|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Near-death experiences and consciousness | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4927 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
Btw, as an aside, it's interesting that one piece of a skull can warrant articles, reconstructions, and reviews of evolutionary paths and is treated as significant non-anecdotal evidence, but at the same time, an account of a NDE where someone remembers specifics while their brain was not functioning is anecdotal.
Imo, this simply shows the incredible inconsistency and biasness of science overall towards certain belief systems.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4927 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
and the two anecdotal accounts, one within the paper and one referenced, perhaps the referenced one is not merely anecdotal we would need access to that paper to find out Why is this anecdotal? It seems to me we can find a piece of a skull and build a whole theory of a creature being ancestral to whales or some such, but we have 2 solid accounts showing NDEs occurred after flat EEGs in this paper, and the author's comments in the magazine article that this is what is occurring, and somehow it's questionable???
Anecdotal evidence is real evidence, it just isn't strong or compelling evidence as it is so dependent on the subjective experiences of human beings. The problem is within the context of discussing conciousness, we are dealing with a subjective aspect of humanity and as such, you are going to have to include subjective evidence such as checking the memories of the patient with the nurses' or other records. I think dismissing such evidence as anecdotal is a weak argument and not reasonable. Furthermore, keep in mind we are dealing with a medical journal and that patients' subjective experience here is a valid area of research.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
ROTFLMAO
Btw, as an aside, it's interesting that one piece of a skull can warrant articles, reconstructions, and reviews of evolutionary paths and is treated as significant non-anecdotal evidence, but at the same time, an account of a NDE where someone remembers specifics while their brain was not functioning is anecdotal. Yeah. Next time you can hold an NDE in your hands and get it independantly confirmed let us know. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
randman  Suspended Member (Idle past 4927 days) Posts: 6367 Joined: |
So we can have one small piece of evidence, a skull, that could have arisen through any number of means, and it's OK to wildly speculate on it. It's valid science to call it aquatic or whatever.
But people remembering events their brain could not observe is somehow inconclusive, eh?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 422 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Yup.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wounded King Member Posts: 4149 From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA Joined: |
Its as conclusive as when people remember things which have never happened to them.
Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with the work of Elizabeth Loftus. TTFN, WK This message has been edited by Wounded King, 11-29-2005 08:03 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
randman writes: Imo, this simply shows the incredible inconsistency and biasness of science overall towards certain belief systems. I have never seen science as being biased...thats a bit like saying that Christianity is exclusivist. This topic DOES venture into an unverifiable realm of data, however...so perhaps many scientists would dismiss any evidence that cannot be quantified. Randman, in post#1 writes: the study published in the Lancet scientifically confirms that consciousness exists outside of the brain and after death. The fact people can remember what happened when their brain is inactive and they are dead is proof positive of this. If I were a scientist, I would ask you to show me the quantifiable evidence that "scientifically confirms" the proof.
randman writes: Are we discussing the science of the design (as in NDE experiences) or are we discussing the Designer and His reality? (i.e. Hell, Pit, scary afterlife NDE versus Angelic P.G. version) I see a flaw in the magazine's depiction of the study (haven't read the original) in that some people do not have such a positive experience, and have even had the experience of being in a pit not being able to get out.Crashfrog writes:
The fact is that this is not a factwebsters writes: fact \"fakt\ n 1 : deed; esp : crime 2 : the quality of being actual 3 : something that exists or occurs 4 : a piece of informationthe”o”ry \"th--r, "thir-\ n, pl -ries 1 : abstract thought 2 : the general principles of a subject 3 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle offered to explain observed facts 4 : hypothesis, conjecture This message has been edited by Phat, 11-29-2005 06:03 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1495 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Imo, this simply shows the incredible inconsistency and biasness of science overall towards certain belief systems. Really? I think it pretty well shows that you don't know what the word "anecdotal" means. (Also, there's no such word as "biasness".)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1372 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
If you could find any ref on this, that'd be great. It'd be surprising, as EEG is a pretty basic electrical signal. Certainly weak signals can be damped by the skull, and the amount of damping depends on the actual tools that they're using. But if that's the case, then we're talking semantics--the real information would simply not be measurable given the tools. "Brain death" would then just be defined not based on some unmeasurable measurement, but on a definition (i.e. can't be revived). So it just means the term wouldn't be useful for this discussion, I think. Brain death - Wikipedia
I do think your overall argument and evidence are pretty compelling, and that NDE can successfully be explained--as long as there's brain activity. well, not really. the brain doesn't need to be active the whole time, just the btis before and after. we like to fill in stuff, and compensate for holes in our memory. the brain also has a high degree of activity while it's running out of oxygen -- and THOSE effects seem to explain nde's. the simply occur BEFORE brain activity ceases (or appears to cease).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1372 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
That's totally misleading. i wasn;t trying to be misleading. i was trying to be funny.
If that figure applies to the populas, then that assumes 100% have been dead for a short while. well, actually, i assuming that the section of nde patients was a representation of the species as a whole. admittedly, it's faulty logic -- i was just extending it along the lines the "study" failed to. they were using the absence of commonality to all cardiac arrest cases as evidence that it was not physiological -- when in reality there are many other factors, such as:
For all you know, if we all died for ten minutes, 80% of us could remember the death period, and I would say the 20% is accounted for, via the lack of ability witin some brains. etc. the fact that it happens RARELY doesn't mean that it's not a natrual phenominon.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2198 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Randman, what is the difference between the report of an NDE, a report of someone being abducted by aliens, and a report of a person waking up in bed, unable to move and there being a malevolent being in the room?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
Thanks. I learned about some really interesting developmental problems, like anencephaly. Oh right, and about brain death. Flat EEGs are a little harder to track down well... working on that.
well, not really. the brain doesn't need to be active the whole time, just the btis before and after. we like to fill in stuff, and compensate for holes in our memory. I'm not familiar with research in this area. Mind if I ask for more links? Aw, hell. Can you provide some links to the kind of research you have in mind for "filling in" ? AbE: I got WK's link to Elizabeth Loftus' work. "Funny" enough, I actually met her (and her husband) while I was studying at the University of Washington psych department for a bit.
the brain also has a high degree of activity while it's running out of oxygen -- and THOSE effects seem to explain nde's. the simply occur BEFORE brain activity ceases (or appears to cease). Maybe. But, how could you falsify this hypothesis? Ben This message has been edited by Ben, Tuesday, 2005/11/29 07:02 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1372 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Btw, as an aside, it's interesting that one piece of a skull can warrant articles, reconstructions, and reviews of evolutionary paths and is treated as significant non-anecdotal evidence, but at the same time, an account of a NDE where someone remembers specifics while their brain was not functioning is anecdotal. Imo, this simply shows the incredible inconsistency and biasness of science overall towards certain belief systems. randman, i showed you several pictures of skulls in the other thread. if you wanted, you could track down a museum and see one for yourself. presuming you were allowed to, you could pick it up and hold it in your hands. you can own one, too -- i actually have a ancient whale vertebrae and rib myself. can you show me a picture of your nde? can i go to a museum and see one? can i hold it in my hands? can i own one?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1372 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Thanks. I learned about some really interesting developmental problems, like anencephaly. Oh right, and about brain death. Flat EEGs are a little harder to track down well... working on that. and apparently meaningless.
I'm not familiar with research in this area. Mind if I ask for more links? Aw, hell. Can you provide some links to the kind of research you have in mind for "filling in" ? uh, i'm not really sure. i could look stuff up -- mostly it's from psych classes learnign about memory and perception.
Maybe. But, how could you falsify this hypothesis? by falsify, you mean "what would support nde's being real spiritual experiences without naturalistic explanations?" i dunno. how can you falsify that gravity isn't caused by invisible pink ninjas with magnets?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ben! Member (Idle past 1426 days) Posts: 1161 From: Hayward, CA Joined: |
{Flat EEGs are} apparently meaningless. Cortical and thalamic cellular correlates of electroencephalographic burst-suppression - PubMed
quote: You can get a flat EEG with thalamic firing (in cats). I'd really like to know what a flat EEG means electrophysically.
uh, i'm not really sure. i could look stuff up -- mostly it's from psych classes learnign about memory and perception. It would really help. There's all sorts of reconstructive processes in the mind; I don't know any that would particularly fit this scenario. Elizabeth Loftus' stuff looks interesting, but seems a bit removed from this to me.
by falsify, you mean "what would support nde's being real spiritual experiences without naturalistic explanations?" Why would you assume that's what I mean? Of course that's not what I mean, that's not falsification of your hypothesis at all. I mean, how would you design an experiment to show whether that hypothesis was true? Here's your hypothesis again:
the brain also has a high degree of activity while it's running out of oxygen -- and THOSE effects seem to explain nde's. the simply occur BEFORE brain activity ceases (or appears to cease). For example, why isn't it due to brain activity after EEG activity resumes? Or is there another biological process, besides electrical activity, that either causes false memories to form or supports consciousness? If the theory's not testable, it's not really helpful in enlightening us anything about the nature of consciousness. That's all. Ben
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024