NDE

[Sriram]

That is like claiming that a robot is all plastic, metal, chips and circuitry. That is true in a limited sense..... but the soul of a robot is the human using it.

[ProfessorDavey]

That is like claiming that a robot is all plastic, metal, chips and circuitry. That is true in a limited sense..... but the soul of a robot is the human using it.

But none of that suggests anything that goes beyond material explanations. What the robot does and what the robot is is entirely determined by material explanations. And the robot simply doesn't exist outside of, or beyond those material elements.

Now humans aren't robots in the sense that we aren't top-down designed, but bottom-up evolved, but the point about not existing outside of or beyond material phenomena is just as valid.

[Sriram]

'Material' is just what we can sense through our senses. Lot of things exist that we cannot sense. Don't limit the universe to our senses. The world is a spectrum. 

Can strings be sensed? Are they material? Can Dark Matter or Dark Energy or Parallel Universes be sensed? Are they material or non material?

Is the mind a material substance? 

[ProfessorDavey]

'Material' is just what we can sense through our senses.

No - it isn't - there are plenty of things that are clearly material, in the sense of being based on fundamental physics (perhaps physical/physicalism are better terms), that cannot be sensed through our senses. That doesn't mean that they don't exist, nor that they aren't material in the context we are discussing.

[ProfessorDavey]

Can strings be sensed? Are they material? Can Dark Matter or Dark Energy or Parallel Universes be sensed? Are they material or non material?

Yes - of course those things can be sensed and measured if they exist.

Is the mind a material substance?

But you are drifting back into anthropocentricity again, as you do so often. Mind is a term that humans give to certain complex physiological processes, which are themselves clearly physical/material. Just because humans describe it in a particular manner, and consider it to have particular importance and relevance in human terms, doesn't stop it being physical and material.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Flip answers?

If we are looking for an explanation of the cause of such experiences then brain activity can be totally satisfying (though not sure that is the correct word). If you are looking for some greater meaning then I'll leave such speculation to you.

But they can only be satisfying to either a neuroscientist or forsomeone for whom neuroscience provides armory for his scientism. But that is only a part of psychiatry or psychology and may be quite alien to the person who has had the experience.

In other words,is your satisfaction derived from telling that person ''It's just brain activity now fuck off and run along, there's a good chap''

[jeremyp]

'Material' is just what we can sense through our senses.

No. Unless you're going to qualify that by saying we can use instruments to augment our senses. For example, almost all galaxies in the Universe cannot be sensed by humans directly, but can be sensed with the aid of a telescope.

Lot of things exist that we cannot sense.

How do you know, if you can't sense them?

Can strings be sensed?

I assume you mean the strings in string theory rather than actual strings. The answer is we can't detect them which is why they remain just a hypothesis.

Can Dark Matter or Dark Energy or Parallel Universes be sensed?

Yes, yes and no, respectively. Dark matter and dark energy can be detected by watching the way stars and galaxies move. Parallel universes can't be detected which is why they remain just a hypothesis.

Is the mind a material substance?

Clearly.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Have you made up your mind yet about whether your claims of evidence of an afterlife rely on NEAR death experiences or on actual deaths?

Thanks.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Dr Adam Rutherford in his comment about England and Wales being officially majority non christian seemed to positively assert the absence of an afterlife In the Guardian today(GYOFE). Any body want to back him or correct him......walk in his fragrant philosophically naturalistic footsteps, perhaps.

[Steve H]

If they came back to talk about it, they didn't die, so such experiences tell us absolutely nothing about what happens after death. They are called "near death experiences" for a reason.

[Maeght]

But they can only be satisfying to either a neuroscientist or forsomeone for whom neuroscience provides armory for his scientism. But that is only a part of psychiatry or psychology and may be quite alien to the person who has had the experience.

In other words,is your satisfaction derived from telling that person ''It's just brain activity now fuck off and run along, there's a good chap''

No, because I don't use the f word.

I think brain activity - which we know exists - provides a possible answer. Beyond that is speculation which I'll leave to those who enjoy/need that.

[Sriram]

Just as strings, parallel universes, dark energy etc. remain hypotheses....the idea of an after-life and reincarnation are also hypotheses.  I don't see why not! 

Merely because many of you have mental blocks because you associate such ideas with religion.....does not mean these ideas cannot be valid hypotheses! There is enough evidence for that.

I'll leave it at that.

Thanks guys.

[ProfessorDavey]

Just as strings, parallel universes, dark energy etc. remain hypotheses....

Actually I think they are theories, rather than hypotheses. I trust you understand the difference.

the idea of an after-life and reincarnation are also hypotheses.  I don't see why not!

Hypotheses to be valid must be both based on prior evidence and testable. These seem not to meet either of those criteria.

[Nearly Sane]

Actually I think they are theories, rather than hypotheses. I trust you understand the difference.
Hypotheses to be valid must be both based on prior evidence and testable. These seem not to meet either of those criteria.

When has string 'theory' or any of the others mentioned by Sriram been repeatedly tested and corroborated?

Indeed not sure all are open to testing.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Just as strings, parallel universes, dark energy etc. remain hypotheses....the idea of an after-life and reincarnation are also hypotheses.  I don't see why not!

Merely because many of you have mental blocks because you associate such ideas with religion.....does not mean these ideas cannot be valid hypotheses! There is enough evidence for that.

I'll leave it at that.

No-one's saying that an afterlife, reincarnation etc can't be discussed. What is being said though is that your efforts at validating these ideas with NDEs fail for the reasons you're given but won't address. That has nothing to do with a "mental block' - just with not accepting claims as true on the basis of bad reasoning.

Anyway, should we take your rapid exit to mean that you don't intend to share with us whether you think it's NEAR death or ACTUAL death that's relevant here?     

[Walt Zingmatilder]

No, because I don't use the f word.

I think brain activity - which we know exists - provides a possible answer. Beyond that is speculation which I'll leave to those who enjoy/need that.

No, beyond the mechanics lies psychology, psychiatry, therapy counselling and the life of human beings all of which would be badly malnourished on a diet of mere brain activity and neuroscience.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

No, beyond the mechanics lies psychology, psychiatry, therapy counselling and the life of human beings all of which would be badly malnourished on a diet of mere brain activity and neuroscience.

But also done a grave disservice by entertainng notions of the supernatural. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

But also done a grave disservice by entertainng notions of the supernatural.

Interesting thesis which, as it's from you, can expect no expansion.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Vlad,

Interesting thesis which, as it's from you, can expect no expansion.

There goes another irony meter...

Anyway - introducing supernaturalism to psychology etc does them a disservice because, as you well know, there are no methods to validate supernatural claims, nor even to distinguish any one such from any other.   

[Maeght]

No, beyond the mechanics lies psychology, psychiatry, therapy counselling and the life of human beings all of which would be badly malnourished on a diet of mere brain activity and neuroscience.

Sure, to help people deal with their emotions. But not to help explain the reality of what happened to them, which is what I have been talking about. Not sure what you are talking about to be honest. You seem to have gone off on a tangent.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Vlad,

There goes another irony meter...

Anyway - introducing supernaturalism to psychology etc does them a disservice because, as you well know, there are no methods to validate supernatural claims, nor even to distinguish any one such from any other.   

Can you give an example of where the supernatural has been introduced into psychology and in what way it has been detrimental.
I think my criticism with Neuroscience is reinforced by those two triumphs of reductionist thinking in neuroscience.
Namely Lobotomy and Electroconvulsive Therapy.

[ProfessorDavey]

Can you give an example of where the supernatural has been introduced into psychology and in what way it has been detrimental.
I think my criticism with Neuroscience is reinforced by those two triumphs of reductionist thinking in neuroscience.
Namely Lobotomy and Electroconvulsive Therapy.

Err - throughout history societies have ascribed supernatural causes to mental illnesses and treated (or rather maltreated) patients on the basis of that supernatural assumption. Hence driving out demons, evil spirits etc.

And this isn't simply something from the distant past - it is happening today and people in need of medical help are suffering. As an example:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628925/full

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Err - throughout history societies have ascribed supernatural causes to mental illnesses and treated (or rather maltreated) patients on the basis of that supernatural assumption. Hence driving out demons, evil spirits etc.

And this isn't simply something from the distant past - it is happening today and people in need of medical help are suffering. As an example:

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628925/full

Yes I would agree there are horror stories when Doctors aren't allowed to practice. I am merely pointing out the horrors of scientific reductionism and bad ideas namely lobotomy and ECT both of which were expressions of a science deluded in how far it had come and how alienated it was from people depending on it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What definition of clinical death are you (and they) using? Traditionally it was the cessation of certain vital functions like the heartbeat. Thanks to modern medicine that definition is somewhat obsolete.

Death is final. Nobody has ever come back from being dead.

Although if you subscribe to Professor Davey's circular heirarchies you get to come back again and again and again and again and again and again and...........

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes I would agree there are horror stories when Doctors aren't allowed to practice.

Err ... because of adherence to supernatural claims. Hence you have demonstrated that your assertion that there are no examples where introduction of the supernatural into psychology has been detrimental. Clearly there are many examples - and while some none supernatural interventions have have been misguided they would have been based on some semblance of evidence, even if that evidence proved to be wrong. Appealing to the supernatural is evidence-less.