Merged A new argument pro Near Death Experiences

[Pup]

Do you have proof for that? Many NDE'ers are talking about a tunnel they go through. The experience of going through this tunnel cannot be explained by peripherical vision loss. How do you explain the experience of going through the tunnel and being one with the light with your peripherical-vision-loss theory?

Not my original idea, but folks a lot smarter than me explain it:

https://books.google.com/books?id=K...a=X&ei=Mg4nVdvwBciSsAXznYCgDA&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAw

or

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/darkness_tunnels_and_light/

From the second link:

"Oxygen starvation can cause both tunnel and darkness experiences. The reason for this lies in the structure and functioning of the blood supply of the retina. The macula is the optical center of the retina; it has the greatest blood supply, while the flow of blood to the retina decreases with distance from the macula according to the inverse square law. Yet the oxygen consumption of each part of the retina is much the same, so oxygen starvation will cause failure of peripheral vision before causing total visual failure. Indeed, experiments with oxygen starvation in human volunteers prove this fact. This is why tunnel experiences occur only in NDEs caused by oxygen starvation, while toxins and poisons cause a “pit experience” before causing failure of vision."

 

[MaartenVergu]

As has been pointed out to you in other threads on this topic, near-death experiences are, in fact, proposed by their advocates to really be death experiences. If they are death experiences, then you are swallowing a camel and straining at a gnat: you have proposed that a dying brain could only hallucinate chaotic experiences, whereas a dead brain would be able to experience a coherent multi-sense whole. And come back to tell of it.

Pim Van Lommel has a theory to explain this possibility. He sees the brain as a receiver.

Even if you are proposing that somehow, near death, we will glimpse what death itself would be like, you are proposing that a near-death, dying brain would be able to sense all of this as a coherent whole, but would not be able to hallucinate the same thing. Doesn't this strike you as a problem?

No. I think the brain is actually death. Or is in the process of dying.

 

[turingtest]

Turingtest, do you think that there are not many different networks of the brain active to produce this sequence of OBE, tunnel-experience, light experience, feelings, understanding words in a meaningful way?
Other argument: these experiences are not chaotic at all, what you expect from an injuried dying brain.A dying brain cannot produce such harmonious experiences full of meaning and very vividly. It's a contradicition. A good working brain can produce these beautiful experiences. But not a dying damaged brain. From a dying brain you expect chaotic hallucinations.

Sure I do; but I don't think that your incredulity that the brain alone is perfectly capable of this is meaningful.

 

[MaartenVergu]

Not my original idea, but folks a lot smarter than me explain it:

https://books.google.com/books?id=K...a=X&ei=Mg4nVdvwBciSsAXznYCgDA&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAw

or

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/darkness_tunnels_and_light/

From the second link:

"Oxygen starvation can cause both tunnel and darkness experiences. The reason for this lies in the structure and functioning of the blood supply of the retina. The macula is the optical center of the retina; it has the greatest blood supply, while the flow of blood to the retina decreases with distance from the macula according to the inverse square law. Yet the oxygen consumption of each part of the retina is much the same, so oxygen starvation will cause failure of peripheral vision before causing total visual failure. Indeed, experiments with oxygen starvation in human volunteers prove this fact. This is why tunnel experiences occur only in NDEs caused by oxygen starvation, while toxins and poisons cause a “pit experience” before causing failure of vision."

I don't know. That can be the case, but I'm not convinced.
I recommand you to listen to the testimonies of many NDE'ers on Youtube. It's hard to believe that it can be explained by these biological phenomena.

 

[BStrong]

BStrong, why do you ignore the possibility of memory loss? You don't know that.

Is this thread going off into the recovered memories school of thinking? Maybe I just need the right therapist to guide me along?

Someone can tell me that the reason I didn't have what folks are looking for in an NDE because I'm not a believer, but nobody has ever accused me of not having a good memory.

My experiences, and really the only thing one can go on here is their individual experience, is that I went out, I came back, that's it.

I know other folks that have reported getting the E ticket ride experience when they checked out. I have absolutely no reason to dispute their account and they have no reason to dispute mine.

 

[Pup]

I don't know. That can be the case, but I'm not convinced.
I recommand you to listen to the testimonies of many NDE'ers on Youtube. It's hard to believe that it can be explained by these biological phenomena.

An argument frim incredulity is hardly convincing. One might as well say to listen to descriptions of LSD trips, or religious ecstacy, or the rare and odd results of brain damage, and say they could not possibly be biological phenomena.

 

[Loss Leader]

It must be a big coincidence that the dying brains of all these people are functioning so well that they have the same sequence and patern of electric activity.

Even if your understanding of biology and psychology was right, you're still making the logical mistake of only counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

I died. My heart stopped. The whole system was down for a solid minute. I was on an EKG and have the strip to prove it. I did not experience anything. It wasn't even like sleep. It was just nothing. Many people have had the same experience. What percentage of people in near-death states have classic near-death experiences?

If you can't answer that, you can't go any further.

 

[abaddon]

Do you have proof for that? Many NDE'ers are talking about a tunnel they go through. The experience of going through this tunnel cannot be explained by peripherical vision loss. How do you explain the experience of going through the tunnel and being one with the light with your peripherical-vision-loss theory?

You have a blind spot in both of your eyes. So do I. So does everyone. You are not conscious of it as such because your brain simply makes up what it guesses SHOULD be there on the basis of what is close to that blind spot and fills in the blank. So does mine. So does everyone's. It is trivially easy to demonstrate this.

Given that we know that the brain will invent things in the visual field out of whole cloth and that it is common to everyone on the planet, why should the commonality of NDE experiences be any surprise at all?

 

[Steve001]

Turingtest, do you think that there are not many different networks of the brain active to produce this sequence of OBE, tunnel-experience, light experience, feelings, understanding words in a meaningful way?

Other argument: these experiences are not chaotic at all, what you expect from an injuried dying brain.A dying brain cannot produce such harmonious experiences full of meaning and very vividly. It's a contradicition. A good working brain can produce these beautiful experiences. But not a dying damaged brain. From a dying brain you expect chaotic hallucinations.

Your expectations can be wrong. Consider that as a practicality.

 

[marplots]

What's amazing to me is that everyone I know can read these words in the same specific way. It's almost like, even with all the complexities of the brain in play, there's some underlying shared experience with reading text. As if similar input produces a similar reaction across all my English speaking friends.

Quite the mystery. It is apparent to me that there must be some outside connection, across brains and across the variety of human beings, that allows this similarity in response to emerge. I call it the "unexplained phenomenon of literacy."

It's just not possible for all these people to share the same experience. Eerie, really.

 

[Mojo]

When you are unconscious, you have no expectations.

When you are unconscious, you cannot report having a NDE.

 

[MuDPhuD]

I don't know. That can be the case, but I'm not convinced.
I recommand you to listen to the testimonies of many NDE'ers on Youtube. It's hard to believe that it can be explained by these biological phenomena.

How can all these pilots subjected to high g-forces have the same experiences when they have passed out? Shouldn't their experience be chaotic and unpredictable?

http://www.near-death.com/experiences/triggers06.html

Strangely the experiences are quite similar to one another, and oh my, also quite similar to what is reported as NDE!

How interesting!

I predict you will not be convinced.

 

[Belz...]

I have a new argument pro NDE's:

According to current neuroscience many parts of the brain are involved in the experience of the tunnel, the light, the peaceful feeling, the words 'it's not your time yet' etcetera.
The verbal cortex, the occipital lobes etc. All must be involved.

Chances are low that the sequence of electric activity in the brain of hundreds of people are almost exactly the same in such a way that they have the same sort of experiences.

To have an OBE, to see the tunnel, then the light, then the words: 'it's not your time yet' assumes a certain patern of electric activity in the brain.
It must be a big coincidence that the dying brains of all these people are functioning so well that they have the same sequence and patern of electric activity.

It's also about the ontological status of 'the Light' and 'the Tunnel' when many people have the same experience, independent from each other.

How is that new ? That's the basic argument: "it feels supernatural"

 

[Belz...]

I disagree here. Most NDE's are very specific. The OBE, the tunnel, the light, the words: it's not your time yet. That's very specific.

Have you considered the fact that perhaps these words are added after the fact via religious beliefs and expectations ?

Of course you haven't.

BStrong, why do you ignore the possibility of memory loss? You don't know that.

Speaking of ignoring possibilities...

I don't know. That can be the case, but I'm not convinced.

Have you done some introspection as to why you're not convinced ?

Of course you haven't.

 

[Belz...]

You have a blind spot in both of your eyes. So do I. So does everyone. You are not conscious of it as such because your brain simply makes up what it guesses SHOULD be there on the basis of what is close to that blind spot and fills in the blank. So does mine. So does everyone's. It is trivially easy to demonstrate this.

Given that we know that the brain will invent things in the visual field out of whole cloth and that it is common to everyone on the planet, why should the commonality of NDE experiences be any surprise at all?

Funny thing about that blind spot is that you would never know about it unless our science dissected an eye, picked up on the problems with the structure, and tested for that blind spot. It's fascinating to see it work for yourself.

 

[abaddon]

Funny thing about that blind spot is that you would never know about it unless our science dissected an eye, picked up on the problems with the structure, and tested for that blind spot. It's fascinating to see it work for yourself.

LOL I freaked out my kids by doing the test before explaining it.

 

[Slowvehicle]

LOL I freaked out my kids by doing the test before explaining it.

Gonzo parenting in its finest flower...

 

[Giordano]

You have a blind spot in both of your eyes. So do I. So does everyone. You are not conscious of it as such because your brain simply makes up what it guesses SHOULD be there on the basis of what is close to that blind spot and fills in the blank. So does mine. So does everyone's. It is trivially easy to demonstrate this.

Given that we know that the brain will invent things in the visual field out of whole cloth and that it is common to everyone on the planet, why should the commonality of NDE experiences be any surprise at all?

It is even worse than the blind spot itself: our eyes see only a small central spot in high definition. The visual image is projected by an imperfect lens upside down on a curved, irregular retina. There are blood vessels between the lens and the image. We are constantly moving our eyes to bring different parts of the image on our one high-definition spot. Our brains piece this all together, spatially and temporally correct it, adjust the color balance, invent parts to fill-in, ignore other parts, and patch it all into what we think we see as a single clear image. As far as we can tell, this happens in much the same way in almost everyone.

We already had the conversation as to whether NDEs are the same in different cultures. They are not. And anyway, why would an NDE be expected to show what things are in a DE (Death Experience)? But I guess if one really wants to believe that one's soul goes on after death, then one believes whatever helps.

 

[skeptichaggis]

The whole thing about NDEs being a glimpse of a afterlife makes no sense. All studies by pro supernatural claimants including kubler-ross and moody have poor methodologies. This anecdote fits with our claptrap so we will record it, this goes against our claptrap so we will ignore it.
I also strongly feel that children who claimNDEs are coached by there parents. I read one child's claim of having met the souls of aborted children-he was six so I don't think he made it up but had it made up by his pro life father.
The idea of duelism-that there is a part of you extant from your mind-is one of the oldest ideas in the psychology of humans but actual science(in this case neuroscience) tells us that the brain is a purely physical organ.
It should also be noted that accuaratly determining if aNDE took place at the short period of death or just before or after is extremely difficult. The claim that NDEs are common also falls flat when you bear in mind the vast majority of people who are brought back do not have this experience.
Any sane appraisal of NDEs must conclude that while there is a small possibility that a interesting neurological process is taking place it is not in any way supernatural.

 

[Olowkow]

This new argument in the OP sounds like another "too cool to just be chemicals and brain" claim. I might argue just as easily that it is not cool enough to be a god related phenomenon. Why not a little more imagination than just the same old "tunnel with a light at the end"? Why not a very elaborate jewel and precious metal encrusted bridge with lasers and flashing strobes or those super bright LED flashlights and a neon sign a thousand feet high flashing "HEAVEN"? Or a bunch of supernovae spelling out "Paradise, turn right". After all, this is the path to the creator of the universe! The tunnel thing sounds like an abandoned subway line for Pete's sake!

A little tunnel with a white light is exactly what I would expect to be the common denominator of oxygen deprivation or GLok if it were purely physiological. For the creator of Man and giver of life, I'd expect a tad more choreography.

I'm not sure that conflating NDEs and OBEs is helping the argument either. Do atheists find any interest in the NDE concept, or is this just something that has been co-opted by theists to help them with that "faith" thing, which is not supposed to need evidence?