Photo by Wonderlane
At Past Life Answers, we are committed to providing you with accurate, unbiased information regarding reincarnation and past life regression hypnotherapy. However, through the research, development, and refinement of this site, we’ve also realized that the line between objectivity and bias is extremely thin. A critic of our site might claim that the product line we offer–our very existence, in fact–assumes a certain bias, because how can we offer audio files that may facilitate a past life regression without some assumption that the regressions we are facilitating are true?
As the founder of this site, I will concede that I am certainly excited by the potential truth in reincarnation and past life regression experiences, but I must also state that I have not reached a point in my five-year exploration of the phenomenon to consider myself convinced. Perhaps you could term the tone of this site as one of “hopeful objectivity,” as it at least accepts the possibility that the experiences and memories revealed through these audio sessions may have some validity; I for one hope that there is an underlying truth in the work we are doing here. But I would contend that this is no more bias than that of any scientist who performs an experiment hoping for a particular result; as long as the scientist does not allow that hope to corrupt his or her methodology, then the results can still be considered unbiased and objective. By the same token, our sessions do not assume that there is truth in past life regression, and we have taken great care in the production of our sessions to ensure that we do not use language that could lead our clients to fabricate false memories just to make the process seem more genuine.
We will continue to strive for objectivity at Past Life Answers in the face of the considerable bias of some of the web’s most visible and easily-accessible resources for past life regression. If you google “past life regression” today, in the first several entries you will inevitably find www.mypastlives.com, a British site by hypnotherapist Andrew Parr, which unabashedly advertises “real” past life experiences. Another entry or two down, you will find the Skeptic’s Dictionary entry (http://www.skepdic.com/pastlife.html), which offers the opposite bias, attempting to refute the process of past life regression. Both of these websites are worth looking at for their interesting and contrasting points of view. More troubling, however, is Wikipedia’s current entry concerning past life regression (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_life_regression), which attacks past life regression even more aggressively than skepdic.com, offering no description of any positive benefits of PLR therapy and making claims such as “the belief [in PLR] gained credibility because some of the advocates possess legitimate credentials, though these credentials were in areas unrelated to religion, psychotherapy or other domains dealing with past lives and mental health.” While I find no fault in a critical or skeptical analysis of PLR, statements like this one, which disregards some of the leading names in PLR therapy (i.e. Dr. Brian Weiss, Ph.D., Psychiatry, and Dr. Michael Newton, Ph.D., Counseling Psychology) are troubling and only serve to mislead the public. I look forward to making adjustments to the Wikipedia entry in the near future to help to accurately provide both sides of the PLR debate, and I hope to build trust in our visitors by ensuring that the information we present is consistently fair.
Matt Winfree
Maybe you can write next articles talking about this informative article.