Weiss here clearly puts up a straw man argument. But the most realistic explanation-the horse-is that these are simply actual past lives. The Amer- ican psychic Edgar Cayce, as well as others, has written about the akashic records, which is similar to the collective unconscious in that it is a knowledge of all things. For example, the memories could be attributed to the collective unconscious, Carl Jung’s concept that at some deeper level everybody knows everything, even if we have forgotten how to access that bank of infinite knowledge. There are several ways to account for the occurrence of shared past-life memories, but they are zebras. In medicine, we have a saying: “When you hear hoof beats, don’t look for zebras.” This means that you should look for horses-or, in other words, the most probable explanation-before considering a more exotic possibility. The controls are too weak or even nonexistent. But there again, there is no hard evidence to prove that the people who share the memories are not sharing historical events which they have unconsciously internalised. In the second chapter, Weiss does provide some experiences which could be linked to historical places and times. (Those who are interested may search out the case of Bridey Murphy, a case of hypnotic regression which was later disproven.) For science requires independently verifiable results, and not personal experiences. None of it will stand scientific scrutiny. Weiss shows between the experiences of various people could be the result of suggestions, simple coincidence, or plain trickery. They could be hallucinations, repressed memories, or plain fabrications. But unfortunately, unless you are a believer, this evidence won't convince you. In the first chapter, the author shares multiple experiences of people who experienced past lives under hypnosis - he talks of 'convincing' evidence which proves the veracity of the experiences. This whole book began to smack of jiggery-pokery from there.

I think the intention here is to prove that he is a sceptic who has changed his mind on hard evidence: but to me, such anecdotal evidence is not acceptable as scientific proof. it's religion and mysticism.īrian Weiss claims that he was 'converted' to a belief in reincarnation by meeting with a patient once, who could recall her past lives and historical details, and even facts from his life which she could not have known in the ordinary course of events. The author may be a psychiatrist, but this book is not science. This one simple sentence in the book clarifies where it's coming from. Once I read through the author's method of regressing patients to their 'previous lives' through hypnotism to cure them of their trauma, I knew where this was going. The first two chapters were enough to convince me that this was metaphysical claptrap camouflaged as science. At the outset - I didn't read this book through.

Brian weiss author