I Am Soul

[articulett]

I've had panic attacks, and it was my son who taught me that was what was happening. I just would get an overwhelming feeling of dread... like something really wrong was happening... a stroke or heart attack or I forgot how to breathe... but my son learned that if you were having those thoughts you were probably breathing fine and nothing bad was happening and it would pass in a moment or two. I don't know why they started or what stopped them. They came many years after my imagined OBE's though, and I'd describe them differently. One made me feel "transcendent" and "wow how cool is this?!" and the other made me feel abject terror unconnected to anything.

I could feel as terrified as I'd imagine the passenger's on the hijacked plane were feeling, but there was nothing that warranted that feeling as far as I could tell.

Depression clouds your "truth" and interpretation of reality too. It seems we often feel things and then invent the reasons using cultural clues and so forth so that we can blame others or imagine the good feelings were due to us--this makes us feel in control of things that we have no control over... or in the case of a placebo affect, it gives us some control... we feel better when we can explain our feelings and put them in some sort of context or give reasons for what we think and do. We confabulate when a ready reason isn't available. If I believed in demons, I imagine an anxiety attack could convince me I was in the presence of one.

One nice thing about being a skeptic is that it eliminates those kinds of fears--ghosts, demons, hell, dark forces, etc. And also the fear of being wrong. It doesn't matter... the evidence will accumulate for the things that are true... I don't have to fear not having faith or not believing in the right thing or not curing my husband's cancer by thinking positive or whatever. My thoughts are not being spied on. I like that.

 

[Paulhoff]

I just would get an overwhelming feeling of dread... like something really wrong was happening...

I've had that when Bush won.

Paul

 

[articulett]

I've had that when Bush won.

Paul

I was very depressed. I knew we'd just be "going backwards"-- I want humanity to move forward.

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

If you understand how the brain constructs the experience of objectivity...it doesn't change things?

Not necessarily as you might think. We already know objectivity is something we cannot absolutely achieve, understanding the underlying process would only confirm that in a more precise way. Furthermore, ‘the experience of objectivity’ is not the same thing as treating objectivity as a ‘methodological aspect’ of research.

Right now, the thoughts passing through the mind...they appear to be "your" thoughts. That experience, that there's a "you", an "I" that is somehow "having" these thoughts, that experience is being created by a neurological process, as yet not understood. Without it, the thoughts would simply be arising, without any sense of them belonging to anybody. They wouldn't be happening to anybody. Just thoughts passing.

Yes, identification is a process happening in the brain, it can be shut down, but it is also a valuable part of human existence.

I agree that it needn't stop technology in its tracks. But it would put a new perspective on things. Can you see it on the cover of SciAm magazine - we know how to switch "you" off! The ultimate in relaxation, no more identification.

Rather than those headlines being somehow revolutionary, I would assume the implications would be such that the headlines would be about possible working models of different types of artificial intelligence capable of having identity. In a curious way people tend to look forward at what’s possible in the near and distant future.

 

[Nick227]

Yes, identification is a process happening in the brain, it can be shut down, but it is also a valuable part of human existence.

When you mention that it is possible to stop identification with thought, how is this done? I'm interested. If you can do it with all the thoughts and feelings still present, it would seem to be instant meditation.

Rather than those headlines being somehow revolutionary, I would assume the implications would be such that the headlines would be about possible working models of different types of artificial intelligence capable of having identity. In a curious way people tend to look forward at what’s possible in the near and distant future.

I would imagine it wouldn't be so hard to give a robot a notion of personal selfhood, to believe that if it does not assert its ideas into actions it is in some way less itself. Though I don't know much about AI. Interesting subject.

Nick

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

When you mention that it is possible to stop identification with thought, how is this done? I'm interested. If you can do it with all the thoughts and feelings still present, it would seem to be instant meditation.

Well, I was talking about that in relation to possibly having figured out how the identification process is produced in the brain, thus being able to manipulate such sensations.

On the other hand, it’s seems already possible to stop identification by closely examining one’s own thoughts: every time a though arises you ask “to whom does this though belong”, the answer will obviously be a new though “to me” but not necessarily as having a priori ownership but rather as claiming ownership. It’s still happening in a brain that’s best described as my brain, although causally it’s the other way around of course.

 

[Navigator]

I agree that it needn't stop technology in its tracks. But it would put a new perspective on things. Can you see it on the cover of SciAm magazine - we know how to switch "you" off! The ultimate in relaxation, no more identification.

Switching ‘you’ on might be interesting to watch.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0823141057.htm

While an interesting experiment, does not prove anything substantial regarding OBE and bears no relationship to my own experience.

There has been no way of inducing an OBE in healthy people before, apart from unsubstantiated reports in occult literature. It's a very exciting development, and has implications for a range of disciplines from neuroscience to theology."

It is obvious that the person thinks he has induced some kind of OBE (artificial at best) and it is also obvious that he is misinformed as to who has OBE’s – seems like it is the dabblers in the ‘occult’
Watch this spot then. See if indeed these ‘implications’ produce anything substantial.
Try moving the camera out of the room where it is not focused on the individual’s human instrument, but on a tree.
Does the individual now think he is a tree?

And it seems curious to me that OBEs contain sensory elements, like vision, that must be operating independently of the body's sensory systems. Yet when someone's vision is damaged they are not able to continue to "see" with their souls. Have you considered this problem?

Nope. Are there accounts of persons not being able to see when having an OBE?

That does not change the fact that such feelings can be experienced by those who are simply physically altering their brain chemistry. In fact, schizophrenics often report such experiences. Such feelings are not evidence of your claims.

Are their experiences reported subjectively too? Is is not possible that you like what they offer as evidence because it fits better into your beliefs about what the brain is hypothetically capable of?
Is a drug induced individual more likely to have his faculties in order to know weather the drug has induced the OBE or that it has simply made it easier for consciousness to be free from the body?

Again with the senses. Tell me, why can't people who have lost their sight, hearing etc. not train themselves to use their souls to replace their damaged senses.

Is the soul about healing physical malfunction?

I'm sure you will continue to believe what you want to believe,

Ditto

I'm just explaining that you have failed to convince me that your conclusion is the only reasonable one, or even the most likely.

Your explanations fail to convince me too, but is that what we are really trying to do?
Speaking for me, well – read my signature…

There does not seem to be any further knowledge to be gained once someone inserts a supernatural element as an explanation, you know. Humans have always used such explanations for fillers, but science erases those explanations with facts. Really believing and wanting something to be true doesn't make it so.

The assumption is that soul is supernatural.
Like an OBE is somehow supernatural.
Nothing in this universe is supernatural.

OBE's and NDE's are very likely an illusion that we use to support what we want to believe. The brain is really prone to see certain shapes and things in it's delusions--spirals, tunnels, faces of loved ones, etc... and have feelings that they describe as "descendant" or feeling like they "know" some profound truth. People who really want to believe get mad at those who point this out... as do people who believe they've had such experiences and they are "real".

People often do get mad when they are not believed, as is evident in some of the responses on this forum, and not just from the so labeled ‘woos’
Personally I don’t care if people believe me or even if they say I am delusional, (or my brain is)
More importantly – and in line with observations about people getting mad – they likely have their reasons for their beliefs, and don’t respond all that amicably to hardarsed observations lacking…soul.
In fact, people being people, (or brains being brains if one prefers) they are likely to think of such as a good reason to continue believing whatever the hey they want to, regardless of hypothetical signs and blunders
The more appropriate response is at least meeting in the middle and allowing for pov’s to merge into something approximating mutual respect.

As a person who has had several OBE's I can give my anecdotal evidence that there was nothing "mystical" about them. They are a fairly common symptom of "panic attacks" or "anxiety attacks", from which I have suffered for a number of years. The sensation, also known as "depersonalization" is the feeling that you are not really "you" and indeed may be a third person or disembodied presence that is observing the ongoing scene.

Depersonalization was not the understanding I have when in OBE. Nor is it “mystical”
There is little anxiety before the event. Indeed, anxiety seems to put the breaks on the whole experience.
This is because there are certain sequences to achieving my OBE, and calm relaxed demeanor is what helps in the activation and continuation.
Quiet the opposite of panic.

 

[HghrSymmetry]

...........

 

[HghrSymmetry]

Is the soul about healing physical malfunction?

I don't think anyone mentioned anything about healing. Simply that if OBE reporters can see when out of body, why can't they use this same ability if they lose their eyesight?

 

[Nick227]

On the other hand, it’s seems already possible to stop identification by closely examining one’s own thoughts: every time a though arises you ask “to whom does this though belong”, the answer will obviously be a new though “to me” but not necessarily as having a priori ownership but rather as claiming ownership. It’s still happening in a brain that’s best described as my brain, although causally it’s the other way around of course.

Yes, good in theory. At some point I find the question as to who is asking comes up though! Who is undertaking this exercise is trying to stop identification?

Nick

 

[Nick227]

Switching ‘you’ on might be interesting to watch.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0823141057.htm

While an interesting experiment, does not prove anything substantial regarding OBE and bears no relationship to my own experience.

I obviously don't know how your experience was, but a lot of people have transitory disidentification experiences and come to regard them as coming into contact with their "soul" or as OOBEs. It's one way for the experience to be regarded.

Nick

 

[Navigator]

I obviously don't know how your experience was, but a lot of people have transitory disidentification experiences and come to regard them as coming into contact with their "soul" or as OOBEs. It's one way for the experience to be regarded.

Nick

I don't doubt that.

 

[Navigator]

I don't think anyone mentioned anything about healing. Simply that if OBE reporters can see when out of body, why can't they use this same ability if they lose their eyesight?

Is it documented that those who are blind, when having an OBE, still cannot see?

 

[lupus_in_fabula]

At some point I find the question as to who is asking comes up though! Who is undertaking this exercise is trying to stop identification?

And obviously no one is there either. But in general I don’t really see a whole lot of value in the approach I exemplified (although I have experienced something of the sort, briefly). Moments of loss of identification are often spontaneous and often a direct consequence of something happening in the brain (like seizure). I don’t think identification in general is a problem, unless you have really crappy thoughts of course.

I posted this earlier in the thread:

Dr. Jill Bolte Taylor gave an interesting talk at this years TED conference; a personal account of her experience during a stroke, especially affecting the area in the brain responsible for making a distinction between self and the surrounding. She described it as inability to define the boundaries where her body ended and the things around here began; in effect, she didn’t recognize here body as hers.

A short story about that can be found here:
http://blog.wired.com/business/2008/02/scientist-turns.html

 

[lightcreatedlife@hom]

Information is more like directions that are encoded in matter-- in books, genes, stories, etc.

What about the elements? Doesn't their atomic arrangement convey information?

Information exists in codes... all of our words are coded in 26 letters of the alphabet and from that an infinite variety of stories can be created... and nonsense too. All of life is coded in 4 basic chemicals... from that all life on our earth is built.

Patterns of behavior, patterns of arrangment?

But I wouldn't say energy gave rise to information... not in our books or in our cells... unless you mean forces that act on the environment...

Yeah them. The four forces determined the physical shape of the universe, why and how the elements do what they do.

I think the evidence show that our basis for consciousness lies within language and emotions involved in story telling...

But we can see the "precusors" to what we consider "consciousness" in the mammals closely related to us, and watch it fade into nothingness through most of the forms we consider "life." And since the inorganic gave rise to the organic...

We don't really know if matter ever was "created" or if it just always existed...

Minutes after the big bang there were only three elements, and what about what particle accelerators do?

we don't know enough about our universe to posit what happened prior to the moment of the big bang or even the words to describe it if we did know... but consciousness evolved over time in creatures for whom increasing "consciousness" offered a survival advantage... no more and no less...

The universe is based on a patterned process, and consciousness is based on patterns. It is part of the natural process.

and from there we adapted our intelligence for our own uses beyond survival and reproduction--because we could. We could enjoy things as a byproduct of evolving to prefer certain things and to seek those things and learn how to create more such things in our lives.

Humans actively seek, and create, patterns as part of the natural process.

 

[Nick227]

Moments of loss of identification are often spontaneous and often a direct consequence of something happening in the brain (like seizure). I don’t think identification in general is a problem, unless you have really crappy thoughts of course.

Sometimes I look out at the world and think "God, what a ****ing mess! Global warming, cities out of control, polution, gang warfare, etc, etc." And it seems to me like it's all caused by identification. The idea arises in me, if only you could switch it off for a few seconds a day and let people realise - this is not who you are.

Nick

 

[edge]

Is it documented that those who are blind, when having an OBE, still cannot see?

From what I have read it's the other way around they then can see.

 

[edge]

Sometimes I look out at the world and think "God, what a ****ing mess! Global warming, cities out of control, polution, gang warfare, etc, etc." And it seems to me like it's all caused by identification. The idea arises in me, if only you could switch it off for a few seconds a day and let people realise - this is not who you are.

Nick

Yep I have to agree, we are meant to be more. From there you at least try to be better.

 

[Foster Zygote]

Nope.

Will you now?

Are there accounts of persons not being able to see when having an OBE?

You tell me. Those who have never had vision do no dream visually. Yet those who have lost their vision often still dream visually. I have a friend who was paralyzed from the waist down from injuries sustained in a fall down an elevator shaft in a parking garage. She still walks in her dreams.

Dreams and hallucinations are created within out brains based on our experiences. If you are really having an out of body experience then how is it that your "soul" is able to have sensory experiences like those of your body? How is it that your disembodied consciousness is able to see without eyes and a visual cortex? How does it hear without ears? How does it feel the wind without skin? If a consciouses can do this outside of the body then why can it not do so within the body? Why can those blinded by injury not use the same abilities that you claim to have to replace their lost sight and see without their eyes? This is a serious problem with your claim that needs to be addressed.

Are their experiences reported subjectively too?

Can you name an objectively reported experience?

Is is not possible that you like what they offer as evidence because it fits better into your beliefs about what the brain is hypothetically capable of?

It is possible, but unlikely. I have no agenda in this matter. In fact, I would very much like to discover that something so remarkable is supported by evidence. Who wouldn't want to believe that we can see beyond our body's location? But if I believe something simply because I want it to be true then I am lying to myself. As a skeptic I have to apply scientific methodology to everything that I examine about the workings of the universe. Especially the things that I would like to be true.

Is a drug induced individual more likely to have his faculties in order to know weather the drug has induced the OBE or that it has simply made it easier for consciousness to be free from the body?

You are assuming that the sensory experience is an OBE. There is nothing to suggest that such experiences, be they dreams or hallucinations, are other than brain activity.

Is the soul about healing physical malfunction?

If you can see with your soul then who needs eyes?

Ditto

Show me the evidence. I have changed my beliefs many times, but the evidence has to be convincing.

Your explanations fail to convince me too, but is that what we are really trying to do?

Yes. That's why we're all here.

Speaking for me, well – read my signature…

I don't buy it, else why are you here?



BTW, I take it that you have no evidence to support your statement about women and superstition.

 

[edge]

"I don't have any idea whether there's life after death or not. I've been a follower of science all of my life, but I also have a Ph.D. in philosophy, and it really seems to me that the question of life after death is not yet ripe for scientific enquiry because it's not formulatable in a way that fits into the scientific method. I also think it's the most important question. If you think of the big questions of existence, this is the biggie."

The following are some examples of veridical NDEs documented by Moody:

Example 1: An elderly woman had been blind since childhood. But, during her NDE, the woman had regained her sight and she was able to accurately describe the instruments and techniques used during the resuscitation her body. After the woman was revived, she reported the details to her doctor. She was able to tell her doctor who came in and out, what they said, what they wore, what they did, all of which was true. Her doctor then referred the woman to Moody who he knew was doing research at the time on NDEs.
http://www.near-death.com/experiences/evidence02.html

Carry on