?
. To say when you're dead, you're dead, challenges all religious ideas of whatever denomination.

Mortalism was a long-standing intellectual tradition in England that gained a simple expression at the time the first trade unions were born. William Blake wrote in The Everlasting Gospel, around 1810: "Thou art a man: God is no more: Thy own humanity learn to adore"

[Cirno(9)]

Since reincarnation doesn't necessarily (or even usually) deal with the usual Christian concept of a 'soul' travelling around as it switches bodies, you can even have just a straight materialist conception of reincarnation dealing with the flow of matter. I think some Secular Humanist groups use that notion for their funeral speeches.

[Elysian]

Sam Harris like to fancy himself an atheist and believes in reincarnation, but the reality, is that he's a religious fundamentalist and as far as you can go from having materialist positions. He's perhaps not alone in this amongst the so called "New Atheists", most of whom are just apologists of imperialism like Hitchens and Harris and the like who just can't stop rambling about "islamo-fascism".

Where does Harris say that? Doesn't he always attack religious beliefs?

[Hit The North]

Since reincarnation doesn't necessarily (or even usually) deal with the usual Christian concept of a 'soul' travelling around as it switches bodies, you can even have just a straight materialist conception of reincarnation dealing with the flow of matter. I think some Secular Humanist groups use that notion for their funeral speeches.

No, this cannot work. For reincarnation to make sense it must posit the survival of a non-material entity like a soul or spirit that has a singular identity and can be transferred into a succession of biological forms. If it isn't 'me', as a stable and identifiable 'self-essence', being reproduced then it isn't reincarnation in any meaningful sense, it is just the recombination of matter which takes place anyway.

A materialist and atheist model would view the 'self' as an emergent property dependent on a particular level of organisation of matter; once that organisation is broken down, the self ceases to exist.

[Red Rabbit]

The "reincarnation" in Buddhism has nothing to do with a soul or spirit. In fact, they regularly stress how there is no permanent, unchanging "self".

The Buddhist "reincarnation" (Often referred to as "Rebirth" to differentiate itself from reincarnation) is likened to a dying flame of a candle being used the light the flame on a new one. It's obviously not the same flame, but they both have a connection.

So, reincarnation doesn't have to rely on having a soul to work.

[Revolution starts with U]

It could be that information encodes into all it interacts with and the info of you is transferred upon death... highly unlikely. But w/e

[Kyu Six]

The "reincarnation" in Buddhism has nothing to do with a soul or spirit. In fact, they regularly stress how there is no permanent, unchanging "self".

The Buddhist "reincarnation" (Often referred to as "Rebirth" to differentiate itself from reincarnation) is likened to a dying flame of a candle being used the light the flame on a new one. It's obviously not the same flame, but they both have a connection.

So, reincarnation doesn't have to rely on having a soul to work.

Of course, Buddhism also posits that earth, wind, fire, and water are the four elements that make up everything in the universe, so obviously their science is a little shaky.

[NGNM85]

Sam Harris like to fancy himself an atheist and believes in reincarnation, but the reality, is that he's a religious fundamentalist…

You have no idea what you are talking about.

From Response to Controversy;

My views on Eastern mysticism, Buddhism, etc.:
My views on “mystical” or “spiritual” experience are extensively described in The End of Faith (and in several articles available on this website) and do not entail the acceptance of anything on faith. There is simply no question that people have transformative experiences as a result of engaging contemplative disciplines like meditation, and there is no question that these experiences shed some light on the nature of the human mind (any experience does, for that matter). What is highly questionable are the metaphysical claims that people tend to make on the basis of such experiences. I do not make any such claims. Nor do I support the metaphysical claims of others.
There are several neuroscience labs now studying the effects of meditation on the brain. While I am not personally engaged in this research, I know many of the scientists who are. This is now a fertile area of sober inquiry, purposed toward understanding the possibilities of human well-being better than we do at present.
While I consider Buddhism almost unique among the world’s religions as a repository of contemplative wisdom, I do not consider myself a Buddhist. My criticism of Buddhism as a faith has been published, to the consternation of many Buddhists.
http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/response-to-controversy2/


and as far as you can go from having materialist positions.

You’re correct that he is not a Marxist. Neither am I. Big deal.


He's perhaps not alone in this amongst the so called "New Atheists", most of whom are just apologists of imperialism like Hitchens and Harris and the like who just can't stop rambling about "islamo-fascism".

The fact that you conflate these individuals simply demonstrate that you know nothing about them. Unfortunately; Christopher Hitchens remained an ardent supporter of the American occupation of Iraq, and Afghanistan. Sam Harris has always been against theoccupation of Iraq, I’ve never seen any substantive comments, by him, on the occupation of Afghanistan. While Christopher Hitchens embraced the dubious phrase; ‘Islamo-Fascism’, Sam Harris did not. The only mention he made of this term was to say that it is; ‘imprecise’, and ‘ignores a variety of schisms that exist, even among Islamists...’

I think my hypothesis has been amply demonstrated.

[NGNM85]

Where does Harris say that?

He didn't.


Doesn't he always attack religious beliefs?

...If you define contesting religious truth claims as an 'attack', then; yes.

[Elysian]

He didn't.



...If you define contesting religious truth claims as an 'attack', then; yes.

I meant 'attack' in a good way, such as attacking superstition, rituals etc. which are an inherent part of any religion.

[Hit The North]

The "reincarnation" in Buddhism has nothing to do with a soul or spirit. In fact, they regularly stress how there is no permanent, unchanging "self".

The Buddhist "reincarnation" (Often referred to as "Rebirth" to differentiate itself from reincarnation) is likened to a dying flame of a candle being used the light the flame on a new one. It's obviously not the same flame, but they both have a connection.

So, reincarnation doesn't have to rely on having a soul to work.

Rebirth, however, depends upon a notion of consciousness that exists independently of matter and whilst it claims that there is no absolute identity between different incarnations, there is a sense in which this abstracted and metaphysical consciousness develops in a unitary way which presupposes a singular identity at some level. Otherwise, what would be the point of karma?

This might not be the same thing as a soul but it is still hopelessly unobservable and indemonstrable. Any atheist who accepted it would be doing so as an act of individual and wilful caprice.

Meanwhile, it is demonstrable that reincarnation has been used by Buddhists as a form of social control and in its popular teaching it has very much operated from the point of view of fostering fear in people that if they misbehave they will be reincarnated as a lower animal or, worse, end up in one of the realms of hell where they can meet several fates including being impaled on fiery spears!

So, in its popular form, reincarnation, even among Buddhists, has really involved a notion of an eternal self, involved in a spiritual journey.

[Rafiq]

They're called new atheists

[Rafiq]

You have no idea what you are talking about.

From Response to Controversy;

My views on Eastern mysticism, Buddhism, etc.:
My views on “mystical” or “spiritual” experience are extensively described in The End of Faith (and in several articles available on this website) and do not entail the acceptance of anything on faith. There is simply no question that people have transformative experiences as a result of engaging contemplative disciplines like meditation, and there is no question that these experiences shed some light on the nature of the human mind (any experience does, for that matter). What is highly questionable are the metaphysical claims that people tend to make on the basis of such experiences. I do not make any such claims. Nor do I support the metaphysical claims of others.
There are several neuroscience labs now studying the effects of meditation on the brain. While I am not personally engaged in this research, I know many of the scientists who are. This is now a fertile area of sober inquiry, purposed toward understanding the possibilities of human well-being better than we do at present.
While I consider Buddhism almost unique among the world’s religions as a repository of contemplative wisdom, I do not consider myself a Buddhist. My criticism of Buddhism as a faith has been published, to the consternation of many Buddhists.
http://www.samharris.org/site/full_text/response-to-controversy2/



You’re correct that he is not a Marxist. Neither am I. Big deal.



The fact that you conflate these individuals simply demonstrate that you know nothing about them. Unfortunately; Christopher Hitchens remained an ardent supporter of the American occupation of Iraq, and Afghanistan. Sam Harris has always been against theoccupation of Iraq, I’ve never seen any substantive comments, by him, on the occupation of Afghanistan. While Christopher Hitchens embraced the dubious phrase; ‘Islamo-Fascism’, Sam Harris did not. The only mention he made of this term was to say that it is; ‘imprecise’, and ‘ignores a variety of schisms that exist, even among Islamists...’

I think my hypothesis has been amply demonstrated.


NGNM, It brightens my day each time I see your posts....




When I look at your name and see you're restricted.

[NGNM85]

NGNM, It brightens my day each time I see your posts....

When I look at your name and see you're restricted.

Since you brought it up; I happen to think you're dangerously misguided. However; this has absolutely nothing to do with anything. I’ve clearly demonstrated that Takayuki has absolutely no idea what he, or she, is talking about, and that virtually everything he/she said is factually wrong, with the exception of the point that Sam Harris does not subscribe to Dialectical, or Historical Materialism, which I concede. You don’t appear to be contesting any of these points, which is quite sensible, as they’ve been amply demonstrated. This, of course, leads one to the inevitable conclusion that you don’t actually disagree with anything I said; you’re simply being an asshole, simply for the sake of being an asshole. How infantile.

[Cirno(9)]

Rebirth, however, depends upon a notion of consciousness that exists independently of matter and whilst it claims that there is no absolute identity between different incarnations, there is a sense in which this abstracted and metaphysical consciousness develops in a unitary way which presupposes a singular identity at some level. Otherwise, what would be the point of karma?

This might not be the same thing as a soul but it is still hopelessly unobservable and indemonstrable. Any atheist who accepted it would be doing so as an act of individual and wilful caprice. Some schools of Buddhism do believe that, yes. Tibetan Buddhism is a good example seeing as how it believes that one can precisely detect where the Dalai Lama reincarnates and. However it is not necessary that they believe in this and the Chán/Zen school's nominalism denies the 'self' even harder than is usual in Buddhism.

I consider someone calling the mere reconstitution of matter to be "reincarnation" to be the same as the Einsteinian pantheist that believes that "God" and "material universe" are interchangeable terms. The only real difference is the emotive/poetic aspect and if they wish to use those words in that way I'm not exactly going to call them wrong for using a word in an idiosyncratic manner.
I feel like I should say that I am neither a Buddhist nor a believer in reincarnation (nor pantheism). I have a feeling the OP was operating under the common assumption of what "reincarnation" is and in that no a materialist can't believe in body hopping immaterial souls.



Meanwhile, it is demonstrable that reincarnation has been used by Buddhists as a form of social control and in its popular teaching it has very much operated from the point of view of fostering fear in people that if they misbehave they will be reincarnated as a lower animal or, worse, end up in one of the realms of hell where they can meet several fates including being impaled on fiery spears!

So, in its popular form, reincarnation, even among Buddhists, has really involved a notion of an eternal self, involved in a spiritual journey.
No argument here, though it was my understanding that this kind of thing was more prominent in Hinduism than Buddhism.

[isaacston]

Of course, Buddhism also posits that earth, wind, fire, and water are the four elements that make up everything in the universe, so obviously their science is a little shaky.
I think that we should return to there being wind, fire, earth, and water as the only elements. The Periodic Table is just too modern. Youngsters are getting carried away with this "science" business.

[/satire]

[isaacston]

Some schools of Buddhism do believe that, yes. Tibetan Buddhism is a good example seeing as how it believes that one can precisely detect where the Dalai Lama reincarnates and. However it is not necessary that they believe in this and the Chán/Zen school's nominalism denies the 'self' even harder than is usual in Buddhism.

I consider someone calling the mere reconstitution of matter to be "reincarnation" to be the same as the Einsteinian pantheist that believes that "God" and "material universe" are interchangeable terms. The only real difference is the emotive/poetic aspect and if they wish to use those words in that way I'm not exactly going to call them wrong for using a word in an idiosyncratic manner.
I feel like I should say that I am neither a Buddhist nor a believer in reincarnation (nor pantheism). I have a feeling the OP was operating under the common assumption of what "reincarnation" is and in that no a materialist can't believe in body hopping immaterial souls.


No argument here, though it was my understanding that this kind of thing was more prominent in Hinduism than Buddhism.
Buddhism doesn't mention reincarnation or what happens death very often, especially in comparison to Hinduism.

[OnlyCommunistYouKnow]

I used to be Stalin.