# Death **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 2, 2005, 9:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435 "2005-10-02T09:40:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/21 "2005-10-02T20:46:20Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > Do you really think the idea of near death experiences, including books, research, etc. would have lasted over 30 years since the publication of Raymond Moody’s first book without some evidence. You’re seriously contending that a belief without evidence couldn’t last 30 years? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/22 "2005-10-02T21:41:33Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > Yes, there is evidence of information acquired in an ex corpore state. > Lots of evidence, in the research done on NDEs. Do you really think the idea of near death experiences, including books, research, etc. would have lasted over 30 years since the publication of Raymond Moody’s first book without some evidence. > > Now I could provide a hundred links that show evidence of life after death, but I will post only one. This is the NDE of Pam Reynolds, it is a benchmark case of life after death. Completely and fully documented by the scientists who performed the surgery. Pam’s NDE has been written up in books, magazines, shown on TV, and discussed in many countries. No scientist has ever questioned the documentation of the case or showed in any way it is flawed. Many have disbelieved it, of course, but that is understandable given the skeptical nature of science. > [http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html](http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence01.html) > > This link is only the tip of the iceberg. Feh, I have seen reports of skeptics having same experiences and they continue being skeptics, before you reply, take into acount that I got that info from a Christian documentary on NDE’s. ---
**Author:** ![Wesley\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wesley_clark/32/20581_2.png) [@Wesley\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wesley_Clark)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/23 "2005-10-02T23:02:45Z")
One theory is that consciousness is an electromagnetic field that (probably) exists in the quantum universe [http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0516026.htm](http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0516026.htm) [http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/cemi.htm](http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/cemi.htm) Read the book ‘the afterlife experiments’. It was pretty interesting. It was about a psychologist who wanted to study the possibility of an afterlife so he did several experiments with mediums and found their replies were well beyond those found by chance alone. And he even attempted to control for factors usually considered possible explanations for these things like reading signals in the face or voice. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/24 "2005-10-02T23:32:39Z")
> [@FriarTed](#): > > BUT there is tons of anecdotal evidence. And the teachings of a lot of people more enlightened than you or I, including those not of my faith. [/quote] Anecdotal evidence of what? NDE’s? I’m pretty sure no one’s actually come back from the dead. Anecdotal evidence is not empirical evidence. Neither are religious teachings. > [@](#): > > I know what side I’m bettin’ on You’ve been around here long enough to know that Pascal’s Wager is a fallacy. 😉 > [@](#): > > Without an afterlife, a Deity, a sense of spiritual worth, other humans can be easily discarded if they get in the way and those doing the discarding need dread no consequences as long as they manage to die happily. Cite? I’ve never met an atheist who felt this way. Atheist != sociopath. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 2, 2005, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/25 "2005-10-02T23:37:54Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > Do you really think the idea of near death experiences, including books, research, etc. would have lasted over 30 years since the publication of Raymond Moody’s first book without some evidence. Beliefs have lasted for thousands of year with no evidence, or even against evidence. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/26 "2005-10-03T00:48:15Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > You’re seriously contending that a belief without evidence couldn’t last 30 years? That’s not what I said Marley23, reread my post please. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/27 "2005-10-03T00:56:09Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > Feh, I have seen reports of skeptics having same experiences and they continue being skeptics, before you reply, take into acount that I got that info from a Christian documentary on NDE’s. Yes, I have heard those reports also, in fact, I have such an experience on my site. I am not more likely to believe something because it is Christian than not. I am not Christian, nor do I belong to a religion of any kind. What causes me to believe or not is in the reading of the experience, I have read many humdreds of them, I know what to look for, what is probable, and what is not probable. If you have a cite I would be glad to read it and give my opinion. If you wish a cite of the one I described, ask. ---
**Author:** ![Scott\_Plaid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/258eb7/32.png) [@Scott\_Plaid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scott_Plaid)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/28 "2005-10-03T00:57:19Z")
Can I anti-ask? ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/29 "2005-10-03T01:06:01Z")
> [@Wesley Clark](#): > > One theory is that consciousness is an electromagnetic field that (probably) exists in the quantum universe > > [http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0516026.htm](http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0516026.htm) > > [http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/cemi.htm](http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/cemi.htm) > > Read the book ‘the afterlife experiments’. It was pretty interesting. It was about a psychologist who wanted to study the possibility of an afterlife so he did several experiments with mediums and found their replies were well beyond those found by chance alone. And he even attempted to control for factors usually considered possible explanations for these things like reading signals in the face or voice. I read your links and found them interesting. I believe they are closer to understanding consciousness than most. I see consciousness as an energy field, that energy field controls the brain, not the other way around. I have noticed more research is being done on mediums, or channels as the spiritual people call them. Yes, some of them can be very accurate. It is good that serious research is now being done in the area of spirituality. ---
**Author:** ![Imasquare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Imasquare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Imasquare)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/30 "2005-10-03T01:09:25Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > The brain produces consciousness the way a lightbulb produces light. Asking where the consciousness goes after death is like asking where the light goes when a lightbulb is broken. I hope you’re wrong. It would be very sad if we are no more than biological machines. If that is the case then our very existence is surely pointless. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/31 "2005-10-03T01:10:34Z")
Welcome to the SDMB. Unfortunately, this topic has already been done to death. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/32 "2005-10-03T01:16:11Z")
> [@Imasquare](#): > > I hope you’re wrong. It would be very sad if we are no more than biological machines. If that is the case then our very existence is surely pointless. Why would you say that ? I can’t see how whether we have an afterlife or not affects the pointlessness/purposefulness of existence. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/33 "2005-10-03T01:27:25Z")
Why does there have to be a point? ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/34 "2005-10-03T01:32:00Z")
> [@lekatt](#): > > That’s not what I said Marley23, reread my post please. Once was enough. I know that wasn’t _everything_ you said, but you sure did say that. ---
**Author:** ![Aeschines](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aeschines/32/16251_2.png) [@Aeschines](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aeschines)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 1:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/35 "2005-10-03T01:43:54Z")
The point of human existence is to argue with **Diogenes the Cynic.** Enjoy this small window of opportunity! ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/36 "2005-10-03T03:58:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Once was enough. I know that wasn’t _everything_ you said, but you sure did say that. I did not say that, please reread my post. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/37 "2005-10-03T04:23:28Z")
> [@Wesley Clark](#): > > One theory is that consciousness is an electromagnetic field that (probably) exists in the quantum universe > > [http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0516026.htm](http://unisci.com/stories/20022/0516026.htm) > > [http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/cemi.htm](http://www.surrey.ac.uk/qe/cemi.htm) > > Read the book ‘the afterlife experiments’. It was pretty interesting. It was about a psychologist who wanted to study the possibility of an afterlife so he did several experiments with mediums and found their replies were well beyond those found by chance alone. And he even attempted to control for factors usually considered possible explanations for these things like reading signals in the face or voice. Not good enough, someone else needs to confirm the research, and based on what happened previously on the past century, the great results do not pan out on further research. One thing to take into account: new research regarding consciousness, dismisses any quantum mumbo-jumbo: [http://cogprints.org/4533/](http://cogprints.org/4533/) > [@](#): > > Evolution and Mirror Neurons. An Introduction to the Nature of Self-Consciousness > > Self-consciousness is a product of evolution. Few people today disagree with the evolutionary history of humans. But the nature of self-consciousness is still to be explained, and the story of evolution has rarely been used as a framework for studies on consciousness during the 20th century. This last point may be due to the fact that modern study of consciousness came up at a time where dominant philosophical movements were not in favor of evolutionist theories (Cunningham 1996). Research on consciousness based on Phenomenology or on Analytic Philosophy has been mostly taking the characteristics of humans as starting points. Relatively little has been done with bottom-up approaches, using performances of animals as a simpler starting point to understand the generation of consciousness through evolution. But this status may be changing, thanks to new tools coming from recent discoveries in neurology. The discovery of mirror neurons about ten years ago (Gallese et al. 1996, Rizzolatti et al. 1996) has allowed the built up of new conceptual tools for the understanding of intersubjectivity within humans and non human primates (Gallese 2001, Hurley 2005). Studies in these fields are still in progress, with discussions on the level of applicability of this natural intersubjectivity to non human primates (Decety and Chaminade 2003). We think that these subject/conspecific mental relations made possible by mirror neurons can open new paths for the understanding of the nature of self-consciousness via an evolutionist bottom-up approach. We propose here a scenario for the build up of self-consciousness through evolution by a specific analysis of two steps of evolution: first step from simple living elements to non human primates comparable to chimpanzees, and second step from these non human primates to humans. And NDE, while interesting in their own way, still does not show to be as reliable as it was thought: [http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2001/B/200112768.html](http://www.scienceblog.com/community/older/2001/B/200112768.html) > [@](#): > > In an accompanying Commentary (p 2010), Christopher French from Goldsmiths College, University of London, UK, cautions that problems with NDE definition and reliance on patients’ memory about NDE makes clear interpretation of the study difficult. He concludes: “Perhaps the switching of classification of patients represents nothing more than changes in definition of NDE at different stages of the study. This possibility may receive some support from the fact that, **at the 2-year follow-up, over a third of the 17 patients who had originally reported superficial NDEs were then deemed to not have had NDEs at all**. Another possibility is ordinary forgetting. Such problems must be rectified in future studies because their overall effect would be to blur the distinction between NDE and non-NDE-patients. This overlap would make it much more difficult to identify possible physiological and psychological differences between the groups.” One more important thing to notice, is that out of the 344 patients resucitated, only 12% reported a deep NDE; so until further research, I have to go for a more prosaic explanation, rather than jumping to this as poof of life after death. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/38 "2005-10-03T04:28:24Z")
> [@googlybear](#): > > The western europeans believed that when you died you died and they would mourn and weep. Not quite sure what this is in reference to. For most of the last couple of millennia western Europe has been predominantly Christian, and the vast majority of Europeans strongly believed in an afterlife and personal survival after death. (That many Christians nonetheless mourn and weep at the prospect of death is admittedly somewhat puzzling; I suppose there’s still that prospect of eternal damnation to worry about, and of course Christians always have at least paid lip service to–or attempted to convince themselves of–the whole “he’s gone to a better place” idea.) If you’re referring to pre-Christian Greek and Roman cultures, it’s true they believed in a rather mournful afterlife, but they still believed in some sort of personal survival after death; it’s just that, at least in early pagan times, the afterlife basically sucked–not endless torture in the fires of hell, just an eternity of moping around with not much to do and no way to do it anyhow (which view is also echoed in the oldest passages of the Old Testament). It’s only relatively recently that western Europeans have become mainly secularized and markedly less religious than Americans are, and the modern godless heathen post-20th Century Europeans certainly didn’t invent the custom of getting all weepy at funerals. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/39 "2005-10-03T07:10:08Z")
> [@](#): > > Henry II: She never marries, not while I’m alive! > > PHILIP: Your life and never are two different times. > > HENRY: Not on my clock, boy. > [@\[Lazarus Long](#): > > ([http://www.dustin.icenter.pl/ruminations/notebooks\_of\_lazarus\_long.htm](http://www.dustin.icenter.pl/ruminations/notebooks_of_lazarus_long.htm)) ]There is no conclusive evidence of life after death. But there is no evidence of any sort against it. Soon enough you will know. So why fret about it? I’m of the “we’re sentient meat” philosophy and that one day we’ll be spoiled meat. That said, it’s not as depressing a viewpoint as many people make it sound. To an atheist, life is _more_ precious rather than less as this world is all they’re is. I used to believe in reincarnation but that was a more romantic phase. Now I think that to have to go through everything from potty training to Alzheimer’s twice would just be a form of torture. It’s hardly an original thought, but I think “what happens when we die” more than anything else explains why cavemen painted walls and medieval Frenchmen built cathedrals the size of mountains and today people crash planes into skyscrapers and send their welfare checks to rouged televangelists. Most people just can’t deal with it, and there are things about it that suck, but there’s also a lot to recommend the viewpoint. ---
**Author:** ![Mellivora\_capensis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8797f3/32.png) [@Mellivora\_capensis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mellivora_capensis)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2005, 8:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435/40 "2005-10-03T08:30:51Z")
I find death fascinating in that death provides 6 billion philisophical probabilities, and only one physical certainty. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/death/324435.md?page=3)