ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags neuroscience , physics

Reply
Old 5th November 2019, 10:29 PM   #121
sackett
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Detroit
Posts: 5,698
Well hell, lightwave ol' pal, I've had 2 near-death experiences, when I was shot at and missed. I don't recall anything but the immediate circumstances: crack-boom-echo, welp, I'm still here.

Do those count? If they do, why? If not, why not?

I think that maybe, just possibly, you may have to consider that

your opinion is worthless.
__________________
Fill the seats of justice with good men; not so absolute in goodness as to forget what human frailty is. -- Thomas Jefferson

What region of the earth is not filled with our calamities? -- Virgil
sackett is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th November 2019, 11:11 PM   #122
Loss Leader
I would save the receptionist.
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 26,882
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
As long as one begins with reality as a material / physical world, then the notion of a soul can never gain any traction. A material / physical world has no explanaition or possibility of a living conscious being, much less a conscious being that survives death. Yet consciousness is - so begin with a different model. I don't know what the term 'soul' refers to, so this is not my wheelhouse.

What?

Why do you say that a material world has no explanation or possibility of a conscious being?

Quarks behave very differently than atoms. Atoms behave very differently than molecules. A single molecule behaves very different than a mass of them. And yet they're all predicted (and testable) in a single model. What is to prevent that from also including conscious life?

Sure, we may not have a strict definition of consciousness. We know we are, we suspect dolphins are, we've seen mother elephants grieve over the death of their child. Maybe dogs are, maybe birds are. Viruses definitely are not, nor are bacteria. So there's no bright line test of conscious/non-conscious animals. So what? Is there a bright line test between homicide and manslaughter, or male and female, or even our border with Canada? Parts of America that people live on are on the Mexico side of the border wall.

At the edges, things can start to get murky. There's a grey area in everything. There's a grey area in how badly Americans are willing to treat the people who make our clothes. Inside the US, they're treated relatively well. In Cambodia, they may be treated far worse than we could ever in good conscience allow. Yet we still go to Costco for $17.00 shirts.

So there's no good definition of consciousness, let alone a bright line for species to step over - so what? It doesn't change the fact that scientists can track the movement of electricity within the brain and predict whether a person is remembering something or smelling something. It doesn't change the fact that we've identified a massive number of chemical neurotransmitters that do different things when released into different parts of the brain.

The material world fully explains the actions of our brains. We deem ourselves conscious. Thus, the material world fully explains that we deem ourselves conscious.

Playing silly buggers with definitions is all good fun. But, in the end, however you personally define it, consciousness and materialism are completely compatible.

Unless, of course, you can design a repeatable, falsifiable test to show they're not. Can you do that?
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 02:36 AM   #123
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
This therefore can't be the authority for your claim that there are "thousands" of congruent reports.
Quote:
Prospective studies review groups of individuals (e.g., selected emergency room patients) and then find who had an NDE during the study's time; such studies cost more to perform. In all, close to 3,500 individual cases between 1975 and 2005 had been reviewed in one or another study. All these studies were carried out by some 55 researchers or teams of researchers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-d...ience#Research
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 02:49 AM   #124
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by jrhowell View Post
If you decide to raise your arm and then do so, what just happened? If your hypotheses is true then the “you” that did that was just your physical body and your soul played no part in that action.
That would be true if there was no interaction between the soul and the body during life. But my hypothesis allows such an interaction, so it can be the soul that raises the arm but in a different state of mind/perception than when it doesn't perceive through the body.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:03 AM   #125
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Name three. Name three neuroscientists and/or doctors who think that. Provide contact information for each.
Bruce Greyson (psychiatrist), Kenneth Ring (psychologist), and Michael Sabom (cardiologist), helped to launch the field of near-death studies and introduced the study of near-death experiences to the academic setting.

Sam Parnia (resuscitation doctor)

Pim van Lommel (cardiologist)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near-d...ience#Research
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 06:50 AM   #126
jrhowell
Muse
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 636
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
That would be true if there was no interaction between the soul and the body during life. But my hypothesis allows such an interaction, so it can be the soul that raises the arm but in a different state of mind/perception than when it doesn't perceive through the body.
Then we are back to the soul having an ongoing influence on the brain, something for which no evidence has been found so far.
jrhowell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 07:07 AM   #127
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Ah, yes, the Handbook. Have you read it?
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 07:10 AM   #128
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
That would be true if there was no interaction between the soul and the body during life. But my hypothesis allows such an interaction, so it can be the soul that raises the arm but in a different state of mind/perception than when it doesn't perceive through the body.
Then why are we so focused on the near-death life review as the mechanism of interaction?
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 08:39 AM   #129
Scorpion
Master Poster
 
Scorpion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 2,106
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
You have said that the soul lays "dormant" during mortal life
No ! I said 'what if' the soul remains dormant? its a question, not a statement.
__________________
You see many stars in the sky at night, but not when the sun rises. Can you therefore say there are no stars in the heavens during the day? O man because you cannot find God in the days of your ignorance, say not that there is no God.
Sri Ramakrishna
Even in the valley of the shadow of death two and two do not make six.
Leo Tolstoy
Scorpion is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 08:55 AM   #130
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by Scorpion View Post
No ! I said 'what if' the soul remains dormant? its a question, not a statement.
Weasel words. You asked a hypothetical question and I treated it (gasp!) as a hypothesis. You proposed that the soul could lie dormant, and therefore not interact with the body, as a hypothesis to explain why no signs of interaction would be measured. I asked you to reconcile that with your later claim that you interacted with your soul in order to self-treat your schizophrenia. I don't care which one you choose to argue. I just want you to acknowledge that they can't both be true, and then own the consequences of the hypothesis you abandon. Will you do that?

Last edited by JayUtah; 6th November 2019 at 09:05 AM.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 09:26 AM   #131
LarryS
Muse
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 976
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
What?

Why do you say that a material world has no explanation or possibility of a conscious being?

Quarks behave very differently than atoms. Atoms behave very differently than molecules. A single molecule behaves very different than a mass of them. And yet they're all predicted (and testable) in a single model. What is to prevent that from also including conscious life?

Sure, we may not have a strict definition of consciousness. We know we are, we suspect dolphins are, we've seen mother elephants grieve over the death of their child. Maybe dogs are, maybe birds are. Viruses definitely are not, nor are bacteria. So there's no bright line test of conscious/non-conscious animals. So what? Is there a bright line test between homicide and manslaughter, or male and female, or even our border with Canada? Parts of America that people live on are on the Mexico side of the border wall.

At the edges, things can start to get murky. There's a grey area in everything. There's a grey area in how badly Americans are willing to treat the people who make our clothes. Inside the US, they're treated relatively well. In Cambodia, they may be treated far worse than we could ever in good conscience allow. Yet we still go to Costco for $17.00 shirts.

So there's no good definition of consciousness, let alone a bright line for species to step over - so what? It doesn't change the fact that scientists can track the movement of electricity within the brain and predict whether a person is remembering something or smelling something. It doesn't change the fact that we've identified a massive number of chemical neurotransmitters that do different things when released into different parts of the brain.

The material world fully explains the actions of our brains. We deem ourselves conscious. Thus, the material world fully explains that we deem ourselves conscious.

Playing silly buggers with definitions is all good fun. But, in the end, however you personally define it, consciousness and materialism are completely compatible.

Unless, of course, you can design a repeatable, falsifiable test to show they're not. Can you do that?
There is no scientific evidence of consciousness, period. We can test if a 'unit' exhibits behavior we deem as conscious behavor.
The highlighted above reads like any religious apologist.
There are no explainations or even wild hunches how matter becomes conscious because in principle there are none. We need a new / different way of thinking about this.
LarryS is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 10:20 AM   #132
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,105
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Because that's what the common elements of thousands of NDE reports suggest.
Nonsense. All they are suggesting is that people near death experience altered consciousness. You are speculating about the source of that alteration, but even that explanation makes no sense: if you're not dead yet, why would you start experiencing the afterlife?

The much more reasonable explanation is that, deprived from its full operational capabilities, the brain is not functioning properly.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 10:25 AM   #133
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,105
Originally Posted by JesseCuster View Post
There's nothing apparent about that to me. That seems to be a complete non-sequitur.

Why is it apparent that reports of vivid and empathetic states of mind during NDEs would be caused by souls detaching from the brain?
In fact, without a brain attached to the soul, how does it record memories? Does the soul have its own memory system? If so, why the duplication?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 10:35 AM   #134
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,105
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Sure, I argue how the soul could interact with the body while eluding observations of physicists and neuroscientists. Because, as you see, a common argument against such an interaction is that physicists or neuroscientists would have detected it.
More accurately, the argument is that it is detectable. And yet somehow its proponents always find a way to make it impossible to detect.

What does the soul do? The brain handles memory, perception, consciousness, personality, etc. What's left for the soul except the feel-good belief in one's immortality?

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Are you joking? The Standard model is missing dark matter and gravity and has not been reconciled with general theory of relativity.
What does that have to do with sould? Do you think Dark Matter will turn out to be magic?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 11:35 AM   #135
JesseCuster
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,014
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
As I clarified, it is apparent to the near-death experiencer.
In what sense is it apparent? All you've done is say it's apparent and when asked how it's apparent, say that some other people who had NDEs say it's apparent.

But how is it apparent? There's no actual chain of reasoning for why vivid NDEs should be considered evidence of souls detaching from brains.

Also, is it actually apparent to NDE experiences and they have reported this? Have NDE experiencers actually specifically said they think vivid and empathetic NDEs are evidence of souls detaching from bodies? If so , did they give reasoning better than "it's apparent"? Linky to evidence please.

How many NDE experiencers have actually said it's apparent that vivid and empathetic NDEs are evidence of a soul detaching from a brain? How many have said something contradictory to that? You need to build an actual argument, not just handwave it away like this,.

Last edited by JesseCuster; 6th November 2019 at 11:39 AM.
JesseCuster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 11:38 AM   #136
JesseCuster
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,014
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
I am pointing out a possibility how the soul could interact with the body without being detected by physicists and neuroscientists.
Assuming facts not in evidence.
JesseCuster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 02:20 PM   #137
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Ah, yes, the Handbook. Have you read it?
No. You?
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 02:32 PM   #138
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Then why are we so focused on the near-death life review as the mechanism of interaction?
That's an extreme scenario where the soul doesn't interact with the body during life and only interacts with it at the end by downloading memories from the brain, which results in the experience of life review. A more general scenario is that the soul interacts with the body during life, and the experience of life review at the end is a result of experiencing the memories in an altered state of mind for the first time.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:03 PM   #139
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
No. You?
Yes, but I don't currently have a copy. NDEs are a perennial subject here. What materials by Greyson have you read?
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:13 PM   #140
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by LarryS View Post
There are no explainations or even wild hunches how matter becomes conscious because in principle there are none. We need a new / different way of thinking about this.
If you mean Chalmers' "hard problem of consciousness", I don't see how a soul would be helpful there. The hard problem is how to explain qualitative stuff (qualia) from quantitative/mathematical theories (of science). I think the best framework for making sense of the qualitative/quantitative dichotomy is something like Russellian monism, where mathematics describes structural relations but since it doesn't make much sense for there to be only relations without something else that stands in those relations, there must also be something else: non-relations, qualitative things. Those qualitative things are mutually associated through their relations but since mathematics describes the relations in a very general way it is difficult for us to imagine how qualities arranged in a specific complex configuration are related to the quality of the configuration (whole) itself. Mathematics can be reduced to pure set theory, which is based on a composition relation (set membership), so it just tells you which things consist of which other things and doesn't elaborate what that means for the qualities of the wholes and their parts.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:26 PM   #141
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Yes, but I don't currently have a copy. NDEs are a perennial subject here. What materials by Greyson have you read?
Nothing by him, as far as I remember. I just read some articles on the internet and some books by Raymond Moody years ago. I know that there have been two studies by Sam Parnia where he placed some symbols in operating rooms that could be seen only from an elevated position to test whether a patient would see them during a supposed out of body experience. No patient mentioned such a symbol in their NDE reports. The second study is still under way.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:27 PM   #142
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
So what did you experience?
In brief, the tunnel, the light, the disembodied floating around the operating theatre as a disembodied "soul". The eerie sense of absolute serenity through all of it. I was even interviewed by the anesthetist post op because of some of the events.

Had you an actual question?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:39 PM   #143
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
In fact, without a brain attached to the soul, how does it record memories? Does the soul have its own memory system? If so, why the duplication?
We can only speculate. The soul may have its own memory system and the material body may serve as a tool through which the soul interacts with the material world.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:41 PM   #144
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
None. So what? How many neuroscientific experiments have you done?
Great. So now you have a chance to interview one. Set forth.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:46 PM   #145
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JesseCuster View Post
In what sense is it apparent? All you've done is say it's apparent and when asked how it's apparent, say that some other people who had NDEs say it's apparent.

But how is it apparent? There's no actual chain of reasoning for why vivid NDEs should be considered evidence of souls detaching from brains.

Also, is it actually apparent to NDE experiences and they have reported this? Have NDE experiencers actually specifically said they think vivid and empathetic NDEs are evidence of souls detaching from bodies?
NDErs often mention out of body experiences and that it felt very real, even hyper-real, vivid and with heightened empathy toward other people.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:47 PM   #146
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
That's an extreme scenario...
Okay, fine, I'll come back to that. My question really meant to ask why we're spending so much time on NDEs. It wasn't really part of the discussion to start with, and now it's taken over. I'm just curious where you plan to take it.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
That's an extreme scenario where the soul doesn't interact with the body during life and only interacts with it at the end by downloading memories from the brain, which results in the experience of life review. A more general scenario is that the soul interacts with the body during life, and the experience of life review at the end is a result of experiencing the memories in an altered state of mind for the first time.
Which scenario are you advocating? Or is it not an either-or dilemma for you?

Regarding the first scenario, we sort of stalled on the issue of the low rate of occurrence as it appears in the data. You argue from silence in a way that suggests you believe the numbers can only go up from there, but I pointed out that's not how arguments from silence work. Greyson also points out a few relevant things there too. I think we converged on the issue of people who die sudden deaths that don't afford a transfer. The degree to which it would be considered a poor system design depends on the degree to which one believes it is a designed system.

Regarding the second, general scenario, you made a comment that's gotten a lot of attention: that this appears to be the soul leaving the body. You're not making that statement now, so it's not clear whether you intend the life review in "an altered state of mind" to refer in any way to a soul. Others have argued that the dying or distressed brain would easily qualify as an altered mind. It matters because even if we grant you that the soul exists and that it communicates undetectably with the organism, why does the life review have to implicate a soul? Can it just be a function of the organism? The more fanciful properties, interactions, and roles you assign speculatively to the soul without reasons or evidence why, the less prima facie probable your soul hypothesis becomes.

But more importantly, you've been asked several times how the purported similarity among NDE reports means they must have a supernatural origin. That's a giant leap of logic that you have yet to explain.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:48 PM   #147
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
In brief, the tunnel, the light, the disembodied floating around the operating theatre as a disembodied "soul". The eerie sense of absolute serenity through all of it. I was even interviewed by the anesthetist post op because of some of the events.

Had you an actual question?
Why do you think it was all a hallucination?
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 03:48 PM   #148
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
NDErs often mention out of body experiences and that it felt very real, even hyper-real, vivid...
How does "feel real" translate to "was real?"

Quote:
...and with heightened empathy toward other people.
What does this have to do with a soul?
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 04:05 PM   #149
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Why do you think it was all a hallucination?
Given the post op interview, at least some of it was demonstrably real. In fact, I never claimed that it was "all a hallucination" because I know that at least some of it was fact based.

Why must you strawman everything?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 04:15 PM   #150
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
How does "feel real" translate to "was real?"
It doesn't. If one went that road, what is one to do with the things that feel unreal but actually are real? As I interestingly discovered.

Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
What does this have to do with a soul?
Foxtrot Alpha.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 04:17 PM   #151
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Nothing by him, as far as I remember.
You might want to brush up on him then. Wikipedia is probably not telling you all that you need to know about his work in order to effectively use him as an authority.

Quote:
I know that there have been two studies by Sam Parnia where he placed some symbols in operating rooms...
He mentioned in interviews that he wasn't satisfied that this was a good protocol. I agree. Probably why a new study is a good idea.

I hadn't intended to go on to the other people you mentioned until we focused on Greyson a bit. Gish gallops are easily noticed here for what they are. But now that I've ignored my own advice, look at your list. You said there were "neuroscientists and doctors" who disagreed that the existing understanding of neurology was sufficient to explain NDEs. Out of an abundance of fairness, Loss Leader asked you to name "neuroscientists and/or doctors." But your list contains no neuroscientists or neurologists. The closest is Greyson, who is an academic psychiatrist. This is not to say that clinicians or other specializations in academia don't have insight. But you're trying to argue that there is legitimate dissent over whether natural causes are sufficient to explain NDEs. Accuracy of specialization is a factor in that argument.

You also urge that Greyson and a few others ought rightly to be credited with bringing the study of NDEs into academic light. That's a two-edged sword at best. The Greyson scale is widely cited, it is true. But when you look at what Greyson et al. actually did, they formed their own institutes, research groups, and journals focusing on NDEs. They didn't really join the world of academia. They sort of went off and formed their own club to host the research they wanted to do. Not a transgression per se, but it undermines the notion that the alleged dissent is legitimate. Have you studied what actual neurologists say in actual neurology journals about the neurological implications of NDE?

Last edited by JayUtah; 6th November 2019 at 04:30 PM.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 04:40 PM   #152
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
We can only speculate.
Yeah, that's the problem. You start with the assumption that a soul exists and then speculate that it has exactly all the properties required to afford all the things you attribute to it, the end observation being exactly the same as it would have been without the soul. This is the paragon of antiparsimony.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 04:48 PM   #153
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Which scenario are you advocating? Or is it not an either-or dilemma for you?
In my OP I had the general scenario in mind, that the soul interacts with the body anytime and in a significant way. Then Scorpion mentioned that the soul may be dormant during life and it reminded me of the doctrine of the spiritual fall of man in religious literature. So there seems to be a possibility that the soul interacts with the body only sometimes, or anytime but not much.

Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Regarding the second, general scenario, you made a comment that's gotten a lot of attention: that this appears to be the soul leaving the body. You're not making that statement now, so it's not clear whether you intend the life review in "an altered state of mind" to refer in any way to a soul.
An NDE is often accompanied by an experience of being out of one's body or of having died and entering a spiritual realm, so it seems obvious to me that the patient feels as if he was a soul that has left his body. The altered state of mind -- a sense of hyper-reality and/or heightened empathy -- is often part of that experience, as is the life review.

Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Others have argued that the dying or distressed brain would easily qualify as an altered mind. It matters because even if we grant you that the soul exists and that it communicates undetectably with the organism, why does the life review have to implicate a soul? Can it just be a function of the organism? The more fanciful properties, interactions, and roles you assign speculatively to the soul without reasons or evidence why, the less prima facie probable your soul hypothesis becomes.
Maybe the NDEs are products of a distressed or dying brain but that's a speculation too and it usually seems unconvincing to NDErs themselves.

Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
But more importantly, you've been asked several times how the purported similarity among NDE reports means they must have a supernatural origin. That's a giant leap of logic that you have yet to explain.
If the NDEs had just random elements that would make it more believable that they are caused by firings of a distressed or dying brain. Instead, the reports often mention common features that evoke the notion of a soul as a conscious entity that survives the death of the material body.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 04:52 PM   #154
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Given the post op interview, at least some of it was demonstrably real. In fact, I never claimed that it was "all a hallucination" because I know that at least some of it was fact based.

Why must you strawman everything?
So what was a hallucination?
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 05:06 PM   #155
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
So what was a hallucination?
I can answer that. But I am uncertain that you care about any answer I may provide and thus lack motivation to do so since any answer I might provide is likely to be promptly dismissed by you since it will not conform to your presuppositions.

You have already decided that any NDE is evidence of a "soul". I am in a position to categorically state that it bloody well isn't on the basis of first hand experience of such.

You are fundamentally uninterested in my particular experience, only in ways to dismiss it. And that is a game I am unwilling to play.

So I will trade you. I will answer questions if you will be honest. Can you live with that?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 05:08 PM   #156
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
...it reminded me of the doctrine of the spiritual fall of man in religious literature. So there seems to be a possibility that the soul interacts with the body only sometimes, or anytime but not much.
Because religion says so? Do you mean "possible" in the sense of congruence among religious beliefs, or "possible" as something that science should consider?

Quote:
An NDE is often accompanied by an experience of being out of one's body or of having died and entering a spiritual realm, so it seems obvious to me that the patient feels as if he was a soul that has left his body.
No. What you actually said was
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Apparently this is due to the soul detaching from the brain.
Nothing about what the patient believes. What about patients who don't believe in souls? Is your interpretation still "obvious" in those cases?

Quote:
Maybe the NDEs are products of a distressed or dying brain but that's a speculation too...
How do you know that? Are you a neurologist? Do neurologists generally concede any such notion? Even if we were to grant that it's speculation, it would still be speculation of a much lower order than what you're suggesting. You have to conjure much more into existence in order for your speculation to hold.

Quote:
...and it usually seems unconvincing to NDErs themselves.
Why does that matter? Are they all neurologists?

Quote:
If the NDEs had just random elements that would make it more believable that they are caused by firings of a distressed or dying brain.
What evidence supports this claim? Is that what neurologists think?

Quote:
Instead, the reports often mention common features that evoke the notion of a soul as a conscious entity that survives the death of the material body.
That's an interpretation of the data, not the data itself. When you interpret data through the bias of your beliefs, it does not somehow become evidence of the belief.

Last edited by JayUtah; 6th November 2019 at 05:11 PM.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 05:17 PM   #157
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Have you studied what actual neurologists say in actual neurology journals about the neurological implications of NDE?
I don't know if I read an article by a neurologist but I see from the Wikipedia article on NDEs that neurologists have suggested possible causes of NDEs, such as too little oxygen, to much carbon dioxide, endorphines etc.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 05:23 PM   #158
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 17,916
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
I don't know if I read an article by a neurologist but I see from the Wikipedia article on NDEs that neurologists have suggested possible causes of NDEs, such as too little oxygen, to much carbon dioxide, endorphines etc.
I recommend deeper research.
JayUtah is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 05:36 PM   #159
litewave
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 270
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
You have already decided that any NDE is evidence of a "soul".
I said that NDEs suggest the existence of a soul, not that they are evidence of it, let alone any NDE.

Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
So I will trade you. I will answer questions if you will be honest. Can you live with that?
I don't know what you expect of me but I would like to know what you think was a hallucination in your NDE and what was not, and why you think so.
litewave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th November 2019, 05:49 PM   #160
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 19,156
Originally Posted by litewave View Post
In my OP I had the general scenario in mind, that the soul interacts with the body anytime and in a significant way. Then Scorpion mentioned that the soul may be dormant during life and it reminded me of the doctrine of the spiritual fall of man in religious literature. So there seems to be a possibility that the soul interacts with the body only sometimes, or anytime but not much.
Are you aware that Scorp has proudly declaimed on this very site that he is a para-schiz refusing meds? This is not an ad-hom. He has flat out told everyone publicly. It isn't a secret.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
An NDE is often accompanied by an experience of being out of one's body or of having died and entering a spiritual realm,
Yup. Been there, done that. So? It is quite a trip, but not even vaguely mysterious.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
so it seems obvious to me that the patient feels as if he was a soul that has left his body.
Yeah. the patient. Would that be the patient under the influence of intravenous drugs? That patient? The same one having intravenous drugs intentionally used to alter their consciousness? Those patients? Don't you think that drugs intended to alter anyones consciousness might actually do that? Or did that thought simply not occur to you?

And that is the point. What it feels like is not what it actually is.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
The altered state of mind -- a sense of hyper-reality and/or heightened empathy -- is often part of that experience, as is the life review.
Sure. Insufficient to make me believe in <insert deity of choice> though.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Maybe the NDEs are products of a distressed or dying brain but that's a speculation too and it usually seems unconvincing to NDErs themselves.
Not to me. NDErs see whatever cultural deity is appropriate.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
If the NDEs had just random elements that would make it more believable that they are caused by firings of a distressed or dying brain.
Strawman. NDEs are not random they are the result of notions ALREADY IN THE BRAIN. Thus christians see jesus, muslims see little mo and so forth. The point is that these myths were already in the brain in the first place.

Originally Posted by litewave View Post
Instead, the reports often mention common features that evoke the notion of a soul as a conscious entity that survives the death of the material body.
Been there, done that. Your answer is No.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:51 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.