A Harvard neurosurgeon's evidence for life after death

[atheistgirl]

[Or is it just someone eating a biscuit…

I had just put my coffee down when I opened your post.

Sarah x
[/quote]

 

[cornbread_r2]

You are misrepresenting me! I did not state that persons who experienced NDEs didn’t die.

Far from being useless, NDEs are, in my opinion, convincing evidence that materialism is false and that we survive after death as conscious individuals.

Despite the fact that no one reporting an NDE actually died?

Then it wouldn’t be an NDE!

I’m half-expecting a claim now that NDE really doesn’t mean Near Death Experience.

Neither I nor anyone else is in a position to judge whether everyone who experiences an NDE has or has not died. Probably some haven’t died, others have died before returning to life and yet others have died for once and for all. I have never even considered whether I was dead but now I think about it I may well have been asphyxiated by the large quantity of seawater I swallowed.

Nor is it evident from such an experience how long we survive after we are dead. It is possible, although I think it is unlikely, that the mind ceases to exist after a certain period of time. From a philosophical point of view there is no way of being absolutely sure about what occurs after death

.

Determining precisely when someone dies is admittedly tricky business, but I’m going way out on a limb here and assert that people who actually go all the way and really and truly die – stay dead.

If my brain was at its lowest functioning level by what mechanism do you explain my state of extreme lucidity?

As you weren’t connected to brain-scanning equipment at the time, you have no idea how low your brain function actually was at that time.

We’ve been around this mulberry bush already. Even if your brain actually did reach a critically low functional level, you still wouldn’t know if your memory of extreme lucidity or whatever occurred when your brain was at its lowest level or before it got to that level or as it started to recover or was nearly fully recovered. Before you start formulating a possible objection, bear in mind that we can cram very detailed and lucid dreams into very short time spans (as one of my original reviewers noted).

 

[Bradski]

As you weren’t connected to brain-scanning equipment at the time, you have no idea how low your brain function actually was at that time.

I think that all we need to do to put this problem to bed is a simple experiment. All we need is Tony, some brain scanning equipment and a bucket of water big enough to get his head in. And maybe some restraints.

Oh, and an alibi if the NDE turns into an ADE.

 

[tonyrey]

I think that all we need to do to put this problem to bed is a simple experiment. All we need is Tony, some brain scanning equipment and a bucket of water big enough to get his head in. And maybe some restraints. Oh, and an alibi if the NDE turns into an ADE.

A typically vacuous post that does precisely nothing to refute the points I have made or further the discussion. A psychologist could probably explain a materialist’s obsessive urge to participate on a Catholic forum in order to destroy beliefs which don’t fit into his scheme of things. There must be some physical cause obviously. I wonder what it is… After all none of us can choose what to believe, can we?

 

[tonyrey]

You are misrepresenting me! I did not state that persons who experienced NDEs didn’t die.

No response.

I’m half-expecting a claim now that NDE really doesn’t mean Near Death Experience.

What you are half-expecting is totally insignificant.

Neither I nor anyone else is in a position to judge whether everyone who experiences an NDE has or has not died. Probably some haven’t died, others have died before returning to life and yet others have died for once and for all. I have never even considered whether I was dead but now I think about it I may well have been asphyxiated by the large quantity of seawater I swallowed.

Nor is it evident from such an experience how long we survive after we are dead. It is possible, although I think it is unlikely, that the mind ceases to exist after a certain period of time. From a philosophical point of view there is no way of being absolutely sure about what occurs after death
.

Determining precisely when someone dies is admittedly tricky business, but I’m going way out on a limb here and assert that people who actually go all the way and really and truly die – stay dead.

Your dogmatic assertion has no rational foundation whatsoever and simply reflects your materialistic scheme of things. If my brain was at its lowest functioning level by what mechanism do you explain my state of extreme lucidity?

As you weren’t connected to brain-scanning equipment at the time, you have no idea how low your brain function actually was at that time.

Since you too have no idea if of how low my brain function actually was you are not justified in asserting that I was in a state of extreme lucidity due solely to my brain function.

Even if your brain actually did reach a critically low functional level, you still wouldn’t know if your memory of extreme lucidity or whatever occurred when your brain was at its lowest level or before it got to that level or as it started to recover or was nearly fully recovered. Before you start formulating a possible objection, bear in mind that we can cram very detailed and lucid dreams into very short time spans (as one of my original reviewers noted).

Your hypothesis is again based on the unjustifiable assumption that all our mental experiences are caused by brain function. If this were true your scepticism regarding my experience would be worthless and self-destructive. It would be the product of your physical constitution, upbringing and environment. In a word you would have been conditioned - like a biological robot - to reject anything that is in principle scientifically inexplicable…

 

[tonyrey]

An exquisite pleasure had invaded my senses, something isolated, detached, with no suggestion of its origin. And at once the vicissitudes of life had become indifferent to me, its disasters innocuous, its brevity illusory – this new sensation having had on me the effect which love has of filling me with a precious essence; or rather this essence was not in me it was me. … Whence did it come? What did it mean?

Tony, what do you think? A possible NDE or at least something equally supernatural. How can you explain it? In fact, is it at all possible to explain it in materialistic terms without confronting the mind/body conundrum?

Or is it just someone eating a biscuit…

Your ecstatic post suggests that you have been consuming something far more intoxicating than a humble biscuit - unless it has been spiked by one of your admirers of course!

 

[cornbread_r2]

No response.

I responded. You just didn’t like the response. The sequence again:

Far from being useless, NDEs are, in my opinion, convincing evidence that materialism is false and that we survive after death as conscious individuals.

Despite the fact that no one reporting an NDE actually died?

Then it wouldn’t be an NDE!

Restating the last bit: If people died, it wouldn’t be an NDE.

Though not stated in so many words, the logical inference is that you agreed that people experiencing NDEs didn’t die. So no, I don’t agree that I misrepresented you.

(BTW, I have now been accused of both mocking your experience and misrepresenting your words. In that I have demonstrated that both of those accusations were unwarranted, can a brother get a mea culpa, or something?)

Your dogmatic assertion has no rational foundation whatsoever and simply reflects your materialistic scheme of things. If my brain was at its lowest functioning level by what mechanism do you explain my state of extreme lucidity?

Since you too have no idea if of how low my brain function actually was you are not justified in asserting that I was in a state of extreme lucidity due solely to my brain function.

Your hypothesis is again based on the unjustifiable assumption that all our mental experiences are caused by brain function. If this were true your scepticism regarding my experience would be worthless and self-destructive. It would be the product of your physical constitution, upbringing and environment. In a word you would have been conditioned - like a biological robot - to reject anything that is in principle scientifically inexplicable…

Individuals in this thread have either given you, or pointed you towards, empirically-based, plausible, naturalistic explanations for NDEs. Accept them or not – I really don’t care – but please stop pretending that it’s only a pernicious, dogmatic, irrational, reductive hatred for all that is good and holy that leads others to that conclusion.

If our mental experiences are not dependent upon our brains, what else would they be dependent upon? What evidence do you have for whatever alternate cause you propose? Be aware that I will not accept cleverly constructed syllogisms involving unfalsifiable premises as evidence.

 

[tonyrey]

NB I ignore and delete irrelevant personal remarks.

Far from being useless, NDEs are, in my opinion, convincing evidence that materialism is false and that we survive after death as conscious individuals.

Despite the fact that no one reporting an NDE actually died?
Then it wouldn’t be an NDE!
Restating the last bit: If people died, it wouldn’t be an NDE.

Though not stated in so many words, the logical inference is that you agreed that people experiencing NDEs didn’t die. So no, I don’t agree that I misrepresented you.

Your deduction is invalid. “reporting” excludes those who have not reported NDEs before they died and those who have not reported NDEs without having died. I am a prime example of the latter - and it is possible I may have died without being aware of the fact.

Your hypothesis is again based on the unjustifiable assumption that all our mental experiences are caused by brain function. If this were true your scepticism regarding my experience would be worthless and self-destructive. It would be the product of your physical constitution, upbringing and environment. In a word you would have been conditioned - like a biological robot - to reject anything that is in principle scientifically inexplicable…

Individuals in this thread have either given you, or pointed you towards, empirically-based, plausible, naturalistic explanations for NDEs.
Please give one specific example of a conclusive empirically-based, plausible, naturalistic explanation for NDEs.

If our mental experiences are not dependent upon our brains, what else would they be dependent upon? What evidence do you have for whatever alternate cause you propose?

The vast majority of human beings have believed, do believe and will continue to believe that our minds are not dependent on our brains for the simple reason that we have free will and are responsible for our behaviour - which would not be the case if our thoughts, choices, actions, decisions and conclusions were determined by physical events. Further evidence is provided by legal systems throughout the world…

As I have pointed out, if this were not the case your scepticism regarding my experience would be worthless and self-destructive. It would be the product of your physical constitution, upbringing and environment. In a word you would have been conditioned - like a biological robot - to reject anything that is in principle scientifically inexplicable…

 

[tonyrey]

Even if your brain actually did reach a critically low functional level, you still wouldn’t know if your memory of extreme lucidity or whatever occurred when your brain was at its lowest level or before it got to that level or as it started to recover or was nearly fully recovered. Before you start formulating a possible objection, bear in mind that we can cram very detailed and lucid dreams into very short time spans (as one of my original reviewers noted).

The supposition that my experience of drowning is similar to having a dream - or may have even have occurred in a dream - is, to put it mildly, unrealistic…

 

[seeker_of_God]

The supposition that my experience of drowning is similar to having a dream - or may have even have occurred in a dream - is, to put it mildly, unrealistic…

Why?

You are asking for all sorts of proof, but in all this long thread, you have provided exactly zero evidence for your assertions. So, why don’t you give your proof?

 

[Bradski]

…and it is possible I may have died without being aware of the fact.

You made coffee go up my nose, dammit.

 

[Linux]

You made coffee go up my nose, dammit.

 

[Linux]

Why?

You are asking for all sorts of proof, but in all this long thread, you have provided exactly zero evidence for your assertions. So, why don’t you give your proof?

uhmmmmmmmmmmm…he has no proof. Leading the witness, case dismissed.

 

[tonyrey]

You made coffee go up my nose, dammit.

Just wait until you swallow a litre of sea water…

 

[tonyrey]

uhmmmmmmmmmmm…he has no proof. Leading the witness, case dismissed.

I entirely agree. He hasn’t refuted a single one of my points… nor have any of the other sceptics (with a few Catholics in their ranks of course).

 

[tonyrey]

You are asking for all sorts of proof, but in all this long thread, you have provided exactly zero evidence for your assertions. So, why don’t you give your proof?

I’m waiting for you to make one positive statement!

 

[tonyrey]

“During my coma my brain wasn’t working improperly, it wasn’t working at all. Many of the NDEs reported happen when a person’s heart has shut down for a while but** in my case the neocortex [higher brain] was out of the picture.** I was encountering a world of consciousness that existed free of the limitations of my physical brain.”
sundayexpress.co.uk/news/weird/376844/It-may-be-scientifically-impossible-but-is-there-an-afterlife?utm_source=outbrain

What (if any) is your explanation?

 

[Aloysium]

ppl that have had NDE’s appear to have experienced a life changing event
i’m not sure how far their statements will go in convincing others tho’
evidence? those that have faith, need no evidence; for those that don’t, there will never be enough

 

[seeker_of_God]

I entirely agree. He hasn’t refuted a single one of my points… nor have any of the other sceptics (with a few Catholics in their ranks of course).

Um, he was referring to you, who has no proof.

 

[seeker_of_God]

I’m waiting for you to make one positive statement!

And I’m waiting for you to prove what you are claiming, just as you are asking others to prove what they are saying. It goes both ways.

What is your proof that your experience was a result of anything more than natural brain function?

If you ignore this post, as you have ignored most of my previous ones, I will assume you have no proof. Likewise if you attempt to redirect.