Accounts of re-incarnation would be easy enough to verify were they true.Gee wrote: Well, Lev, your above statement made me smile. I can't remember the last time someone called me "childish", but apparently you think so. (chuckle) You are correct in that I did not make an argument, but I thought it unnecessary. Just pointing out the lie should have caused you to reevaluate your statement. But if you want an argument, I can provide one.
Please consider that Philosophy is the study of what we can know, and how we can know it -- or what is true. You stated that in "every single case" of investigations regarding reincarnation, the results have shown it to be false. So the question is, How can you possibly know this? You would have to know about "every single case". That would take more than a lifetime of study, so I seriously doubt that this is true. Then one must consider that if you knew about "every single case", then you would have to already know about Dr. Stevenson's work. So you would have to know that Dr. Stevenson found evidence of reincarnation.
In order to dismiss the evidence, you would have to base your knowledge on something other than evidence. So it is my thought that you base your knowledge on assumption, opinion, and belief. This is a common problem with religious people, but this is the Science forum, not the Religion forum, and I did not think you were religious. Hence, your statement is a lie.
In the future, you may want to consider qualifying such grandiose statements with something like, "in my opinion", or "as far as I know", or "to my knowledge", instead of stating something as fact, that is not fact.
And in every single case where such investigations have been made to prove re-incarnation the results have shown false.