Are child prodigies evidence of reincarnation?

I have been thinking about this for a while and I believe that child prodigies are evidence for reincarnation.

Child Prodigy:

A child prodigy is someone who at an early age masters one or more skills at an adult level.[1] One heuristic for classifying prodigies is: a prodigy is a child, typically younger than 15 years old, who is performing at the level of a highly trained adult in a very demanding field of endeavor.[1][2]

listverse.com...
www.cracked.com...

How else can you explain the amount of knowledge and ability that these people have at such a young age? Mozart, for example, was by the age of five composing his own music. Even if you started teaching a normal child music by the age of two or three, how many would be composing by five, or even mastered their instruments? Not many, I don't think.

I think that somehow prodigies retain knowledge of a past life/lives. Maybe not consciously, because they normally undergo some kind of rudimentary training. But they seem to grasp the teaching so easily and then quickly surpass the teacher. Think of it as a "refresher course."

If you spend a lifetime learning a particular skill or profession, and then are reborn with residual knowledge of all that you learned, you would be a prodigy in that area of expertise.


Some well known child prodigies:

Akrit Jaswal

Akrit Jaswal is a Punjabi adolescent who has been hailed as a child prodigy who has gained fame in his native Punjab (India) as a physician, despite never having attended medical school.

Kim Ung-yong:

Kim was a guest student of physics at Hanyang University from the age of 3 until he was 6.[1]. At the age of 7 he was invited to America by NASA.[1]. He finished his university studies, eventually getting a Ph.D. in physics at Colorado State University [1] before he was 15. In 1974, during his university studies, he began his research work at NASA[1] and continued this work until his return to Korea in 1978.

very interesting stuff thanks for posting.

question...

Are child prodigies simply the end result of being raised in an environment that is conducive to reaching incredible potentials?

Ie. Most parents treat their children as children, here is a toy learn to play with it

The parents of most prodigies are very attentive to their children and encourage learning at a very young age. They engage the children in learning and this, I believe is the reason for the prodigies.

You get out, what you put in

Society makes us assume we need to treat children a certain way at certain ages but the truth is they learn from what you expose them to.

I certainly believe there is some residual knowledge in our children. I don't know if this is genetic or spiritual, but it obviously exists. I read a study once where a certain pod of dolphins learned to use rocks as tools. they would teach the skill to their off-spring, and each generation picked up the skill at an earlier and earlier age!

My son's first word was "bike" in a Target store. He was around a year old, and he threw a fit to go see the bikes. We have no idea how he knew or learned that, or why he was so emotionally connected to it. He didn't learn it from us, and he doesn't go to daycare.

Tis true, there was a great show on recently in the UK called trophy kids. it showed about 5 kids with really pushy parents, turning their kids into amazing sports stars.If you started training a kid at 3 to play the piano im sure within a yearor 2 you could get them to adult standard.

Originally posted by warrenb
Are child prodigies simply the end result of being raised in an environment that is conducive to reaching incredible potentials?

The parents of most prodigies are very attentive to their children and encourage learning at a very young age. They engage the children in learning and this, I believe is the reason for the prodigies.

You get out, what you put in

Society makes us assume we need to treat children a certain way at certain ages but the truth is they learn from what you expose them to.

Thanks for the reply. Yet, I disagree. I think a prodigy is way above just an intelligent child. If it were that easy there would be more child prodigies around. Not every child, or even the majority, will become prodigies if raised in such a learning environment. Plus, how do you explain cases where the child's knowledge or talent surpasses that of any of their teachers?

Originally posted by warrenb
very interesting stuff thanks for posting.

question...

Are child prodigies simply the end result of being raised in an environment that is conducive to reaching incredible potentials?

Ie. Most parents treat their children as children, here is a toy learn to play with it

The parents of most prodigies are very attentive to their children and encourage learning at a very young age. They engage the children in learning and this, I believe is the reason for the prodigies.

You get out, what you put in

Society makes us assume we need to treat children a certain way at certain ages but the truth is they learn from what you expose them to.

Although I feel that there is some importance on the 'what you put in influences what you get out' theory, you have to look at the family situations of MANY of the child prodigies around the world. Many do not live in a great or even middle class family (lifestyle wise.) Many grow up in poor households with very little educational options and so on.

Take for instance this young girl that can paint masterpieces before she was 9. Very brilliant young woman. Brought up by atheists. When asked where she learned to paint like that (she paints lifelike oil paintings) she simply replies "I get them from God. He talks to me and tells me how to do it."

Then you have a young man that by the age of 8 wrote his first symphony. All by himself. Nothing special about his family either. Parents weren't music freaks or anything. He simply says that it is always in his head. He has since written many more and his is only 12.

When I have discussed this idea about reincarnation and using prodigies as examples with my debunker friends they simply attribute it to mathematics.

Yes. Plain old math is what they say. They say that the children are simply mathematically inclined. Because everything in the universe is based on math. The music, the strokes of a paint brush, memorization, etc. So to them it is nothing more than really smart kids.

This is an interesting thought but it doesn't explain everything. It is almost a cop out. Trying to oversimplify what these children could represent.

Me? I'm torn. Because if what physics tells us is true, that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, then why not? Why not be recycled? Not necessarily the same person over and over but pieces of the energy?

Just a thought.

Then we get into the discussion of a higher energy (power, or source, or God to some).

This is why I don't understand some of the Christian views on reincarnation. They say that you have one life. Screw it up and you're, well, screwed. But would God truly do that to his beloved creations? You see, there are lots of questions created by this very interesting topic.

I could go on forever on it.

reply to post by dariousg


Thanks for the reply, and thanks to all who have replied.

Yes, this issue is not 'cut and dried' in my opinion. Sure there are some bright kids that are the children of accomplished parents that pass that on. But, as you point out, there are the true prodigies that are born into a situation that is not ideal. It is these children that I mean when I say child prodigy.

Take Kim Ung-yong. He was in university studying physics at age 3. What possibly could his parents have taught him in those three years that got him to that level? Were they shoving equations in his face at 6 months of age?

[edit on 12-6-2009 by TheComte]

Originally posted by dariousg
Me? I'm torn. Because if what physics tells us is true, that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, then why not? Why not be recycled? Not necessarily the same person over and over but pieces of the energy?

It's kinda ironic, they believe in that, but don't believe in perpetual motion.

In my own theory, we leave an imprint to the fabrics of space-time when we die, well probably, we have that imprint the moment we are born or developed self-awareness. You can call it consciousness if you want.

That imprint can find itself back to the physical world if it finds itself a suitable soul - a soulmate? Someone with characteristics close to its own or simply close to home.