• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Man claims to have seen the afterlife

No one is saying NDEs doesn't exist. There are rational, physiological explanations for them. It's the claims of the reported metaphysical being actually real that is questionable.
But what evidence is there for those explanations? That was my original question. How does one prove that the NDE experience is simply a fantasia, given that you can't get into the head of the person experiencing it? Somone, Lisa I believe, cited a study in which the experimenters claimed to have collated dozens of reports and had framed an "explanation" from whatever common factors they claimed to find. But their interpretation of those reports is just that, an interpretation. I don't think they were the ones who advanced the strange explanation that involved opossum-style faux deaths. But what's the evolutionary advantage of the opossum-human hallucinating that he's going down a long corridor? How does that fantasia enhance survival in the Classical Darwinist manner? The scientists are also free to ignore anecdotal evidence, but the insistence that NDE subjects are (a) accurate about their fantasias but (b) not accurate about seeing things from some astral-body perspective makes the materialist argument sound strained and dogmatic. And lest anyone ask, I've never had an NDE.
 
But what evidence is there for those explanations? That was my original question. How does one prove that the NDE experience is simply a fantasia, given that you can't get into the head of the person experiencing it? Somone, Lisa I believe, cited a study in which the experimenters claimed to have collated dozens of reports and had framed an "explanation" from whatever common factors they claimed to find. But their interpretation of those reports is just that, an interpretation. I don't think they were the ones who advanced the strange explanation that involved opossum-style faux deaths. But what's the evolutionary advantage of the opossum-human hallucinating that he's going down a long corridor? How does that fantasia enhance survival in the Classical Darwinist manner? The scientists are also free to ignore anecdotal evidence, but the insistence that NDE subjects are (a) accurate about their fantasias but (b) not accurate about seeing things from some astral-body perspective makes the materialist argument sound strained and dogmatic. And lest anyone ask, I've never had an NDE.

A Unified Neuroscience Model Explains Near-Death Experiences

Near-Death Experiences: Neuroscience Perspectives on Near-Death Experiences

The Neurology Of Near-Death Experiences

 
Prove it and I will listenj
The problem is science hasnt invented instruments sensitive enough to detect the Astral world.
It would be the same as asking for evidence the bacterial world exists, before Antoni van Leeuwenhoek invented the microscope in 17th century.
So until that happens I can only give you anecdotal evidence.

I dont blame people for being skeptical, cause if it hadnt happen to me I wouldnt believe it either
 
The problem is science hasnt invented instruments sensitive enough to detect the Astral world.
Then one cannot claim an astral world exists.
It would be the same as asking for evidence the. bacterial world exists, before Antoni van Leeuwenhoek invented the microscope in 17th century.
No one accepted it then either.
So until that happens I can only give you anecdotal evidence.
Which is subjective and scientifically invalid.
I dont blame people for being skeptical, cause if it hadnt happen to me I wouldnt believe it either
Its all about the evidence. Anecdotal "evidence" is the weakest of all.
 
Stalin killed millions in defense of a non-religious belief system. Was his materialism the result of his having thought rationally about life, morality and death?

Stalin didn’t kill in defense of any belief system. He killed and imprisoned as a means to gain absolute power. He was a criminal who developed a cult of personality. He had been used by Lenin to fund the revolution through robbery and kidnapping for ransom. He never had a problem killing anyone who opposed him. It had nothing at all to do with his materialism, as you put it. His actions were personally motivated, not philosophically so. From his youngest days, he routinely and habitually killed anyone who opposed him in his quest for power.
 
The problem is science hasnt invented instruments sensitive enough to detect the Astral world.
It would be the same as asking for evidence the bacterial world exists, before Antoni van Leeuwenhoek invented the microscope in 17th century.
So until that happens I can only give you anecdotal evidence.

I dont blame people for being skeptical, cause if it hadnt happen to me I wouldnt believe it either

Or the problem is that if something can be detected it means that it is physical. The only means of detecting things is physically.
 
But what evidence is there for those explanations? That was my original question. How does one prove that the NDE experience is simply a fantasia, given that you can't get into the head of the person experiencing it? Somone, Lisa I believe, cited a study in which the experimenters claimed to have collated dozens of reports and had framed an "explanation" from whatever common factors they claimed to find. But their interpretation of those reports is just that, an interpretation. I don't think they were the ones who advanced the strange explanation that involved opossum-style faux deaths. But what's the evolutionary advantage of the opossum-human hallucinating that he's going down a long corridor? How does that fantasia enhance survival in the Classical Darwinist manner? The scientists are also free to ignore anecdotal evidence, but the insistence that NDE subjects are (a) accurate about their fantasias but (b) not accurate about seeing things from some astral-body perspective makes the materialist argument sound strained and dogmatic. And lest anyone ask, I've never had an NDE.

Science doesn’t prove things, it provides supporting evidence or it demonstrates that there is no supporting evidence.

We know that people have dreams and what physical things happen in the brain during them. It doesn’t mean the content of the dream is something beyond an individual’s brain activity.
 
Then one cannot claim an astral world exists.

No one accepted it then either.

Which is subjective and scientifically invalid.

Its all about the evidence. Anecdotal "evidence" is the weakest of all
You're starting to sound like a broken record.
By now we know you dont believe in it, so why do you insist on being a 1-trick pony??
 
You're starting to sound like a broken record.
Says the one going on about NDEs and astral worlds. 😆
By now we know you dont believe in it, so why do you insist on being a 1-trick pony??
Ask yourself the same question. At least I provide the science which explains NDEs. Anecdotes not required or necessary.
 
Says the one going on about NDEs and astral worlds. 😆

Ask yourself the same question. At least I provide the science which explains NDEs. Anecdotes not required or necessary.
You're the guy who falsely claimed no studies had ever been done on NDE's, OBE's, and astral projection.
I proved you wrong by posting dozens of studies.
I then asked if you could at least admit you were wrong that studies had been done.
I asked you a simple yes/no answer, and you still couldnt do that.

For that reason you cannot be taken seriously.

Here are all the studies again for those who missed it


And here are some of the peer-reviewed research papers:



















 
You're the guy who falsely claimed no studies had ever been done on NDE's, OBE's, and astral projection.
I proved you wrong by posting dozens of studies.
I then asked if you could at least admit you were wrong that studies had been done.
I asked you a simple yes/no answer, and you still couldnt do that.

For that reason you cannot be taken seriously.

Here are all the studies again for those who missed it


And here are some of the peer-reviewed research papers:



















I claimed physiological processes explains NDEs, the science of which i cited. There is nothing which establishes the veracity of any actual "astral worlds" or other things one "experiences" in a NDE. You seem to think the things experienced in a NDE are actually real, is that correct?
 
I claimed physiological processes explains NDEs, the science of which i cited. There is nothing which establishes the veracity of any actual "astral worlds" or other things one "experiences" in a NDE. You seem to think the things experienced in a NDE are actually real, is that correct?
DUH!!! Obviously I think they're real.
After all my posts ITT you still have to ask that question??

Now let me ask you again, and please respond with just a yes or no answer.
After I posted the studies, do you now admit there have been dozens of studies done on NDE's?? Yes or no??
 
DUH!!! Obviously I think they're real.
After all my posts ITT you still have to ask that question??

Now let me ask you again, and please respond with just a yes or no answer.
After I posted the studies, do you now admit there have been dozens of studies done on NDE's?? Yes or no??
What you think is real is not necessarily so. Like a dream or hallucination. Thats what the studies i cited demonstrate.
 
What you think is real is not necessarily so. Like a dream or hallucination. Thats what the studies i cited demonstrate
I didnt ask you whether you think the studies I posted are real or not.
Answer the question again, after I posted the studies, do you now admit there have been dozens of studies done on NDE's??

Yes or no??
 
I didnt ask you whether you think the studies I posted are real or not.
Answer the question again, after I posted the studies, do you now admit there have been dozens of studies done on NDE's??

Yes or no??
I didn't ask about your studies. I asked if think whatever you saw was actually real and not some dream or hallucination?
 
I didn't ask about your studies. I asked if think whatever you saw was actually real and not some dream or hallucination?
Still cant answer with a simple yes/no answer.
It shows your lack of honesty.

I'm done with you, I dont have time for trolls.
Life's too short for that
 
Brains hallucinate even everyday shit. Like the color "purple" and the visual lacuna between the eyes.
 
Still cant answer with a simple yes/no answer.
It shows your lack of honesty.

I'm done with you, I dont have time for trolls.
Life's too short for that
Such projection.
 
Brains hallucinate even everyday shit. Like the color "purple" and the visual lacuna between the eyes.
But some people apparently think hallucinations are real things rather than mere hallucinations. Go figure.
 
But some people apparently think hallucinations are real things rather than mere hallucinations. Go figure.
Well, to be fair, much of what occurs in the visual field is hallucinatory. That's my point. Brains are hallucination machines. Some of these visual constructs are quotidian. They are functional solutions to perceptual problems. They are also rigorous, in so much as brains are regularly solving these problem across multiple persons and instances. Everyone who sees purple is "hallucinating" it, for example. The brain is "smudging" blue and red wavelengths the eye cannot process well at the same time.

This may or may not be the case with NDEs, which have similar elements (probably related to occipital structures) but also are wildly individual.
 
Well, to be fair, much of what occurs in the visual field is hallucinatory. That's my point. Brains are hallucination machines. Some of these visual constructs are quotidian. They are functional solutions to perceptual problems. They are also rigorous, in so much as brains are regularly solving these problem across multiple persons and instances. Everyone who sees purple is "hallucinating" it, for example. The brain is "smudging" blue and red wavelengths the eye cannot process well at the same time.

This may or may not be the case with NDEs, which have similar elements (probably related to occipital structures) but also are wildly individual.
NDEs are all about the brain, especially in response to traumatic events and related stimuli leading to death. There was a case a few years ago where a patient was having a brain EEG and he died as it was recording brain activity. The EEG recorded what happens in the brain immediately before and after death, namely brainwaves similar to dreams and memory recall. This would explain the claims of NDEs.
 
Back
Top Bottom