Conjectural Science and Reincarnation

So, ‘reincarnations’ are authentic, though not realistic. They are – as just mentioned above – classical ‘déjà vu’s’! They are unconscious, dreamy, though not completely true, nor are they authenticated in clear, let alone scientific, language (there is so a ‘jamais raconté’ which has to be told urgently). They are genuine appearances, signifiers1, though they are not real incidences.

Reincarnation deals with authentic images, but not with real existence.

This can easily be seen by studying the behavior of the ‘Ego’ function in context. How can you possibly identify yourself with so many past or also future “I’s” in a ‘reincarnation’? Of course, we know that Descartes erred in saying: „I think, therefore, I am.“ Because he cannot make this statement from where he i s, namely in the unconscious. This dark, foregoing step to existence “is at the level of the unconscious”, says Lacan, “marked by an ‘I think’, which is not ‘I’”.2

There is a ‘somebody’ thinking itself to be an ‘Ego’! A ‘nowhere’, thinking itself of being existent! You are repeatedly emerged in this ‘incarnation’ of an ‘anybody’ and of a ‘nowhere’, are obligated and glued to it. Actually, the ‘reincarnations’ are entwined in ‘light’ / ‘sound’, because the slash, or fraction stroke, that I set between ‘light’ / ‘sound’, does not yet have a valid, upright stay, no sincerity, no steadfast ‘self’, no imposingness. They are rather unconscious objects, mirrored desires. For it would need be a great, or multiple, Ego, that could always responsibly make statements of what it says in precise assumptions (conjectures), and supervise it’s ‘reincarnations’!  

Conjectural science, here’s our initial requirement. This is the only way to correctly categorize what a ‘reincarnation’ is.3 As in psychoanalysis, and in the same way in Yoga, it leads to a temporary loss of the Ego, to an ‘other-Ego’, yes, to the Other as such.4


1 Significant is a term used in linguistics and can be interpreted as descriptor, having meaning, or a unit of meaning. I’ve already mentioned the idea of the „imaginary signifier“ in the context of Kirpal Singh’s gaze, thus, something visually significant and I’ve illustrated this with the three views, or gazes which are intertwined in a picture (ill. 2). Reincarnation is also something visually significant, what has to be entirely symbolized. It only has a revealing function and is not finally „revealing speaking"!

2 Lacan, J., Séminaire Nr. XIV, lecture dated 11.1.67, script page 77.

3 Later on we will see, that the largest I is not the most appropriate expression for the actual spirituality we are looking for. The term of ‘oneself’ or even ‘spiritual self’ is just as questionable.

4 The Other written with capital “O” means the important, significant, totally Other (early in life it is represented by the parents, later on by the analyst or the guru, and at least, by an inside instance. Further going explanations are found below).


Vorstellungskraft, nicht Intelligenz, liess uns menschlich werden.
Terry Pratchett
You are here: Home Analytische Psychokatharsis Artikel Conjectural Science and Reincarnation