Does it really matter ?

[dogbite]

It's the unfounded jump to meaning and meaning as deriving to real facts that I object to. That logic chain is beyond flawed.

I agree with this dogbite!

I agree with dogbite also as far as establishing external reality.

But an NDE is a claim on external reality.

I concur that a person can achieve personal insight about themselves within their own head of thoughts.

[alas]

I agree with this dogbite!

I agree with dogbite also as far as establishing external reality.

But an NDE is a claim on external reality.

I concur that a person can achieve personal insight about themselves within their own head of thoughts.

To the person who has it, it may be. To some others, it may not be. But YOUR NDE is not MY external reality. My NDE is not your external reality. Someone may claim it is external reality, but that is their your claim and I am not going to argue with them about their perception of external reality. It may not be my perception of external reality, but then some things that I am pretty sure are “external reality” may not be, because my perception may have been off. All memories are just your or my *perception* of external reality and when you get right down to it, everyone’s perception is different anyway. Why should some agreed upon perceptions be privileged over others? But those that people agree on do tend to get privileged over others. So, we agree that the color “blue” is the same color. But we may see very different things. Like my son knows what other people call “red” but he does not perceive it the same way I do and certain specific tests can show up that different perception, and we not color blind people claim that his perception is faulty. But we only know his perception is different because sometimes he makes a mistake or flunks the color test. But what if you learned to call this hue you perceive “green” and someone else sees what you would call pink, but they have also learned the same name you did for what you actually see totally differently. How would we know? Like one guy I had in a psychology class. 52 years old and flunked the color bling test, but could correctly name every color we showed him. Even ones that I know will fool most color blind people. He had learned what to call the external reality that he could not perceive. Really strange. So, just what is “external reality? We never experience “external reality” but only our perception. All we have is our perception and certain agreements about “external reality”. Sometimes we don’t even have an agreed upon “external reality”. As trump supporters prove. Have you ever seen photos of “what bees see.” They have a different “external reality” than humans.

What are NDE anyway? All the theories about “the dying brain shutting down” do not fit the evidence. People can have them on drugs. People can have them during trauma. People can learn how to induce them at will through meditation. People who are brain dead, flat line on brain activity, can wake up and report what went on while they were brain dead. So, find an “external reality” that explains them away. There isn’t one....yet.

Oh, I vote for “all in the person’s head” but only because I am such a skeptic, I mean, if I was forced to vote, but since I am not, I am going to say, “we just don’t know...yet.” But the “all in their head” explanations don’t fit the evidence ...yet. There is a lot we just don’t understand, oh say like string theory. Maybe it is another dimension. Maybe that dimension is the next life. Maybe it is all a vivid hallucination, but it is a very different kind of hallucination. Or something. There is so much consistency over thousands of years in these accounts.

[Cnsl1]

For the naysayers and those of us who press for objective data:

https://www.thesoulphonefoundation.org/ ... ne-update/

Scientists have demonstrated the likelihood of life after death, and are confident and hopeful this will soon be a scientific fact.

Dr Gary Schwartz is one of the most interesting people I've had the pleasure to meet and learn from, and certainly one of the most influential professors I ever had. I once heard him give a lecture that convinced it reinforced to me of the existence of God, and he never mentioned God, religion, his belief, or anything but science. I often walked away from his lectures a changed person and better human.

[LSOF]

For the naysayers and those of us who press for objective data:

https://www.thesoulphonefoundation.org/ ... ne-update/

Scientists have demonstrated the likelihood of life after death, and are confident and hopeful this will soon be a scientific fact.

Dr Gary Schwartz is one of the most interesting people I've had the pleasure to meet and learn from, and certainly one of the most influential professors I ever had. I once heard him give a lecture that convinced it reinforced to me of the existence of God, and he never mentioned God, religion, his belief, or anything but science. I often walked away from his lectures a changed person and better human.

I've had a little look around and am not convinced. Dr Schwartz believes in mediumship, which is invariably a con job. The SoulPhone™ just seems like a higher-tech Ouija board. At least he has qualifications in a relevant field, which is more than I can say for other woo-meisters.

[deacon blues]

This sounds nit picky, but wouldn’t consciousness after death be a better/more accurate term. Personally I’m of 2 minds about consciousness after death.

[Cnsl1]

Dr Schwartz rigorously tested mediums and found that while many are cons, some are able to know the "unknowable" at clinically significant levels.

He also discovered possible explanations for "spiritual" communication, including heart wave or EKG electromagnetic wave that can be picked up on sensors physically distant from the person sending. Disruptions in that wave form might be picked up in the body of a loved one who may "sense" something awry. Some people are better receptors than others.

[dogbite]

Anything peer-reviewed?

[Cnsl1]

Absolutely. This is serious research. There has been criticism over their methodology (for instance, how to best study the veracity of a medium) and their subject matter, but not about the lack of peer review.

[alas]

Absolutely. This is serious research. There has been criticism over their methodology (for instance, how to best study the veracity of a medium) and their subject matter, but not about the lack of peer review.

I was turned off by his using his own language for things like mediums. He invented a word for them and never defined it. First rule of such research is define your terms and he didn’t, at least in the article you sent us to, and so that really turned me off to his “research”. He just seemed to be using his own jargon to obfuscate the fact that he is talking about seances.

Now, I am a believer in ESP, and NDE, and some other paranormal. I have experienced some, and I will share one. It was a “visit” from my dead father once when I had my mother in the emergency room in respiratory crisis. I knew he was there, and right where he was. But my view was blocked by the twenty or so people working frantically on my mother. Then days later my mother asked me if I thought her seeing him was a hallucination. She is not a believer in any paranormal. She said she saw him, right exactly where I had “felt” his presence, at exactly the same time as I felt his presence. Then still later, my husband mentioning him being in the room. He is a Mormon believer in visits from beyond, so no surprise if he imagined it. Three of us all had near identical experiences of him showing up. Now, the thing is, he is the last person on earth any of us would turn to for comfort. We didn’t particularly like him. He was an abusive jerk. So, why would we imagine him coming to us when we are afraid for Mom’s life? Nope, we don’t even want him there.

But this guy? He may be on to something, but the way he talks is not like others who study the paranormal scientifically. He needs to define his terms and stop trying to hide that he is talking to ghosts. He really may have proven something, but he sounds like just another con, because he is trying too hard not to sound like just another con. If that makes any sense. I think he doth protest too much.

[wtfluff]

Absolutely. This is serious research. There has been criticism over their methodology (for instance, how to best study the veracity of a medium) and their subject matter, but not about the lack of peer review.

If there is no lack of peer reviewed studies, why not post links to such studies?

[1smartdodog]

Like aliens they may exist, but until there is some real evidence it is hard to take seriously.

If the human mind can invent complex mathematics I am sure it can invent an NDE to cope with trauma.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cnsl1]

Double post sorry.

[Cnsl1]

Sorry, I haven't given you good links to look up Schwartz's research, and I sorta put the cart in front of the horse as far as where he's going and where this came from.

Some of his earlier stuff I can access but can't link cuz it's science journals you gotta pay for. If you have university access can look him up and see the variety of studies he's been involved in. Tons of stuff. Over 400 peer reviewed articles. He's edited 11 books. And yes, he has operationally defined a "medium" in the studies. While he has his critics, his education and credentials can't be questioned.

I'll try to find and link some that are directly related to this topic.. here's one:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 070600454X

You might also be interested in the "Manifesto for a post-materialistic science" , which was co-authored by Schwartz. It's in the 2014 Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing. You can download the PDF from oliphant.nl

https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=e ... FuGmrGlRkJ

The manifesto is probably a good place to start if you're really interested as it lays out an argument for serious scientific research in these areas we've talked about--NDEs, life or consciousness after death, spirituality, spiritual communication, etc.

[moksha]

Sarah Hinze who wrote a whole bunch of books on near-death experiences, recently won the Best Documentary and People’s Choice Award at the 2021 LDS Film Festival for her documentary on the pre-birth experience where she shares her memories of having been valiant in the Heaven War and watching Manitou, Buddha, Zeus, and Ganesha standing bravely with Jesus's plan for our salvation, which she witnessed from the Council of Gods viewing gallery.

[Hagoth]

I haven't looked into this enough to have an opinion that matters but I do know that there are plenty of people who have criticized Schwartz's methods, and that Schwartz refused to make his data available for a review by skeptics, including James Randi, fearing that they would be biased.

If this is reliable science I look forward to many other researchers duplicating his results.

[RubinHighlander]

I doubt these would be significant concerns for a person experiencing a NDE. If NDE have anything in common with powerful trips using entheogens such as psilocybin, Mescaline, DMT etc, and there is evidence that they do, then applying our normal reasoning, logic, and the laws of nature as we understand them would feel rather silly to someone who has had a profound, life changing experience.

I’ve never had a NDE. But I’ve had experiences on psychedelics that make my normal waking life and my regular ability to perceive and understand the world seem like a cheap feeble imitation in comparison. Experiences that make normal life feel like a cartoon animation while the other is like watching Planet Earth in 5k. In these states or “realms” you don’t need to see or hear to know. You know by some stronger deeper way that doesn’t map onto normal waking life.

Now those experiences were are all just taking place in my mind. But then again so is normal life.

+1 here

I can't say if NDEs are the proof of life after death. From my own multitude of personal experiences I don't believe they are. I've also seen the fine amazing detail of the realms that Lucidity talks about, making reality literally look and feel like a lower resolution TV show. I see where the psychonaught hippies come up with their descriptions of these experiences. There's some overlap, but most are very individualist and very hard to describe. Indeed it often feels like there are just not human words or language to describe it; it completely transcends what we have defined as reality. It does, in most cases, provide a feeling of assurance that existence is good and the cosmic energy that makes all this happen is basically just love. Yes, that's right, love. Not all the human and religious messiness we've given that word, but it's purest form of existence. To me this definition of love is more a state of matter than human description. It's a pure form of energy in the universe where there is no longer any emotional state or care. But what I don't know is if my unique consciousness is preserved in anyway in this post death state. I would say it does not, because my mind and experiences come with a lot of human emotional states: pain, stress, fear, sadness, anger, moral judgement, etc. I think we leave all that behind. But the mormon plan says we keep all of that in the next life, so choose wisely. That's why it's easier to have someone hand you all the answers.

These psychedelic journeys are often hard, they really work your brain to the point of exhaustion; it's why I don't venture in very often. I don't trust people who come out of these experiences (NDE or psychedelic), who say they have answers for everyone else. Run away from those people. I often go down these rabbit holes of the evolution of the universe, life here and if there is any purpose to the whole thing. At the end of all of them I walk away with this acronym, every time: IDKSAF. If I ever come here and say "I took this trip last weekend, I have figured it out." Please put the smack down on me and tell me I'm full of $hit.

To me, right now, my dominant opinion on NDE is just a chemical reaction in the brain as it shuts down. But I reserved 5-10% of my beliefs that there is something else, some energy, maybe an intelligence, IDK. I don't trust anyone who says they do know. This is the trap of our Sapient brains, trying to fill all the knowledge gaps, even it's with bullshit! I have also experienced the ESP moments, but not too many metaphysical ones (just a few). When they occur it feels like the cosmos is Fing with me; giving me just enough to make me not go completely atheist but also enough factual evidence to keep me feeling like I'm probably right that it's not a thing.

I also see the crossover to the psychedelic's and the religionists experiences in many cases. In most cases, if you give a true believing person these substances, and they want to talk to God or Jesus or an angel, they will. There's evidence to suggest that these early church history "spiritual" experiences could be linked to psychoactive substances and alcohol. Mind set and physical setting are the two most important ingredients in psychedelic experience, as well as the religious one!

[Zeezrom]

In my formal life as a believer I had perfect know it all answers to the complete afterlife from the moment of death until eternity. Leaving the bubble meant acknowledging I didn’t really have a clue as to what would really happen after the moment of death. The good news is I got to acknowledge my complete ignorance while in this life rather than being completely gobsmacked after death—-if such a thing is possible Lol. Can you imagine feeling like an idiot walking around to every being flashing Masonic handshakes and signs looking for Angels acting as sentinels only to be looked at like an idiot that lost their marbles!!!

[hmb]

NDE.jpg (44.08 KiB) Viewed 5426 times