Reincarnations Do we have a Choice ?

[Roselove]

coming2 - I agree with you we do make cons choices however those choices are always determined by our awareness/expierences which are prefated. Ulimately we are products of our conditioning and enviroment. And if souls are aware of karma why pick roles as immoral people in the first place? i.e. Hitler's rise was predicted prior to his birth.. by several astrologers (i know there are some prophets as well but those readings are too general so won't include them)



Free will is an illusion, biologist says PhysOrg - March 3, 2010

• Three different models explain the causal mechanism of free will and the flow of information between unconscious neural activity and conscious thought (GES = genes, environment, stochasticism). In A, the intuitive model, there is no causal component for will. Will influences conscious thought, which in turn influences unconscious neural activity to direct behavior. In B, a causal component of will is introduced: unconscious neural activity and GES. But now will loses its freedom. In C, the model that Cashmore advocates, will is dispensed with. Conscious thought is simply a reflection of, rather than an influence on, unconscious neural activity, which directs behavior. The dotted arrow 2 in C indicates a subservient role of conscious thought in directing behavior.
  When biologist Anthony Cashmore claims that the concept of free will is an illusion, he's not breaking any new ground. At least as far back as the ancient Greeks, people have wondered how humans seem to have the ability to make their own personal decisions in a manner lacking any causal component other than their desire to "will" something. But Cashmore, Professor of Biology at the University of Pennsylvania, says that many biologists today still cling to the idea of free will, and reject the idea that we are simply conscious machines, completely controlled by a combination of our chemistry and external environmental forces.
  Cashmore's argument is that free will is an illusion derived from consciousness, but consciousness has an evolutionary advantage of conferring the illusion of responsibility. So what is the point of publicizing the fact that we have no free will, and letting everyone off the hook of individual responsibility? Cashmore says that, as researchers deepen their understanding of the molecular basis of human behavior, it will become increasingly difficult to entertain the fallacy of free will.
  In a recent study, Cashmore has argued that a belief in free will is akin to religious beliefs, since neither complies with the laws of the physical world. One of the basic premises of biology and biochemistry is that biological systems are nothing more than a bag of chemicals that obey chemical and physical laws. Generally, we have no problem with the ³bag of chemicals² notion when it comes to bacteria, plants, and similar entities. So why is it so difficult to say the same about humans or other ³higher level² species, when we¹re all governed by the same laws?
  No causal mechanism
  As Cashmore explains, the human brain acts at both the conscious level as well as the unconscious. It¹s our consciousness that makes us aware of our actions, giving us the sense that we control them, as well. But even without this awareness, our brains can still induce our bodies to act, and studies have indicated that consciousness is something that follows unconscious neural activity. Just because we are often aware of multiple paths to take, that doesn¹t mean we actually get to choose one of them based on our own free will. As the ancient Greeks asked, by what mechanism would we be choosing? The physical world is made of causes and effects - ³nothing comes from nothing² - but free will, by its very definition, has no physical cause. The Roman philosopher and poet Lucretius, in reference to this problem of free will, noted that the Greek philosophers concluded that atoms "randomly swerve" - the likely source of this movement being the numerous Greek gods.
  Today, as researchers gain a better understanding of the molecular details underlying consciousness, some people think that we may discover a molecular mechanism responsible for free will - but Cashmore doesn¹t think so. Such a discovery, he says, would require a new physical law that breaks the causal laws of nature. As it is, the only ³wild card² that allows any room for maneuvering outside of genetics and one¹s environment is the inherent uncertainty of the physical properties of matter, and even this stochastic element is beyond our conscious control. (However, it can help explain why identical twins growing up in the same environment are unique individuals.)
  To put it simply, free will just doesn¹t fit with how the physical world works. Cashmore compares a belief in free will to an earlier belief in vitalism - the belief that there are forces governing the biological world that are distinct from those governing the physical world. Vitalism was discarded more than 100 years ago, being replaced with evidence that biological systems obey the laws of chemistry and physics, not special biological laws for living things. I would like to convince biologists that a belief in free will is nothing other than a continuing belief in vitalism (or, as I say, a belief in magic), Cashmore told PhysOrg.com.
  Conscious Deception
  It all seems quite rational, so why is our lack of free will so difficult to accept for many people? Cashmore explains that there are several compelling reasons that people have for believing in free will, not the least of which is that we have a constant awareness of making decisions that seem to be driven by our own volition. In addition, free will is a very useful concept when it comes to the justice system; we take responsibility for our criminal actions and accordingly, are eligible for personal punishment, which is deemed to be necessary for protecting society.
  However, Cashmore argues that there are deeper explanations for why we think we have free will. He thinks that there must be a genetic basis for consciousness and the associated belief in free will. Consciousness has an evolutionary selective advantage: it provides us with the illusion of responsibility, which is beneficial for society, if not for individuals as well. In this sense, consciousness is our 'preview function' that comforts us into thinking that we are in control of what we will (or at least may) do ahead of time. As Cashmore notes, the irony is that the very existence of these 'free will genes' is predicated on their ability to con us into believing in free will and responsibility. However, in reality, all behavioral decisions are nothing more than a reflection of our genetic and environmental history.
  "Whereas the impressions are that we are making 'free' conscious decisions, the reality is that consciousness is simply a state of awareness that reflects the input signals, and these are an unavoidable consequence of GES [genes, environment, and stochasticism]," Cashmore explained.
  Few neurobiologists would argue with the notion that consciousness influences behavior by acting through unconscious neural activity, he said. More controversial is the notion that consciousness plays a relatively minor role in governing our behavior. The conscious mind is conceivably more a mechanism of following unconscious neural activity than it is one of directing such activity. I find it interesting to compare this line of thinking with that of Freud, who created a controversy by suggesting that the unconscious mind played a role in our behavior. The way of thinking regarding these matters now has moved to the extent that some are questioning what role, if any, the conscious mind plays in directing behavior. Namely, Freud was right to an extent that was much greater than he realized.
  Can¹t Be Held Responsible
  Perhaps the most obvious impact of this paradigm shift will be on our judicial system, in which the notions of free will and responsibility form an integral component. Currently, in order to be found guilty, a criminal must be considered responsible for his actions; otherwise, he can be found not guilty by reason of insanity.
  Cashmore disagrees with these rules, noting that psychiatric research is finding its way more and more into the courts and causing time-wasting debates. (For example, is alcoholism a disease? Are sex crimes an addiction?) "Where is the logic in debating an individual¹s level of responsibility, when the reality is that none of us are biologically responsible for our actions?" he said.
  Cashmore proposes a change, based on ³the elimination of the illogical concept that individuals are in control of their behavior in a manner that is something other than a reflection of their genetic makeup and their environmental history."
  He says that psychiatrists and other experts on human behavior should not be involved in initial judicial proceedings. The jury should simply determine whether or not a defendant is guilty of committing a crime, and not be concerned with mental issues. Then, if the defendant is found guilty, a court-appointed panel of experts would advise on the most appropriate punishment and treatment.
  Cashmore argues that, even though individuals are not biologically responsible for their actions, in order to minimize criminal activity, people should still be held accountable, and be punished when necessary. Such punishment is rationalized on the grounds that it will serve as an incentive (an environmental influence) not to participate in criminal behavior.
  "Here I introduce the practice of 'I am sorry about this but I am going to have to beat you,'" Cashmore said. "This punishment is rationalized in the sense that it serves as a lesson to individuals not to break the law. So people would be held accountable for their actions, even though they are not biologically responsible for such actions. This punishment may involve fines or placing people in prison.
  Such punishment should not reflect any sense of retribution, and given this I do not personally see how one could continue to impose the death penalty - the alleged effectiveness of such a penalty presumably being far outweighed by its unfairness. The exact way in which one balances the presumptive requirement for punishment, and the lack of biological responsibility, would indeed be difficult, and would require much discussion within the legal system and society as a whole."
  He said that tailoring punishment on an individual basis is presently done, at least to some extent.
  "Why is it important to make a change? Because increasingly the legal system is being forced to confront the reality that people's behavior is governed by nothing other than their biological history: their genes, their environment and a degree of stochasticism (if you wish, a degree of chance). The legal system is increasingly seen to be a farce, with lawyers spending endless time and money debating this nonsensical question of how responsible or not their clients are. Why nonsensical? Because no one is biologically responsible for their actions. As Francis Crick said, 'Dream as we may, reality knocks relentlessly at the door.' And as a result of the rapid and ongoing progress in neuroscience, the reality that individual behavior is governed by one's genetic and environmental history is becoming increasingly apparent."
  
  
  more - http://www.crystalinks.com/freewill.html

[Roselove]

Greenslade - just a note on vibrations people that suffer from depression, commit suicide, are ill, have anxiety etc usually are lower vibrationally... you can be aware, "further along the path" but still suffer from these feelings

Rose thanks for the info, it was interesting...It is always interesting when I read things that are based in psychology because of the contrast between psych and spiritual...inevitably they go hand in hand but the psych world misses so much in trying to explain the unexplainable.That made sense though. As far as conditioning is concerned, I agree in alot of ways. I guess the only comment I can make about Karma in relation to people like Hitler...and again this is just my view and is open for debate...

I dont know that I believe that people are born inherently evil. It kind of takes away from the thought process that the afterlife is nothing but purity and love. Again I believe that we are given sets of choices and the basis of those choices shape our lives. Again with the free will. I truly believe in cause and effect/like begets like/we reap what we sow and we cannot have light without darkness. Is that really Karma though?? For every negative action there is a Karmic debt to be paid?? For every good deed done is payback into the Karmic bank?? I am just throwing this out there. I love banter like this because it always makes me question what it is exactly that I believe but at the end of the day I dont find much importance in what I believe but more so how I act and react in the world around me.

Do I think Hitler chose his path?? Not in the sense that he got together with his spiritual team and said "I think I will come back as a sadistic monster"....I think he did, however, say I am going to put these really hard lessons in place and hope that in my human form I will make the right choices. Obviously he shaped his own outcome by his actions, reactions and personal choices. Heck lets not even delve into the psychiatric waters and his mental illness!

I am rambling now...love how this thread has evolved!! Your thoughts??

On depression and lower vibrations.....

From someone who has had personal experience with this I have found that the depression stems from being disconnected from the spirit. When I went through my depression years ago I was desperately trying to build a better relationship with God. As someone who has been blessed with certain gifts I was not aware that they were gifts but instead stayed confused because I had no guidance. I dont know that I would say that my vibration was lower though. I resonated on a higher vibration than some really healthy people but was so lost and depressed that I didnt know how to access my own joy. In no way am I comparing myself to any prophet but when I think about some prophets from the Bible they were of the highest vibration but suffered miserable depression, loneliness and separation from God...Again thats just my opinion and it was probably way off topic!! lol

you cant see me, but never over look me

"You know you're in love when you can't fall asleep because reality is finally better than your dreams."

"Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You."

"We are all a little weird and life's a little weird, and when we find someone whose weirdness is compatible with ours, we join up with them and fall in mutual weirdness and call it love."
— Dr. Seuss

and many more

[*whitefeather]

Originally Posted by Rosewater

if we come from light why the need to "evolve"

I have heard various theroies that we are God here to expierence awareness, some say we have the choice too, others say it is mandatory.. others say the counsel we encounter afterdeath guilts us into reincarnating..

honestly I have no idea.. It's recently been brought to my attention the Lords of Karma existing? I thought the soul was it's own judge guess not.. there are plenty of people that have had near death exp's where there souls are front of a council and higher self is advocating for them or they encounter beings that tell them they have to go back.. one of the most frightening was the man that dreamed of different energies fighting over what to do with his soul.. i was told there was a battle of spirit going on in the heavens dont know if either side is really good for us

personally i feel on a grand scale we are here for the expierence.. and possibly have been trapped in this process, maybe even used

Several people I know have shared their after life memories with me, so this is what I believe too Rosewater. Freewill doesn't exist.

" the reality that individual behavior is governed by one's genetic and environmental history is becoming increasingly apparent." As quoted from Rosewater's post.

I don't believe that's true. I live in the same town Dennis Neilson grew up, had the same background - close to. I used to play with his family when I was a child and actually met him a few times. According to much I have read I should have done much the same things and I know there are those who should be doing the same. But I made a conscious choice not to.

I didn't say having higher vibrations made everything perfect, Rosewater. We're vibrating in the 3rd dimension, and nothing is ever going to be perfect. However, angels, ascended masters and the like are at different dimensions - this is what I meant. Our own vibrations can be slightly higher than someone who isn't Spiritual, but they're still in the band for the 3rd.

I believe Hitler's Soul knew exactly what it was going to do before he reincarnated, I believe that for all of us. Many usually ask around now - "why would anyone's Soul do that?". If you want to understand Spirit you have to think like Spirit. What we see as good or bad, Spirit doesn't. Why would Spirit chose to incarnate as a bad person? Why would Spirit chose to reincarnate at all, when it's the equivalent of being a deaf, dumb, blind, brain-dead torso?

We have Free Will, Whitefeather. Our Path is agreed with us before we become incarnate, the details are left up to us. You incarnate into a certain house with certain people, but you can change the colour of the bathroom if you wish. However, I do have something that really irks me about that process, as in before we become incarnate that I have never got to the back of. I believe it's a Spirit thing that has stayed with me. Whiles most people wax lyrical about how wonderful the Afterlife is, I know differently.

Greenslade, your last comment has me a bit baffled.What did you find so distressing about the afterlife? Are your memories of it so very different than mine? Considering our conversations I would have thought that it would have been a similar experience. You can always PM, if you would prefer.

Originally Posted by Lynn

The word Reincarnation means to make new again.

It is said to be when the Soul leaves the body and is freed at the time of death of the physical body to come forth again to a new body. When one dies from the physical body I feel that the Soul is what goes to the Light to be re born or to come to a new body for more in the body learning’s and experiences. That said I do wonder on having a choice where we come to or that we might or might not want to come back.


Do we have a choice on where we come back to ?


Do we have a choice to maybe NOT come back ?




Lynn


Lynn

Hello Lynn,

I agree with what most of the others say, I do think that we have a choice, but it is a Soulic choice, not a physical choice. We choose to do what the Spirit needs.

You might find 'Conversations With God' by Neil Donald Walsch an interesting book and very enlightening on a lot of issues. It offers a whole new perspective in some cases.

Blessings

grazier

[Roselove]

Greenslade - what I think was meant with that statement was your own expierence, your own family life etc. A schoolyard bully and someone not so popular may grow up in the same enviroment, encounter each other etc but the expierences that shape them and make them who they are.. are very different

I didn't say you did, when I was refering to different dimensions humans can go to in the afterlife I wasn't talking about the Angelic Realms etc, I was talking about how your base vibration determines which afterlife realm avialable to us (so they say) we can enter so it would be unfair for someone to enter a lower realm if the contend of their character is good but they died in a grief stricken state