XPost: sci.psychology.psychotherapy, alt.consciousness, talk.origins
From: nygdan_morteauxspam@yahoo.com
"CAndersen (Kimba)" on 18 Jun 2004
posted
> john_SPAM@wilkins.id.au (John Wilkins) wrote:
>
>>I knew this would get a rise, but I am satisfied with Sue Blackmore's
>>work on NDEs.
>
> From what I know of Blackmore's writing, she began with her own
> drug-induced experience, which lends the very real possibility of
> hallucination or perhaps a combination of OOBE and drug-induced
> hallucinations. I am reminded very much of Karl Jansen's original
> conclusions about ketamine and the NDE. To me, both sound like they're
> confusing experiences that are somewhat similar to an NDE with the NDE
> itself. It's worth noting that Jansen recanted his opposition to
> spiritual explanations of NDEs
Was that on his death bed or just near it?
> (Journal of Near-Death Studies, vol 16,
> Fall, 1997).
>
> Blackmore's conclusions seem to depend on some very poor hypotheses
> and logic, such as the supposition that her experience is identical to
> all others' NDEs, the idea that no NDErs can distinguish between
> what's real and what isn't, and that people's minds create these
> experiences to shore up their beliefs (when a full study of NDE
> reports does not support this idea).
Sio its more logical to suppose that its because of some other wordly
after life making some sort of connection with the person?
>
> She also seeks to discount the notion that the life-changing aspect of
> a true NDE points to its reality by saying that any brush with death
> will have the same effect. However, research by Dr. Bruce Greyson
> contradicts her stance.
>
> Blackmore makes a truly astounding statement in "Dying to Live":
> "It is my contention that this "real thing" -- NDEs, mystical
> experiences and indeed everything encountered on the spiritual path --
> are products of a brain and the universe of which it is a part. For
> there is nothing else." Taking her intended point into consideration,
> that there is nothing else other than the physical world, it is a
> statement of utmost arrogance and stupidity for she assumes she knows
> all there is and ignores the logical impossibility that lack of
> evidence proves that something does not exist.
Logic is irrelevant since your talking about a metaphysical existence
which need not obey oany conceivable logic.
> Ironically, the kicker
> "for there is nothing else" brings to mind the "universal oneness"
> often reported by NDErs and other experiencers of spiritual
> phenomena--if all is one, indeed there is nothing else.
>
> I find it interesting that on Blackmore's own web site, she includes
> an article by Ed Shermer, who says, "In the end, it is probably a
> matter of personal preference whether to interpret the NDE as a
> glimpse of the life beyond or the product of the dying brain."
ie its a matter of irrationally holding a religous beleif about the
experience or being rational about it.
> Certainly the personal preferences of those I've seen promote the
> "dying brain" hypothesis have been painfully obvious to me. Of those
> I've encountered who have had an NDE, their personal preference tends
> toward desiring a greater understanding of the phenomenon.
>
> My own interest in the NDE comes from great similarities between many
> NDE reports and my own "paranormal" (I hate that word) experiences.
Would you mind elaborating? Not why you dislike the world paranormal,
but what the experiences were/are. Paranormal seems a good word, sort
of inbetween supernatural and natural. 'Along side natural'.
>
>
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
