Michael Sudduth's critique of the Leininger case as reincarnation or psi evidence

I'm not sure about this. What Sudduth seems to stand convicted of is being a narcissistic d***head with an omniscience complex. But I can't say I've seen anyone really blow a hole in his work, point out serious error or incompetence, that sort of thing.

I haven't read his criticism of the Leininger case.  But if you mean more generally, a relevant blog post by me.

I'm not sure why it fills people with dread.

I'd have to get more of an understanding on the context of reincarnation, but one thing that comes to mind is the lack of continuity.  If there is no retention/connection to the current "you" then what, truly, is reincarnation.  What's the "re"?

I have no memories of prior lives; never a peep as best I can tell.  If I am a reincarnation, I wonder how my "re" would feel about things understanding s/he is gone as far as the current incarnation goes.

I have no idea how a super-self might change this view.  Very difficult for me to envision a super "me" that somehow integrates various incarnations into a whole.

I'd have to get more of an understanding on the context of reincarnation, but one thing that comes to mind is the lack of continuity.  If there is no retention/connection to the current "you" then what, truly, is reincarnation.  What's the "re"?

I have no memories of prior lives; never a peep as best I can tell.  If I am a reincarnation, I wonder how my "re" would feel about things understanding s/he is gone as far as the current incarnation goes.

I have no idea how a super-self might change this view.  Very difficult for me to envision a super "me" that somehow integrates various incarnations into a whole.

It's the same you that reincarnates.  The reason why people don't think it's you that reincarnates is because they've been indoctrinated into an acceptance of the materialist's conception of personal identity.  For example, many materialists assert that memories are a crucial ingredient for a person at time T2 to have been the very same person at an earlier time T1. 

This is a thoroughly materialist conception of personal identity.  One that has highly counter-intuitive consequences.  For example, if you had been born to someone else, then your current memories would be wholly different, hence you would quite literally be a different person. I mean different in the sense as you and I are different.

It seems to me the materialist conception of personal identity rules out any persisting self whatsoever. See this blog post by me where I explain why this is so.

As for personal identity and what survives, see my The self or soul as a mental substance.

I don't know what a "super-self" is and how it differs from a normal self.  But a substantial self is all that is required for me to reincarnate, and it to be me in any afterlife realm.

I'm not sure why it fills people with dread.

Thanks for the advice ! Life can be wonderful, sure. It can also be a terrible ordeal. These are simplifications of course, for many, probably most, it's neither. One can look at it from any number of perspectives and all are reasonably correct.
 

How appealing or otherwise one's next life will be depends on where and who one is born to. 

In my next life, I'd like to be born to parents who are both rich and loving. I think I'd probably prefer to be born male, in the west, in idyllic countryside. And would be great to be good-looking, and intelligent, and enigmatic, and mysterious, outgoing, and strangely alluring.

 
Being born good looking and wealthy is no guarantee of happiness, as I'm sure you're well aware. Maybe it helps, I suppose one would probably choose it, (if that's how it works?) Steve McQueen on his death bed,"Is this all there is?"

I have no memories of prior lives; never a peep as best I can tell.  If I am a reincarnation, I wonder how my "re" would feel about things understanding s/he is gone as far as the current incarnation goes.

The vast majority don't have any memories of it. But nobody should have memories if materialism is correct. I suspect you've 'planted' yourself where you felt you needed to be, or where you felt you could cope. I also suspect we've all had hundreds of incarnations and even if we make a complete *hash of it, it probably won't matter one iota, ultimately. Having said that, it doesn't seem unimportant, does it, when one 'cocks it all up', as they say (makes a mess of it).

The vast majority don't have any memories of it. But nobody should have memories if materialism is correct. I suspect you've 'planted' yourself where you felt you needed to be, or where you felt you could cope. I also suspect we've all had hundreds of incarnations and even if we make a complete *hash of it, it probably won't matter one iota, ultimately. Having said that, it doesn't seem unimportant, does it, when one 'cocks it all up', as they say (makes a mess of it).

I have a suspicion it could matter a great deal, but perhaps only in ways personal to the incarnating person...though I believe there are some strains of thought that suggest the "Genesis" of Reality is unfinished, ongoing work. From the Talmud:

"...man was created alone to teach you that whoever kills one life kills the world entire, and whoever saves one life saves the world entire."

Or to pick a tradition from Hinduism where they do believe in reincarnation, there is a (perhaps heretical) variation of the story of Krsna where the demons plot to vanquish Vishnu by spreading Evil. Reflecting to themselves they proclaim, "For how can He exist when We are Everywhere?"

Even Teilhard De Chardin, in his panentheistic intelligent design conception of the Omega Point believed that the Unity toward which Spirit moves the world could be disrupted in some form, as part of the gift of Free Will is the capacity for Evil.

All to say there may be more consequences to this life that just our own personal work, as troubling as that may be...

All to say there may be more consequences to this life that just our own personal work, as troubling as that may be...

It may well be so ! As you might expect, NDE's have coloured my perspective. When Stefan Von Jankovich reviewed some of his recent past lives (of being both sexes) he reported (annoyingly for him) that he felt he had learned...nothing. He had just repeated all his previous mistakes.

It may well be so ! As you might expect, NDE's have coloured my perspective. When Stefan Von Jankovich reviewed some of his recent past lives (of being both sexes) he reported (annoyingly for him) that he felt he had learned...nothing. He had just repeated all his previous mistakes.

I do think reincarnation is not necessarily a planned phenomena, or even when choosing to reincarnate one doesn't have complete control.

For example we have the reincarnation case of the retired cop John McConnell coming back as his own grandson William, to fulfill the promise to his daughter Doreen that he would always be looking out for her.

Yet as William he was born with heart defects corresponding to the fatal shooting that killed his previous incarnation (when he tried to stop an armed robbery). I doubt he chose a condition that required multiple surgeries and lifelong medication. 

All to say I think the afterlife is, for better or worse, prone to issues out of our control.

During the observation of the individual scenes from my life film (his NDE life review), I suddenly realized that I had made some mistakes before and even more times in previous lives. I understood that I had been confronted with the same weaknesses, including, greed, envy, dishonesty, domineering oppression of other's opinions, etc.,  I had committed similar mistakes back then. 

As a teaching model, I suddenly saw scenes, like diapositive projections, where I'd lived in quite different roles, in other times, and in unknown places. The main actor - ME - then took just as wrong a decision as I did in the last life. Only the "staging" of the problems was different. The action remained the same. So I had not learned anything in my recent life! 

This observation was a basic realization for me and I felt it as perfect reality. I felt something like this: "You, now as Stefan, have again made the same mistakes as before ... so and so ... there and there. You have not learned anything." (reiterating) During my clinically dead condition, I had a limited insight into some of my previous lives. These insights, which were given to me, always referred to situations in which I had committed exactly the same mistakes as I had in my recent life. Scenes from eight previous lives were shown to me.

Source : Reincarnation as a reality (Stefan Von Jankovich)

It's the same you that reincarnates.  The reason why people don't think it's you that reincarnates is because they've been indoctrinated into an acceptance of the materialist's conception of personal identity.  For example, many materialists assert that memories are a crucial ingredient for a person at time T2 to have been the very same person at an earlier time T1.

Yes, this is how I envision things. (bold)  I don't know what you is.  Its not me, at least in any way I can envision or understand.  I'm also not a materialist; at all.  Clearly, I'm also not convinced of universal reincarnation either.

This is a thoroughly materialist conception of personal identity.

It may be materialist but its also the same conception as many religious traditions (i.e., those that don't feature reincarnation).  Am I missing something?

As for personal identity and what survives, see my The self or soul as a mental substance.

I don't follow much of this.  Regardless, and to be clear: this is what you believe or are you asserting this as reality?

I don't know what a "super-self" is

I didn't know how to define the "I" that sits above all the reincarnated I's.  So, I used "super-self".