Oh, heavens forbid, asking someone to believe a first-hand, eyewitness account, you know I would never, never do that, well at least not here anymore. Especially not since there have been thousands of them.
Love
Its been done. Its called “Demon haunted world”. Its by Carl Sagan. You should probably read it.
As first hand account are NOTORIOUSLY unreliable even in complete prosaic situations, I think asking for a bit more than that in confirming something as momentous is justified.
In situatuations of extreme duress, admitted loss of conciousness, and frequently being under the influence of highly psychoactive compounds at the time, I would say the testimony is just one step short of useless.
Unless that testimony accurately reveals specific information that could not possibly be known or guessed by the NDEr, it can serve little purpose but to flag this as an area worth looking into. It cannot serve as the basis of proof for anything other than the patient experienced a compelling experience. It says not one single thing about the internal or external reality of the experience.
You posted in your own words the same thing I said in mine. I see we agree on this.
The greatest number of people on this planet hold belief systems.
These systems are usually forced upon them by parents, teachers and the like. Religions, political structures, scientific methods and procedures, all kinds of protocal, rites, even what to wear, what to eat, etc., etc. Hardly anyone escapes this kind of indoctrination into some belief scenario.
All belief systems are closed. That is all have limitations, boundaries, rules that must be followed or the believer will be ostricized, kicked out, or killed. This keeps the integrity of the system intact.
Some people are able to change systems as they grow older, theists become atheists or vice versa. Some play the part of several different systems. When in church, pray, when in the lab, conduct experiments. There is a great mix of systems here, and a great deal of acting.
If you belong to the scientific system, NDEs are false, they just don’t fit in with the facts of science. If you belong to the fundamental religious system, NDEs are the result of deceptions by the devil. This could go on ad infinitum.
Science will never be able to understand NDEs, neither will the religious folk.
But what happens when that rare someone appears who has bought into no belief system. This individual may or may not accept NDEs as real, but he will be able to read them without pre-conceived beliefs interfering.
Ironically, in the NDE, one of the most common things that happen is the complete loss of belief systems. An experiencer knows only by observation and experience the things he speaks of. It is very hard to live in a world where most people have mind sets on every subject.
I can tell you that the thoughts are clear and the decisions self-evident. The most wonderful place to be is with other experiencers.
So, don’t try to understand NDEs, just don’t worry about them.
Love
Is it my imagination, or is this thread just an endless stream of nitpicking and quoting, which is basically rhetoric to avoid the bigger picture? Speaking of which: what is the bigger picture.
It started as “evolution vs creation” and now its “understanding NDEs + why its impossible to know something”
I may not have the answers, but no human does, nor will they ever. The definition of “truth” and “knowledge” is of a nature that begs for conflict.
It’s unfortunate how a deep-rooted, mostly philosophical debate can turn into an argument about arguments.
How can anyone hope to progress in an argument where each statement is critisized and dismantled into technicalities, therefore making each person’s view invalid?
The saying: “lighten up” comes to mind.
Not necessarily invalid, but possibly unsound. If you want light, go to IMHO.
I’m afraid that you continue to misunderstand, lekatt:
To science, NDE is NOT “false.”
It is–until there is a reliable method of describing it, hypothesizing about its origin or activity, and testing that hypothesis–outside the view of science. By imposing your interpretation, “false,” you continue to misunderstand the difference between belief systems and science.
Ah, so that’s the reason I have hitherto ignored this thread.
This is actually a great suggestion-I just bought a copy of the book, and I think it’s great. Granted, I haven’t read the entire thing yet, but I think it illuminates some of the fallacious thinking behind psuedo-science.
You can’t make this statement with any authority. Why do you think we have reason to believe this?
At one time, I’m sure, people didn’t think it was possible to go to the moon, but you know what, with advances in science we have.
Hundreds of NDEs accurately reveal specific information that could not possibly be known or guessed by the NDEer.
I am always surprised by the lack of NDE information shown on this board.
Love
Lekatt- NDE’s accurately reveal, what? What a nurse might have been saying? What the operation room looked like?
No offense, but these experiences could be explained another way. Luck for example, also the NDEr could subconsciously “hear” certain things during the operation. It could be, because of a spiritual experience-but at this time, with what is known about NDE’s, their is no evidence that it is a spiritual experience.
The arena of science has a lot more work to do, before it has answers to everything (if it ever will).
I don’t think you are giving this board enough credit, in regards to NDE information.
Very specific information is accurately and in great detail given. Even events happening in other rooms and sometime miles away.
Again showing a lack of knowledge of NDEs.
Science will never be able to give answers to NDEs.
Um…How have I shown a lack of knowledge of NDEs? I haven’t given you enough information on what I know for you to ascertain that, now have I?
How can you say “Science will never be able to give answers to NDEs”?
What’s your evidence on that? If it’s just an assertation, well then I’ll say; Science will give the answer to NDEs.
Both opinions are equally valid, unless you care to prove why your opinion carries more weight.
Don’t bother, Meatros.
We’ve been round and round the NDE “evidence”. It is far from good evidence. It is interesting, but not conclusive. I would like nothing more than it to be conclusive, myself. But sadly, it is mostly anecdotes. Much of it, the person who had the experience won’t even coaborate.
Is it enough to be interesting? Yes
enough to be worth studying more? Sure
Anything remotely like conclusive? Not a chance.
Have people been working on obtaining conclusive evidence? Yep, but so far they have a big fat nothing. Until it comes in, I’ll stay on the sidelines except to point out to people that think that the “evidence is in”, well… it just isn’t.
Lekatt has shown a consistent lack in being able to tell the difference. That makes the rest of us “unable (or unready) to handle the implications”.
And Lekatt, please point out a specific example, just one, where the information is “accurate and in great detail”, and could not be obtained in any other means. And, for the kicker… the whole thing is anything like well documented. (I want one case where “unknowable” knowledge was documented after an NDE.) If I can poke holes in it without trying, it just ain’t convincing… Not on a subject like this.
Well, since this board is about fighting ignorance, and you seem quite the expert on it, why don’t you start a GD thread and fight ignorance instead of blabbing about how we don’t understand it.
Oh, include links, book references, and other types of information that can be validated as actually written about this subject, rather than made up inside your own head.
If you aren’t interested in doing so, I suggest you take all this crap to IMHO or MPSIMS and not waste our time in GD. Thanks
I begining to think you are right scotth. The thing I find ironic, is that Lekatt is saying that dopers are uninformed about NDE, while at the same time he is unable to admit that he is uninformed about science.
I suppose he has a vested interest in misrepresenting science. Science does not back NDE, it does not say it’s proven, which I suppose could be construed as an attack on Lekatt-Lekatt had a NDE, it was real-beyond doubt in Lekatt’s mind. The problem is that Lekatt’s experience isn’t enough for the rest of us (those that require the scientific method), we want verifiable proof.
Ding Ding Ding, we have a winner.
scotth-What do I win?
An all expense paid trip to the office, a house full of chores to do, and a car in need of constant maintanence.
Congratulations.