Subject: Reincarnation : generalization and another Environment-DNA link?
From: "Bill Howell. Retired from NRCan. now in Alberta Canada" <>
Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 09:37:54 -0600
To: "Sarah Howell. Director-Actor-Freelance E-Journalist. Panama Columbia Peru Signapore " <>

To me, reincarnation is just a fun "trick", given its perennial interest to people.  So I have no intention of going into this deeply, but since the topic arose, there are points that bubble to the surface now and again.

Generalisation :
MindCode begs a far more general definition of Reincarnation.  I'm not really sure what that is.

However, take the examples of :
  • the stunning similarity of some identical twin's [personality, behaviour, etc] separated by birth, brought up in radically different environments (particularly family environments), and never aware of the other until adulthood when they are studied. 
  • what everybody "knows" in that their lives continue through their children, but perhaps in a far more profound way than believed today, but not-so different than what people have believed throughout history and pre-history.
  • Respect and knowledge for elders - as to some degree, "we are they"?
Even though I've never heard of cases as those listed above where reincarnation was claimed, what would the situation be like if identical twins did express a feeling that that had occurred?

But the key point is that a generalised definition of reincarnation would blur with our normal understanding of Mendelian heredity, and a "lost scientific belief" in Lamarckian heredity from the late 1700's to mid-1800's.  Reincarnation then becomes more of a "mundane belief" in a MindCode sense.

"Nature versus Nurture" - a twist on a theme that has generated empty arguments
I'm very unimpressed by essentially ALL of the "Nature versus Nurture" analysis I've seen, but it is an important theme given its [history, prominence, recurrence].   The MindCode twists are that :
  • IF "pre-programmed [normal, epi]-DNA" MindCode ([data, functions, processes, operating systems, consciousness, behaviours, personalities, socialities, politicalities]) does exist in every individual, based on [classical Mendelian evolutionary, Meaney-ian Lamarckian] processes, 
  • THEN a possible result (as proposed earlier) is that a key environmental influence would be the triggering of [latent, non-expressed, hidden] MindCode and [substantive, radical] immediate [phase changes, flipping, morphing] of an individual's current MindCode state in a manner which is probably [unpredictable, individualized] for now, but for which the statistics are likely reflected to some degree in historical observations of behaviour.  
  • AND the sudden changes, or even long-term changes, could be MindCode reversible, and a long-standing patience in personal attitudes and in law regarding personal reform and change, may relate well to MindCode but in a far more powerful way than currently imagined.
Examples might be widely known conundrums, for which MindCode might be a contributing process  :
  • Why do advanced, well-educated populations "flip" in behaviour (Nazism in Germany, Communist revolutions, observed immediate flips in Western society's beliefs and "known truths), often WITHOUT an apparent realization of the complete and fast change, and WITH a belief that people had always thought that way (which in a MindCode sense, would have some truth).  (Obviously my WWII film keeps focusing my thinking along that line, as well as my theme "Lies, Damned Lies, Scientists].
  • Reform of career criminals, violent behaviour, self-destructive thinking and behaviours.

Spirit and Soul
I like that point that you brought out - I would never have thought of it.  My first reaction, as I stated on the phone, was that Spirit and Soul could easily be part of MindCode, and should be added to the list.   But their definition in a MindCode sense would likely be far more restrictive than what is commonly understood by "spirit and soul" - that is, at least part of a soul could be passed on, but perhaps enough to make it an important part of the "descendant soul's content".  This would be particularly impressive where unique individual traits of the soul where expressed, even more if an individual had a feeling that this was the case, and to an extreme if they knew whose soul they were expressing.  The last point would be problematic for even grand-parent relationships, almost impossible for earlier generations.  However, we do see people making that claim - but that they usually seem to focus on past famous people is reason for great skepticism.

No answer expected of you
Anyways, these are just brain farts - no answer expected.