I had a NDE/OBE at age 5 from drowning in a pond. I had a NDE/Heavenly Realm at age 25 from an ectopic pregnancy. I had forgot all about the first NDE until after the second. My family confirmed everything I saw while my body was at the bottom of the pond. I saw my mom and sister sitting on a bed sheet rubbing lotion on their arms. They hadn't come down to the pond yet when I drown. Before they came down I saw them in the kitchen getting stuff to bring for a pic nic.I saw my brother was still busy doing laps on my board. I had used it as a raft until he grabbed it and used it himself, causing me to drown. The second NDE saved my life. Because I was in just in Heaven and accepting it, I knew when I came back something serious was wrong because I just died. My doctor had previously done a ultrasound and assured me I was fine and wanted to discharge me. I refused. He admitted me for the night and did another ultrasound in the morning, which revealed extensive internal bleeding. I had paranormal events after the drowning for a while but after the second NDE I had an ability to know when someone in close proximity to me was in need of life saving measures. I saved a little boy from downing in a ditch and a boy choking on Easter basket grass and rushed to a car wreck where 4 men were seriously injured. Each time nobody knew they needed help but me and I couldn't explain how I knew. Something forced me to go to them. It has continued throughout my life. NDEs open a portal to the other dimension, I guess. I want scientific exploration into this but the smarty pants can't stop rolling their eyes and scoffing at us long enough to actually try to prove us wrong.
I’m a neuroscientist. I suspend my judgement on what NDEs mean about the afterlife (they are still experiences being filtered through individual personalities…not even remotely saying they aren’t real or valuable, just saying I can’t personally make a call on what they mean), but I’m extremely interested in what they say about the generally accepted paradigm that the brain generates consciousness. BTW, look up the case of Pam Reynolds. That in itself blows the top off of brain-based theories of consciousness. All discussions of mind should start with cases like that.
He also lived a long time before neurosurgery and modern biology, my point being had he been aware of the physical nature of life perhaps he would not have taken them so seriously.
@@diveguy4291Plato rejected naturalism on purely philosophical grounds. I don’t think modernity presents anything novel which would change his attitudes on that front.
@@diveguy4291 What about neuro surgery and modern biology would've convinced him otherwise? Do you think he'd be surprised that there are correlations between our bodies and our experience? This argument always confused me. It's akin to saying he'd be surprised that removing an eye makes you lose half of your sight.
What about dr. Sam Parnia? (including his AWARE-II study and the latest book) Edit: 24:50 it's mentioned a little 49:00-53:00 on the relation of math (Probability Theory, Bayes Theorem) with philosophy and religion.
My dad passed just over a year ago, it shattered any belief I previously had in concious survival of death, however after his passing i saw rainbows every day while dropping my kids off at school for about six weeks, my rational mind told me it was due to the persistent rain we experienced at the time, but the proceeding months were equally as rainy and I haven't seen any more, I had also seldom seen a rainbow previously, I find it odd, my youngest child was born the day before he died, she was born 3 weeks premature despite all my other children being at least a week late, my dad died within hours of being told about the birth. I am rationally minded so I dont make any conclusions anout this but there is a small glimmer of curiosity that perhaps there is something more to things than what appears.
Other than hundreds of thousands of NDE reports catalogued worldwide, the decades long consciousness experiments and research data on "OBEs" done at the Monroe Institute is not to be ignored. I'd argue that's the most compelling evidence we have.
If someone can prove is real and not just a biological process of brain shutting down. Maybe floating out of body and being able to see things they had no way of seeing. If that had happened then am sure we would have heard of that verifiable evidence.
I'm curious as to why substance dualism would automatically be described as non-naturalist as he seems to assume? Couldn't SD be just what nature is? Not that I am a SD/ist or a naturalist.
Naturalism is a monist position. Naturalists believe that the universe is comprised entirely out of one type of fundamental substance. As the name implies, substance dualism believes in more than one type of substance.
@@jackjones6849 That isn't necessarily true. Within philosophy naturalism has a lot of stretch to it, and as far as I know it does not entail monism of any kind. It is rather that reality is exhausted by nature, and that it contains nothing supernatural. Some naturalists will also add that all of reality can be explored by science. However naturalism is not a very informative concept, and there is disagreement concerning what it means. As such, one could include substance dualism as part of the extension of nature and still claim to be a naturalist.
Fascinating how these "near ghosts" have a very limited vusual sensory imput, simmilat to the living humans. You would think that being spiritual being able getting through walls, you could perceive somewhat wider spectrum. How disappointing. So in many hospitals there are numbers posted on top cabinets pointing up for this purpose, so that people having this "experiences" could identify them. Has anybody done that?
Apparently, a regular feature of NDEs is what people describe as having 360-degree vision. This is something Dr. Baker-Hytch mentions, but it might be in the extended version. As for the numbers test, I think it hasn't resulted in any positive confirmations (as he admits).
Why do you expect the nde to conform to the experiment? Imagine the novelty of being dead but conscious? It has never happened before! You won't be mildly reading a note scribbled on top of a shelf. Timothy Leary has a funny joke about scientist demanding a description of what happened when you have a DMT experience. Least likened it to be shot out of a cannon ball and taking notes. My example is going on a rollercoaster for the first time. If anyone remembers their first time, it is exhilarating and fast. Now if a scientist wrote notes for the rollercoaster newbie to see, well I doubt the screaming guy having a ride will spot them. This doesn't mean the guy on the rollercoaster didn't have any experience. I believe the near death competition, who can read what Mr experimenter had scribbled on top on a high cupboard is bound to fail.
The number test won't work for the same reason experiencing a rollercoaster ride for the very first time you won't be reading numbers on the side of the tracks. Really, writing numbers on top of a high cupboard and expecting one that has just left the body, if this scenario is true, is more an expectation of the scientist for the NDE experience to conform to the experiment. In super novel situations we are in the zone of the experience. Only if you have been on a rollercoaster a dozen times then you can look around and read the numbers. Unfortunately you only die once so if a patient is really floating up there he will be in the zone indeed. So the number test is bound to fail.
@@JarekKrawczyk It's not about spirituality or woo. It's about what nature allows you to do. There is a hypothesis proffered by Bernardo Kastrup about NDEs in which disembodied loci of consciousness could have a 'borrowed' perception of this world from people who are awake and healthy and observing the world. If nobody in the vicinity is aware of a number on a high shelf (especially in a double blind experiment) then it's possible that it won't be perceived let alone focused on. Check out his paper on NDEs and also his analytic idealism, where the world itself is mental in nature, or a shared mental construct.
Interesting. Wonder why we have eyes and ears if according to these NDE reports, supposedly we can see and hear whats going on even without using such sense organs? Why does we have a brain if thinking and observation can be done by floating up under the ceiling or far away from the body...
According to some, our senses are limited to the organs. This is not the case outside the body. Sight, hearing, touch, all of this is one. There is no view to speak of.
@@FelenzoGara Seem like we are doing better without these sense organs then, so why do they exist in the first place? What about blind or deaf persons that have NDE - are they also hearing or seeing things from the world of the senses?
@@ottonilssen1533 I believe the idea would be that this hyper-perception comes from connection to a deeper wellspring, which is antithetical to survival. Think about it - it's only accessible when the borders of "Myself" are frayed and the brain is inoperable. Not conducive to the survival of the organism. Our senses are an affordance of our evolution.
I don't understand this question. I'm not saying the soul exists and is independent of the body, but if it does, and is, then the brain is not ultimately you, the soul is. That being so, it's the soul that 'knows', whether in the brain/body, or out of it, and not the brain (assuming the soul exists).
Good question, actually! I believe that the brain is a sort of transceiver for consciousness. It does not produce consciousness but allows our consciousness and physical bodies to function in and perceive physical reality. Our consciousness extends far beyond our physical brains, yet our brains act as a kind of filter for our greater consciousness. Kind of like how my phone does not produce Star Trek, but allows me to watch Star Trek. And if a friend absolutely hates Star Trek and smashes my phone, he hasn't destroyed Star Trek, just the device (or vessel) which I used to watch it. A crude analogy but hopefully helpful.
Assuming that soul exists, one can communicate the NDE vision details with another person only through brain. If soul to soul communication were possible, we could have communicated even with dead persons.
I would think it this way. We are constantly guided by our higher mind, the soul, like we remote control our drone. It contains all memories of all previous and future life (yes, future). You can regard it as cloud storage. Our brain is our web browser/cookie storing local memories. When they soul return to body, the brain gets refreshed. Our body also receives our body sensation coded into memory and emotion in our body, stored in our brain, which is also constantly uploaded to our soul (just to the portion of the soul known as yourself this lifetime) as eternal experience.
No offense, but I suggest you look into the examples he provided and ask yourself what the evidence is for them. Is it just a story? For example look into the doctor Jean-Jacques Charbonier he mentioned (you might have to translate some of the material). He doesn’t seem like a particularly “skeptical” guy (and has sold a bunch of sensational books on the subject). Furthermore, he says that if we have “lots” of cases, then the evidence outweighs the potential that these are all just coincidences or lies, etc. But if there are SO MANY cases, why do I always hear about the same 3 or 4? And why, if these are presumably examples of some of the “best” cases, are they so often not well substantiated. The AWARE study was a well designed study, and interestingly they didn’t find the evidence they were looking for. Nobody reported seeing the number near the ceiling, so if anything it’s evidence against the OBE claims (or a null result at least). This philosopher seems very nice, so I’m curious how he would respond to these criticisms.
@@GreatMusicLessons I suggest you look at the body of evidence properly for NDE studies. The number experiment you talk about was a double-blind experiment where nobody knew what the number was and patients didn't even know about the experiment being conducted. If they didn't know, why would they be looking for a poxy number on a high shelf when they are focusing on what's happening to their bodies from an out of body perspective? Such an experiment does not disprove NDEs in any way and it is ludicrous to think so.
@@ArlindoPhilosophicalArtistIf you can see peace of garbage on the roof, why not a large number on the top of the cabinet. What, the God is hidding it, so that the supranatural can't be proven?
With reference to the Aware studies, one and two, you need to be aware (no pun intended) of the facts, though. In the first study, only two patients reported out of body experiences. But neither of those occurred in a research area (a room with a board fitted) so the study didn't fail, it was just unable to scientifically (empirically) verify the patient's claims. They did however find one exceptional veridical out of body experience which was inexplicable according to the authors, the case of Mr A, a fifty seven year old man who suffered a cardiac arrest in the cath lab. In Aware two, which has just been published, instead of fitting shelves in rooms, they created a portable apparatus which they took to cardiac arrest codes as soon as they were alerted. It consisted of a lap top fitted on top of a pole that displayed an image upwards and also generated an audible (to the patient only) sequence of fruits (apple pear banana) which was fed into the ears of the patient through blue tooth head phones. The results of this were that no one reported seeing the image (on the laptop) but one patient did correctly identify the three fruits. This was actually quite remarkable and was the first empirical evidence ever recorded in a prospective study. These patients were not 'quick shocks', they were all extended resuscitations longer than five minutes (it took five minutes to get to the arrest and set up the equipment). The sample size here was too small, though. Out of an original couple of thousand cardiac arrests, they were only able to get twenty eight interviews (think it was roughly) and if I remember correctly, eleven patients reported having some memories of their time in cardiac arrest (dead basically). Six of these had what the author (Parnia) now terms RED's, recalled experiences of death. Out of these RED's, I think only one patient reported a visual out of body experience and he just said that he was 'standing up' beside his own physical body (on the bed) and he claimed to see the team getting organised etc. He was also the one that remembered the three fruits. Aware three is now underway and I suspect that the experiment has been further refined. Nevertheless, leaving aside the majority of academics who are of course obliged (they could lose their jobs) to refer to naturalistic explanations to explain these experiences, the evidence from very well designed prospective studies says differently. There's something going on here which is not explainable by brain pathology or any of the other (over twenty now) hypotheses that currently exist. Together with the hundreds of other case studies many of them reliably witnessed by medical professionals, it looks like the brain is not the producer of consciousness but something that mediates it and that is so extraordinary and threatening to mainstream science that there is understandably a lot of resistance.
@@JarekKrawczyk If they notice arbitrary things like something on the roof or an amputated leg being put in a bag, then perhaps that makes it _less_ that they'd notice one thing out of the number of things they potentially _could_ notice - unless you think they ought to notice everything. But I guess you're saying that a number on a cupboard top is unusual enough to stick out? If that's the assumption, I can think of more attention-grabbing things they could have chosen.
@@Eman_Puedama Well, the whole point of a controlled experiment to confirm the existence of phenomenon is for the variables to be controled. There is a reason in scientific inquiry for specific restrictions. Garbage can be found on the roofs and legs are being amputated in hospitals. All I see, are excuses that the fenomenal, supranatural capabilities of people near death are defeated by couple arabic numerals. While all the evidence from neuroscience pointing towards physicality of brain and lack of, or at least massive limitations of free will are being ignored. One guy here got excited, cuz when they forced the dying people to listen to audio feed, on one occasion one patient has remember that, which means that he was more aware of the surrounding then previously thought, the evidence of somewhat functioning brain, the guy think it is evidence of paranormal. I am sceptical, but present me with fulfilled novel testable prediction made by your hipotesis in controled, blinded envitonment, done with decent methodology, and being evidence minded, I will change my maind.
Near death experiences are largely subjective, and they alwyas involve damage to our multisensory organs (like the brain). That being said, I'm less interested in this debate about whether NDEs serve as evidence of an afterlife, and I'm more interested in the philosophical implications of NDEs. If NDEs are hallucinations created by the human brain as a last attempt of survival (as i believe) the fact the human brain can create such a vivid experience that is largely inseparable from our daily experiences and might even be more profound in some cases (like experiencing out of body) is very telling and intresting in it's own right. That puts a large question mark about what we consider to be real or unreal. If an NDE experience is similar and not that different and even more real than our daily experience, who's the say you're not dreaming right now? Who's to say that the people in your life aren't just a figment of your imagination? Something being a "hallucination" doesn't mean it's not real. It is very much a real experience.
Ndes doesn't always involve brain damage no. But i do get your point, besides all the afterlife and soul stuff, your point is that even if it wasn't true, ndes can still be profound and telling in its own right.
Let me tell you about death. Falling asleep in front of the tv without the waking up. That’s death for you in all its magnificent glory. Near death experiences are not: right after death experiences. They are part of the life side. And it’s a part of life to turn our deepest wishes into beliefs. But there is a silver lining around the harsh reality. As humans we are only capable to experience life since there’s no awareness about death whatsoever; no, not even for a short time to observe who will grieve over you. So in a way we all live eternally. The concept of death belongs to our relatives.
How do you know, if you are having those particular experiences, that they are "near death", if you do not die after them? And if you die, you cannot report them. NDE is a pile of baloney !!
Because the doctors and nurses are monitoring your heart and even brain waves. After flat lining the waves come back... Where have they been the last 40 years friend?
@@moesypittounikos But we know at least from 2013 that the lack of electrical activity on EEG doesn't reflect the complete lack of electric activities in the neurons. The studies done on cats a few years back have shown (and the cats' scull is small, so EEG can pickup more) that with a flat EEG and therefore supposedly isotonic brain, that the indwelling electrodes in the cortex and hypocampus showed ongoing electrical activities in the neurons there. So putting it simply the EEG w a s n o t s e n s i t i v e e n o u g h to pickup such activity. The experiences easly can be created by the networks of neurons in the brain, they are not specially fully damaged for +- 4 minutes, and they became permanently irreversibly damaged after 7 min if there is no circulation. The Not Quite Dead Yet Experiences can emerge from activities of barely functioning brain, or even they can be created at some recovery stage.
@@spikespiegel9919The doctors know that the cells remain alive for several minutes, and those who read reaserch papers do know that the flat EEG does not mean that there is no electric activity in the brain at all. We have studies showing otherwise. Further more, even it there wasn't activity during CA (there is) the experiences could be created doring the recovery as the result of trauma. This stuff proves absolutely nothing.
Actually, the hypothesis that oxygen deprivation generates NDEs has already been ruled out as they also have been reported by people who still retained oxygen levels above normal in some unusual circumstances pertaining to air pressure where they still suffered physical trauma.
I had a NDE/OBE at age 5 from drowning in a pond. I had a NDE/Heavenly Realm at age 25 from an ectopic pregnancy. I had forgot all about the first NDE until after the second. My family confirmed everything I saw while my body was at the bottom of the pond. I saw my mom and sister sitting on a bed sheet rubbing lotion on their arms. They hadn't come down to the pond yet when I drown. Before they came down I saw them in the kitchen getting stuff to bring for a pic nic.I saw my brother was still busy doing laps on my board. I had used it as a raft until he grabbed it and used it himself, causing me to drown. The second NDE saved my life. Because I was in just in Heaven and accepting it, I knew when I came back something serious was wrong because I just died. My doctor had previously done a ultrasound and assured me I was fine and wanted to discharge me. I refused. He admitted me for the night and did another ultrasound in the morning, which revealed extensive internal bleeding. I had paranormal events after the drowning for a while but after the second NDE I had an ability to know when someone in close proximity to me was in need of life saving measures. I saved a little boy from downing in a ditch and a boy choking on Easter basket grass and rushed to a car wreck where 4 men were seriously injured. Each time nobody knew they needed help but me and I couldn't explain how I knew. Something forced me to go to them. It has continued throughout my life. NDEs open a portal to the other dimension, I guess. I want scientific exploration into this but the smarty pants can't stop rolling their eyes and scoffing at us long enough to actually try to prove us wrong.
I believe you
I’m a neuroscientist. I suspend my judgement on what NDEs mean about the afterlife (they are still experiences being filtered through individual personalities…not even remotely saying they aren’t real or valuable, just saying I can’t personally make a call on what they mean), but I’m extremely interested in what they say about the generally accepted paradigm that the brain generates consciousness. BTW, look up the case of Pam Reynolds. That in itself blows the top off of brain-based theories of consciousness. All discussions of mind should start with cases like that.
Plato, remember him? He took NDE's seriously. So philosophy will come full circle 🤞
He also lived a long time before neurosurgery and modern biology, my point being had he been aware of the physical nature of life perhaps he would not have taken them so seriously.
Physical can include consciousness @@diveguy4291
@@diveguy4291Plato rejected naturalism on purely philosophical grounds. I don’t think modernity presents anything novel which would change his attitudes on that front.
What are you referring to?
@@diveguy4291 What about neuro surgery and modern biology would've convinced him otherwise? Do you think he'd be surprised that there are correlations between our bodies and our experience? This argument always confused me. It's akin to saying he'd be surprised that removing an eye makes you lose half of your sight.
What about dr. Sam Parnia? (including his AWARE-II study and the latest book)
Edit: 24:50 it's mentioned a little
49:00-53:00 on the relation of math (Probability Theory, Bayes Theorem) with philosophy and religion.
My dad passed just over a year ago, it shattered any belief I previously had in concious survival of death, however after his passing i saw rainbows every day while dropping my kids off at school for about six weeks, my rational mind told me it was due to the persistent rain we experienced at the time, but the proceeding months were equally as rainy and I haven't seen any more, I had also seldom seen a rainbow previously, I find it odd, my youngest child was born the day before he died, she was born 3 weeks premature despite all my other children being at least a week late, my dad died within hours of being told about the birth. I am rationally minded so I dont make any conclusions anout this but there is a small glimmer of curiosity that perhaps there is something more to things than what appears.
What is the significance of rainbows and your father? Unless there’s a connection to rainbows, your mind could just be creating stories.
Other than hundreds of thousands of NDE reports catalogued worldwide, the decades long consciousness experiments and research data on "OBEs" done at the Monroe Institute is not to be ignored. I'd argue that's the most compelling evidence we have.
If someone can prove is real and not just a biological process of brain shutting down. Maybe floating out of body and being able to see things they had no way of seeing. If that had happened then am sure we would have heard of that verifiable evidence.
I posted a link but it doesn’t seem to be here. Anyway, if you haven’t read it yet mate A J Ayer’s NDE is interesting to read.
Thanks. Yeah, we mention it in the extended version.
The conversation actually begins ~ 8:30ff.
I'm curious as to why substance dualism would automatically be described as non-naturalist as he seems to assume? Couldn't SD be just what nature is? Not that I am a SD/ist or a naturalist.
Naturalism is a monist position. Naturalists believe that the universe is comprised entirely out of one type of fundamental substance. As the name implies, substance dualism believes in more than one type of substance.
@@jackjones6849 That isn't necessarily true. Within philosophy naturalism has a lot of stretch to it, and as far as I know it does not entail monism of any kind. It is rather that reality is exhausted by nature, and that it contains nothing supernatural. Some naturalists will also add that all of reality can be explored by science. However naturalism is not a very informative concept, and there is disagreement concerning what it means. As such, one could include substance dualism as part of the extension of nature and still claim to be a naturalist.
@@jackjones6849 no it's not
Last book of David Bentley Hart is well worth reading.
Yup. Reading it.
The fact that only 20% report NDE does not mean that the rest do not have. How many of us remember our dreams?
Great interview ❤
Fascinating how these "near ghosts" have a very limited vusual sensory imput, simmilat to the living humans. You would think that being spiritual being able getting through walls, you could perceive somewhat wider spectrum.
How disappointing.
So in many hospitals there are numbers posted on top cabinets pointing up for this purpose, so that people having this "experiences" could identify them.
Has anybody done that?
Apparently, a regular feature of NDEs is what people describe as having 360-degree vision. This is something Dr. Baker-Hytch mentions, but it might be in the extended version. As for the numbers test, I think it hasn't resulted in any positive confirmations (as he admits).
Why do you expect the nde to conform to the experiment? Imagine the novelty of being dead but conscious? It has never happened before! You won't be mildly reading a note scribbled on top of a shelf. Timothy Leary has a funny joke about scientist demanding a description of what happened when you have a DMT experience. Least likened it to be shot out of a cannon ball and taking notes. My example is going on a rollercoaster for the first time. If anyone remembers their first time, it is exhilarating and fast. Now if a scientist wrote notes for the rollercoaster newbie to see, well I doubt the screaming guy having a ride will spot them. This doesn't mean the guy on the rollercoaster didn't have any experience. I believe the near death competition, who can read what Mr experimenter had scribbled on top on a high cupboard is bound to fail.
The number test won't work for the same reason experiencing a rollercoaster ride for the very first time you won't be reading numbers on the side of the tracks. Really, writing numbers on top of a high cupboard and expecting one that has just left the body, if this scenario is true, is more an expectation of the scientist for the NDE experience to conform to the experiment.
In super novel situations we are in the zone of the experience. Only if you have been on a rollercoaster a dozen times then you can look around and read the numbers. Unfortunately you only die once so if a patient is really floating up there he will be in the zone indeed. So the number test is bound to fail.
@@JarekKrawczyk It's not about spirituality or woo. It's about what nature allows you to do. There is a hypothesis proffered by Bernardo Kastrup about NDEs in which disembodied loci of consciousness could have a 'borrowed' perception of this world from people who are awake and healthy and observing the world. If nobody in the vicinity is aware of a number on a high shelf (especially in a double blind experiment) then it's possible that it won't be perceived let alone focused on. Check out his paper on NDEs and also his analytic idealism, where the world itself is mental in nature, or a shared mental construct.
@moesypittounikos that's a very good point! I don't think I'd be thinking about numbers on cupboards if I were having an NDE!
Interesting. Wonder why we have eyes and ears if according to these NDE reports, supposedly we can see and hear whats going on even without using such sense organs? Why does we have a brain if thinking and observation can be done by floating up under the ceiling or far away from the body...
Because
According to some, our senses are limited to the organs. This is not the case outside the body. Sight, hearing, touch, all of this is one. There is no view to speak of.
@@FelenzoGara Seem like we are doing better without these sense organs then, so why do they exist in the first place? What about blind or deaf persons that have NDE - are they also hearing or seeing things from the world of the senses?
@@ottonilssen1533 I believe the idea would be that this hyper-perception comes from connection to a deeper wellspring, which is antithetical to survival. Think about it - it's only accessible when the borders of "Myself" are frayed and the brain is inoperable. Not conducive to the survival of the organism. Our senses are an affordance of our evolution.
If the soul has left the body during an NDE, how does the brain know what the soul has seen after leaving the body?
I don't understand this question. I'm not saying the soul exists and is independent of the body, but if it does, and is, then the brain is not ultimately you, the soul is.
That being so, it's the soul that 'knows', whether in the brain/body, or out of it, and not the brain (assuming the soul exists).
It seems our soul has memories despite the brain .That's why we never forget our NDE. It is superior to the brain.
Good question, actually! I believe that the brain is a sort of transceiver for consciousness. It does not produce consciousness but allows our consciousness and physical bodies to function in and perceive physical reality. Our consciousness extends far beyond our physical brains, yet our brains act as a kind of filter for our greater consciousness.
Kind of like how my phone does not produce Star Trek, but allows me to watch Star Trek. And if a friend absolutely hates Star Trek and smashes my phone, he hasn't destroyed Star Trek, just the device (or vessel) which I used to watch it. A crude analogy but hopefully helpful.
Assuming that soul exists, one can communicate the NDE vision details with another person only through brain. If soul to soul communication were possible, we could have communicated even with dead persons.
I would think it this way. We are constantly guided by our higher mind, the soul, like we remote control our drone. It contains all memories of all previous and future life (yes, future). You can regard it as cloud storage. Our brain is our web browser/cookie storing local memories. When they soul return to body, the brain gets refreshed. Our body also receives our body sensation coded into memory and emotion in our body, stored in our brain, which is also constantly uploaded to our soul (just to the portion of the soul known as yourself this lifetime) as eternal experience.
No offense, but I suggest you look into the examples he provided and ask yourself what the evidence is for them. Is it just a story? For example look into the doctor Jean-Jacques Charbonier he mentioned (you might have to translate some of the material).
He doesn’t seem like a particularly “skeptical” guy (and has sold a bunch of sensational books on the subject).
Furthermore, he says that if we have “lots” of cases, then the evidence outweighs the potential that these are all just coincidences or lies, etc.
But if there are SO MANY cases, why do I always hear about the same 3 or 4? And why, if these are presumably examples of some of the “best” cases, are they so often not well substantiated.
The AWARE study was a well designed study, and interestingly they didn’t find the evidence they were looking for. Nobody reported seeing the number near the ceiling, so if anything it’s evidence against the OBE claims (or a null result at least).
This philosopher seems very nice, so I’m curious how he would respond to these criticisms.
@@GreatMusicLessons I suggest you look at the body of evidence properly for NDE studies. The number experiment you talk about was a double-blind experiment where nobody knew what the number was and patients didn't even know about the experiment being conducted. If they didn't know, why would they be looking for a poxy number on a high shelf when they are focusing on what's happening to their bodies from an out of body perspective? Such an experiment does not disprove NDEs in any way and it is ludicrous to think so.
@@ArlindoPhilosophicalArtistIf you can see peace of garbage on the roof, why not a large number on the top of the cabinet. What, the God is hidding it, so that the supranatural can't be proven?
With reference to the Aware studies, one and two, you need to be aware (no pun intended) of the facts, though. In the first study, only two patients reported out of body experiences. But neither of those occurred in a research area (a room with a board fitted) so the study didn't fail, it was just unable to scientifically (empirically) verify the patient's claims. They did however find one exceptional veridical out of body experience which was inexplicable according to the authors, the case of Mr A, a fifty seven year old man who suffered a cardiac arrest in the cath lab.
In Aware two, which has just been published, instead of fitting shelves in rooms, they created a portable apparatus which they took to cardiac arrest codes as soon as they were alerted. It consisted of a lap top fitted on top of a pole that displayed an image upwards and also generated an audible (to the patient only) sequence of fruits (apple pear banana) which was fed into the ears of the patient through blue tooth head phones. The results of this were that no one reported seeing the image (on the laptop) but one patient did correctly identify the three fruits. This was actually quite remarkable and was the first empirical evidence ever recorded in a prospective study.
These patients were not 'quick shocks', they were all extended resuscitations longer than five minutes (it took five minutes to get to the arrest and set up the equipment). The sample size here was too small, though. Out of an original couple of thousand cardiac arrests, they were only able to get twenty eight interviews (think it was roughly) and if I remember correctly, eleven patients reported having some memories of their time in cardiac arrest (dead basically). Six of these had what the author (Parnia) now terms RED's, recalled experiences of death. Out of these RED's, I think only one patient reported a visual out of body experience and he just said that he was 'standing up' beside his own physical body (on the bed) and he claimed to see the team getting organised etc. He was also the one that remembered the three fruits.
Aware three is now underway and I suspect that the experiment has been further refined.
Nevertheless, leaving aside the majority of academics who are of course obliged (they could lose their jobs) to refer to naturalistic explanations to explain these experiences, the evidence from very well designed prospective studies says differently. There's something going on here which is not explainable by brain pathology or any of the other (over twenty now) hypotheses that currently exist. Together with the hundreds of other case studies many of them reliably witnessed by medical professionals, it looks like the brain is not the producer of consciousness but something that mediates it and that is so extraordinary and threatening to mainstream science that there is understandably a lot of resistance.
@@JarekKrawczyk
If they notice arbitrary things like something on the roof or an amputated leg being put in a bag, then perhaps that makes it _less_ that they'd notice one thing out of the number of things they potentially _could_ notice - unless you think they ought to notice everything.
But I guess you're saying that a number on a cupboard top is unusual enough to stick out? If that's the assumption, I can think of more attention-grabbing things they could have chosen.
@@Eman_Puedama Well, the whole point of a controlled experiment to confirm the existence of phenomenon is for the variables to be controled. There is a reason in scientific inquiry for specific restrictions.
Garbage can be found on the roofs and legs are being amputated in hospitals.
All I see, are excuses that the fenomenal, supranatural capabilities of people near death are defeated by couple arabic numerals.
While all the evidence from neuroscience pointing towards physicality of brain and lack of, or at least massive limitations of free will are being ignored.
One guy here got excited, cuz when they forced the dying people to listen to audio feed, on one occasion one patient has remember that, which means that he was more aware of the surrounding then previously thought, the evidence of somewhat functioning brain, the guy think it is evidence of paranormal.
I am sceptical, but present me with fulfilled novel testable prediction made by your hipotesis in controled, blinded envitonment, done with decent methodology, and being evidence minded, I will change my maind.
Is it a coincidence that this video is 1:11 long. I don’t think so, nothing is a coincidence.
Well f someone could prove what experienced was real and not just a biological process of brain shutting down.
Short answer; we don’t know. Nobody does.
Agree with you 100% but not the answer especially the physicalist want to hear.
We're as uncertain about it as we are about Thor or santa or big foot etc
Near death experiences are largely subjective, and they alwyas involve damage to our multisensory organs (like the brain). That being said, I'm less interested in this debate about whether NDEs serve as evidence of an afterlife, and I'm more interested in the philosophical implications of NDEs. If NDEs are hallucinations created by the human brain as a last attempt of survival (as i believe) the fact the human brain can create such a vivid experience that is largely inseparable from our daily experiences and might even be more profound in some cases (like experiencing out of body) is very telling and intresting in it's own right. That puts a large question mark about what we consider to be real or unreal. If an NDE experience is similar and not that different and even more real than our daily experience, who's the say you're not dreaming right now? Who's to say that the people in your life aren't just a figment of your imagination? Something being a "hallucination" doesn't mean it's not real. It is very much a real experience.
cant be a hallucination if the perception is in real time , u can look at veridical cases , they are really interesting
Ndes doesn't always involve brain damage no.
But i do get your point, besides all the afterlife and soul stuff, your point is that even if it wasn't true, ndes can still be profound and telling in its own right.
Brain can create very vivid dreams, at time at an instant, so I don't see why it couldn't create these phenomenons interpreted as NDE.
@@JarekKrawczyk how could i create veridical perception right when a person is dead , makes 0 sense
and they always involve damage to our multisensory organs (like the brain). No they don't.
Let me tell you about death. Falling asleep in front of the tv without the waking up. That’s death for you in all its magnificent glory. Near death experiences are not: right after death experiences. They are part of the life side. And it’s a part of life to turn our deepest wishes into beliefs. But there is a silver lining around the harsh reality. As humans we are only capable to experience life since there’s no awareness about death whatsoever; no, not even for a short time to observe who will grieve over you. So in a way we all live eternally. The concept of death belongs to our relatives.
How do you know, if you are having those particular experiences, that they are "near death", if you do not die after them? And if you die, you cannot report them. NDE is a pile of baloney !!
Because the doctors and nurses are monitoring your heart and even brain waves. After flat lining the waves come back... Where have they been the last 40 years friend?
Calling something a load of bologna without investigation is a load if bologna.
Are you asking how the doctors know that the instruments monitoring life signals are not giving any life signals?
@@moesypittounikos But we know at least from 2013 that the lack of electrical activity on EEG doesn't reflect the complete lack of electric activities in the neurons. The studies done on cats a few years back have shown (and the cats' scull is small, so EEG can pickup more) that with a flat EEG and therefore supposedly isotonic brain, that the indwelling electrodes in the cortex and hypocampus showed ongoing electrical activities in the neurons there. So putting it simply the EEG w a s n o t s e n s i t i v e e n o u g h
to pickup such activity. The experiences easly can be created by the networks of neurons in the brain, they are not specially fully damaged for +- 4 minutes, and they became permanently irreversibly damaged after 7 min if there is no circulation.
The Not Quite Dead Yet Experiences can emerge from activities of barely functioning brain, or even they can be created at some recovery stage.
@@spikespiegel9919The doctors know that the cells remain alive for several minutes, and those who read reaserch papers do know that the flat EEG does not mean that there is no electric activity in the brain at all. We have studies showing otherwise. Further more, even it there wasn't activity during CA (there is) the experiences could be created doring the recovery as the result of trauma.
This stuff proves absolutely nothing.
No. They provide evidence of oxygen deprivation.
Such a closed, uncurious mind.
Actually, the hypothesis that oxygen deprivation generates NDEs has already been ruled out as they also have been reported by people who still retained oxygen levels above normal in some unusual circumstances pertaining to air pressure where they still suffered physical trauma.
Finally we are talking about NDEs and giving them the attention they deserve.
me when i dont know what hypoxia is
@@ArlindoPhilosophicalArtistWell, it is not just the plain hipoxia, is it?It is also (primarily) the release of the cocktail of neurotransmiters.