What is death?
What is after death?

Just wanna get some opinions...

I think time after our death is something we cannot imagine ... not being alive is something we have never experienced and therefore cannot imagine how it is... As for death, it is the destruction of our conciousness.

What is death?

The end of living. The point where all brain activity ceases.

What is after death?

Nothing. We simply die then help to fertalize the ground, which helps new plants grow, which feeds other animals, which feed yet more animals, which eventually die to start the process again. An afterlife is simply an invention of the human mind designed to comfort the dying and their loved ones when the end is near. It's doing it's job quite well.... a little too well even.

Death is boring :D

Death is simply the passage between physical and non-physical existance. The end of the end and the beginning of the beginning. The return to home. :)

Can you prove (or at least show some shed of evidence) that the no-physical exists.

No, because it´s not physical and can´t be proven physically, maybe philosophically though. Or by your own experience. :)

But for the non-physical to have any meaning it has to interact with the physical. No experimental evidence supports this.

We all know what happens to the meat, the body. Is there anything more to it? I have know idea. I haven't died yet. When I have, maybe I'll come back and let you know. Or not. Either way, I won't know until it happens. And maybe even then I won't.

That´s because the experiments have been invalid. And it does interact, to such an extent that the physical world would not exist without it. It has created it. And it doesn´t have to interact physically to have meaning, that it has anyway, in itself. The physical world is a created "illusion" by the non-physical world.
But then, don´t take my word for it, find out for yourself, otherwise it will not be any real knowledge, just belief.

can YOU show one shread of evidance that there is NO afterlife of some respect?

WOW do you ever listen to yourself?

The nonphysical created the physical and since the phisical exists that proves the nonphysical. Thats not the least bit circular. ;)

The only thing we have to evaluate the world with is evidence everything is just guesswork or wishful thinking which has everything to do with faith but nothing to do with fact.

I'm an atheist and a skeptic. But as someone who values scientific principles and learning over acceptance of the unknown, I have to say I can not dismiss the idea of an afterlife. Not until it is disproven. Nor will accept that any afterlife exists until proven. Once again, this goes in my Undecided tray.

Well, that´s just your opinion. ;)
I didn´t say that the physical world proves the non-physical by merely existing. Though it does, but only after you already have gotten proof for the non-physical. Otherwise we would not bother to have this discussion even. :)

And yes, I do listen to myself, much to often...:p

True there is noe evidence against an afterlife as such but there is evidence that there is nothing beyond the physical world. Because as i said before the non-physical world would have to interact with the phsical world to have any real existance. All experimental evidence suggests that there is no non-physical influence effecting the expeiments. If there is a type of non-physical existance than it has nothing to do with the physical world so therefore nothing to due with us. Which means no metaphysical afterlife.

If there is a type of non-physical existance than it has nothing to do with the physical world so therefore nothing to due with us. Which means no metaphysical afterlife.

Unless there is more to us than merely the physical. I'm not saying there is, but I do think there is the possibility that all those ideas we humans have carried for scroes of millennia might be based on something more than fear and superstition. I personally have experienced odd things which I attribute to what you might call the supernatural. I just can't explain them in mundane physical terms. However, I remain in need of explanations and evidence or pretty much everything.

You´re in for a pleasant surprise then...or unpleasant depending on the level of chock. :D

Adam,

Its possible that there is some non-physical aspect of us but like i've been saying it would have to interact with us to have anypart of our real existance. Since it has no part of the real person its not so much of an after life as a non-physical copy of you living on in heaven or hell (however it can't be judged because anything you did in life was because of your physical self) If there is some sort of non-physical existence it has to be completely seperate from the physical world like an alternate universe. Which means you cna never relate the two so for our purposes it dosent exist.

Oh, and Bebilina i strongly doubt that im in for any suprises when it comes to metaphysical reality.

I don't know enough to propose a theory, but the the discovery of quantum entanglement and the possibility that our consciousness may derrive from quantum interactions within microtubules (microscopic cellular structures) of the brain could support a theory that conscious could be linked in some manner between individuals.

Quantum entanglement of macroscopic particles has also been demonstrated now... maybe we are all one.

I'm not suggesting it's true... but it sure is interesting and might be feasible.

Anyway, it's an idea I like to toy with.

~Raithere

Asgaurd,

can YOU show one shread of evidance that there is NO afterlife of some respect?Certainly. Look at the invisible immaterial 6-inch wide crystalline dodecahedron that is floating 2 inches in front of your eyes.

This crystal is equally real as an afterlife. Both are figments of the human imagination.

Things that exist are based on observation and detection. Nothing can be said about any concept that does not conform to this criterion.

There are probably a near infinite number of imaginative contrived constructs that also do not exist. The probability that any one of these might be true is effectively mathematically zero.

Cris

bebelina,

No, because it´s not physical and can´t be proven physically, maybe philosophically though. Or by your own experience. Ok so you agree it can’t be proven through material means. And philosophically in this regard is no different to imaginative fiction.

So how about your own experience? I cannot experience your personal experience so I can never share your alleged proof, however, can you show that your belief is quantifiably different to an irrational delusion?

If you cannot do that then why should we believe anything other than that you are deluded?

Cris

bebelina,

I didn´t say that the physical world proves the non-physical by merely existing. Though it does, but only after you already have gotten proof for the non-physical.You must know that that is an entirely circular argument and completely invalid.

If you have proof then show it, if it is just a personal conviction then prove you are not deluded. Either way you have made a claim and must offer an acceptable proof if you are to be believed.

Cris

Cris, you are so very welcome to believe that I´m deluded...:D
Maybe that is what it takes to understand these things. ;)
Yes, it´s circular at first, unless you stick your head in it, then you can begin to grasp the vast realities beyond the physical illusion. The thought can open your mind, litterally.
I don´t know how to prove anything to you, and even if I were to find out any proof , you would dismiss it immediately, because you are reluctant to broaden your mind, or even acknowledge the necessity of such a behaviour, and that is what it takes to recognise the proof as real.
You can never get proof unless you change your way of viewing the world, it´s as simple as that. And it´s a very hard task to change your worldview, and even harder to be so selfaware to admit that it´s necessary.
And you don´t have to believe me, you have free will...;)
I wouldn´t want anybody to just believe me either, I would get very suspicious if someone just turned straight around and suddenly just agreed. Proof will come from you, when you are ready to see them. Are you ready to change your worldview to get proof? Just try it, for a few minutes each day, to get the feel of it, as a scientific test. ;) How much of a scientist are you? Do you dare? :D

Proof will come by changing my view of the world!?!?

My world view is to except only what there is evidence to support. That is the only way there is reason to believe anything. You're accusing chris (and probaly me) of not having a broad mind. I dont see you being very open minded. Why don't you try applying logic (non-circualar that is) to some of your arguements. You say you have proof of the non-material but what is it based on. Everyone has to have a reason to believe something my reason is evidence can you give me any.

Bebelina,

I don´t know how to prove anything to you, and even if I were to find out any proof , you would dismiss it immediately, because you are reluctant to broaden your mind, or even acknowledge the necessity of such a behaviour, and that is what it takes to recognise the proof as real. You appear to be judging me and I don’t think you know enough about me yet to be able to do that with any confidence of accuracy.

Note that I have not accused you of being deluded, but have suggested you show the difference between what you believe and a delusion. Now I do recognize the problem that if the delusion is complete then the deluded person will have no way to know that they are deluded or not. And that is really the question you must ask yourself. How do you know you are not deluded? What test can you perform that can convince you that what you believe is true? Convincing others or me is an entirely different matter.

From what you have said I don’t believe that you do have any way to know that you are not deluded. If true then you need to assess the probability of an understandable delusion and a fantastic claim that a non-material realm exists.

You can never get proof unless you change your way of viewing the world, it’s as simple as that. And it’s a very hard task to change your worldview, and even harder to be so selfaware to admit that it’s necessary.

Are you ready to change your worldview to get proof? Just try it, for a few minutes each day, to get the feel of it, as a scientific test. How much of a scientist are you? Do you dare? What is it that you would have me try?

Will it help you to realize that I have been Yogic-flying since 1987? No probably not, but that fact might give you an indication of how I ‘m prepared to consider anything. Perhaps I should also list the many weird things I have tried. Well, maybe not yet.

Cris

Cris, I´m sorry if I judged you, but we have been down this road many times before. But please do list the weird things you have done. :p

As I said earlier, you don´t have to believe me at all...:)
I know what I know and if I´m deluded then so be it, what´s really the difference form being not-deluded? Who can tell who is what, and from what perspective? You seem equally deluded to me.

I have many clairvoyant dreams for example, but can I hear you laughing already....or at least smirking. ;)
I speak with my dead grandfather and other dead relatives in my dreams. They give me advice and warnings. I prevented my cousins daughter from jumping off a high building by dreaming of it first. I instantly emailed my cousin in the morning, but she wasn´t at home to read the mail. When she got home and read it, she was shocked, because her daughter had actually tried to jump off a high building, but she caught her in time. Sure, it can be a coincidence, so can everything, or she got the message anyway, by telepathy perhaps, so that she could prevent the child from jumping.
And this really disturbes even me, because I don´t want to think that the future is set, but so some degree it seems to be.
My grandmother and I both saw the ghost of my grandfather the day before his funeral. He just walked by us in the hallway. I have seen my fathers dog after she died, standing in my kitchen. And once I got an inner vision of where the lotto tickets were when I had no idea where they were. ( I had not put them there, nor seen when the person put them there, and it´s not a usual place)
Memories of previous reincarnations.
There are many incidents...many forgotten even. :)
It has mostly to do with feelings of trust and love, not so much intellectual scrutinizing, even though you can get pretty far by that alone too, but not all the way.

Yes Albatross, you must beleive to get proof. :) So why not try? What are you afraid of? Of actually getting proof? :D

Im still not quite getting what this proof in the supernatural is based on. Im getting the impression that your trying to tell me that if i believe in the supernatural it will prove itself. Not only is this another circular argument it goes against everything i know and have ever seen.

That´s the point! If it didn´t go against everything you believed before, then no change would be necessary, right? :D

I still think you're as closed minded as you accuse me of being.

bebelina,

but can I hear you laughing already....or at least smirking. Neither, I'm just very curious.

I have to sleep now. More on the morrow.

Take care
Cris

Cris, I´m still waiting...:bugeye:

Albatross, whas that your smartest reply? :D

Bebelina,

Sorry, catching up with other threads and it was my first day back at work today after a 3 week vacation.

Cris

Ok, hope you had a great vacation. Did you do anything special? :)

About as smart as any of yours.

You wish... :rolleyes:

It is just as smart as your arguments because when you throw out the circular logic all that left is you accusations that im closed minded. Same as what i said. ;)

When did I accuse you for being close-minded?
The circular logic isn´t circular when you understand it, and it takes a bit of confusing to get there. The thought of the circular is evolving for the mind.
:)

Bebelina, you're definitely a space cadet. (That's a good thing.)

The only way to believe in something is to believe in it! DUHHH! insert eye roll here.

you are reluctant to broaden your mind

I'd say thats calling me closed minded. ;)

The circular logic isn´t circular when you understand it

Thats another circular arguement because it only holds if it assumes itself true and then tries to prove itself.

Your arguements are so circular that i get dizzy reading them.

ALL HAIL BEBELINA GODESS OF CIRCULAR LOGIC!!!!!!

Oh, you morons....you twist everything I say to fit your NARROW and CLOSE MINDED worldview. :p
I never said that Mech, read again and insert brain before you do it. :D
The circular logic is meant to make you dizzy so that I can attack you while you are unconscious with my amazing ideas, that you willfully will accept under dizzy circumstances, and then wake up like a new person, totally brainwashed! :D

But what if the only way to get proof is to let your thought slide into areas unknown to your consciousness so far, are you then willing to go there to get proof, that you so dearly want? :bugeye:

Ya know Bebalina the other thing about you that amazes me besides your use of circular logic is your insistance on denying you said something when its all on record.

First you say that you never called me closed minded I adressed that in my last post so you can just look it up there. But than you deny saying that you have to believe in something to believe in it

you must beleive to get proof

Sound familiar?

An a little not about how blatently wrong the statement is. Nobody believed in General Realitivity untill experimental evidence backed it up.

At least in my opinion it means the same thing as what you denied saying.

BELIEF AND EVIDENE ARE THE SAME THING. THE ONLY REASON ANYONE SHOULD BELIEVE ANYTHING IS BECAUSE OF THE EVIDENCE TO BACK IT UP. SINCE FROM A SCIENTIFIC STANDPOINT PROOF CAN NEVER BE ACHIEVED EVIDENCE IS ALL THERE IS. IF YOUR GOING TO ARGUE A POINT GIVE EVIDENCE BASED ON A NON-CIRCULAR BASIS.

At least I have a sense of humour. And I´m pretty sure the comment about broadening the mind was directed to Cris.

Anyway, belief was the wong choice of words, I got confused by the Mech-post.
What I meant was of course that you must change your worldview to get proof.
Or lets say it like this...do you like the world as it is today? Are you content with what there is ? Are you not curious to find out if there is more?
If you are content and do not want to find out more, then that´s fine, but allow others to do that without your mockery. If you are not content , then what can you do? Change the whole world? That´s impossible, or is it? How can a person change the whole world? By changing how you perceive the world.
Now, I´m not saying that you should totally abandon everything you thought you knew, just give up a little space in your consciousness to the possiblility that there could be more.
Why are you so afraid to do that? It´s just a thought, how much harm can it do? ;)

If you just change your world veiw, and put your head inside it, you'll see that I was just agreeing with you Bebelina

To all,

There is often a tendency to pre-judge or to have preconceptions about events or activities that have not been directly experienced, and where such evaluations turn out to be significantly inaccurate.

For example how can you realistically experience the emotional effect of a great movie just by reading the synopsis? But worse is when you have unfavorable pre-conceived ideas about the movie based on similar movies of the same genre.

Another good example is how can you effectively evaluate the quality of a new piece of music based on someone’s verbal description?

And again how can you convince a non-swimmer that swimming is not too difficult and that he will float if he lets go of the railings. He is never going to be fully convinced until he tries it, even when he can see that others have no trouble. Full realization of truth only comes from actual experience.

We can theorize all we want about many activities but until the activity is directly experienced then you can never really appreciate or properly understand the activity.

A common argument from theists and other proponents of the supernatural is that you cannot know whether it is true or not unless you attempt to experience it.

My question to everyone and especially non-believers is whether it is fair to dismiss the supernatural when many of us have never attempted to experience the believer’s suggestions?

From my past perspective as a devout evangelical Christian for several years leads me to believe that my perspective is as accurate as I can make it. And I’ll describe more of that experience later.

But for now can anyone who has had similar experiences see anything wrong with my conclusion that a belief in an alleged supernatural is nothing more than a fantasy?

Cris

GRO$$,

Death is, in Essence, transformation. It's the bridge to another kind of life, another kind of existance. :)

Love,
Nelson

truthseeker,

Death is, in Essence, transformation. It's the bridge to another kind of life, another kind of existance. That is an unsupported assertion. Just your emotional hope.

As far as we know death is the termination of existence. There is currently nothing that indicates otherwise.

Cris

Cris,

That is an unsupported assertion. Just your emotional hope.

Nope... That's the conclusion you get when you discover yourself as water in a bottle...

As far as we know death is the termination of existence. There is currently nothing that indicates otherwise.

NDE people...
Plus philosophy... which have been discussing the issue for centuries... look for the ideas...

Love,
Nelson

truthseeker,

NDE people...
Plus philosophy... which have been discussing the issue for centuries... look for the ideas...I’ve spent a great deal of time examining NDE claims and have posted here on the subject in the past.

There is no substance to any NDE claim that the phenomena are the result of alleged supernatural interactions. There is however, overwhelming evidence that severe trauma to the brain can and does cause intense hallucinatory effects that the patient cannot distinguish from reality.

There remains absolutely no evidence that a soul or spirit can or does exist and that if it existed that it could survive death.

If you know different then show me the evidence instead of stating conjecture and wishful thinking.

Cris

truthseeker,

Death is, in Essence, transformation. It's the bridge to another kind of life, another kind of existance.

That's the conclusion you get when you discover yourself as water in a bottle...Fortunately I have never discovered myself transformed to water and held in a bottle, but of course I have not died yet. Are you saying that when someone dies they are converted to water and put in a bottle?

We have no evidence that death is anything other than the end of our existence. If you have evidence that shows otherwise then show it, otherwise anything else you say can only be wishful thinking.


Cris

Cris,

There is no substance to any NDE claim that the phenomena are the result of alleged supernatural interactions. There is however, overwhelming evidence that severe trauma to the brain can and does cause intense hallucinatory effects that the patient cannot distinguish from reality.

The interesting thing is that after they come back, with a "severe trauma in the brain" they actually live more meanfully, they valorize more life and lose the fear of death. Why this happens...? ;)

If you know different then show me the evidence instead of stating conjecture and wishful thinking.

What kind of evidence are you looking for?

Fortunately I have never discovered myself transformed to water and held in a bottle, but of course I have not died yet. Are you saying that when someone dies they are converted to water and put in a bottle?

You know very well that allegories and metaphors are widely used in Philosophy to explain what "common" words can't explain all alone.

Compare your spirit to the water, and your body to the bottle. When you die, you (water) get out of your body (bottle). That's doesn't mean that you (the water) cease to exist, it only means that you exist somewhere else...

We have no evidence that death is anything other than the end of our existence. If you have evidence that shows otherwise then show it, otherwise anything else you say can only be wishful thinking.

There's no EVIDENCE in Philosophy, there's only observation and logic thinking.

Love,
Nelson

truthseeker,

The interesting thing is that after they come back, with a "severe trauma in the brain" they actually live more meanfully, they valorize more life and lose the fear of death. Why this happens...? And there are many other cases that can be quoted where people have close encounters with death that make them realize the value of life. Many soldiers report changed attitudes when they return from war.

But losing a fear of death because of a vision caused by a hallucination could also be seen as a dangerous thing. Certainly psychiatry uses hallucinogenic drugs to some extent to help with depressive patients.

But other cases of NDE hallucinations have revealed that the experiences have been quite frightening and disturbing.

There really is no value in trying to conclude a supernatural influence from extreme physiological damage or seriously abnormal conditions. While we do not fully understand the human brain completely we do know that it does behave very unpredictably when it is damaged.

Cris

There's no EVIDENCE in Philosophy, there's only observation and logic thinking.

So what is more logical? That NDE's are actually a natural part of how the brain functions when it is damaged or when it goes into "survival mode" or that they are visions of the afterlife beamed down from an invisible heaven? Sorry Truthseeker, religion and logic tend not to mix very well, kind of like oil and water.

Cris,

If it's damaged enpugh to cause halucinations, why they don't continue after the patient recover?


Xelios,

So what is more logical? That NDE's are actually a natural part of how the brain functions when it is damaged or when it goes into "survival mode" or that they are visions of the afterlife beamed down from an invisible heaven? Sorry Truthseeker, religion and logic tend not to mix very well, kind of like oil and water.

They "mix" well depending on the way you look to them...
About brain damage, the same as above...

Love,
Nelson

truthseeker,

If it's damaged enpugh to cause halucinations, why they don't continue after the patient recover?It’s called healing. The body tends to be quite good at that on its own and can sometimes be assisted by medicine and surgery.

Many things cause hallucinations: Recreational drugs are a good example. Typically the synapses that connect the neurons are made to react differently and hence the signals the brain receives are jumbled. However, the brain does its best to interpret the signals and put meaning to them. For example you know that you can draw a 3 dimensional object on a flat piece of paper and your brain will have no problem understanding the representation – the brain has effectively interpreted the image. Incidentally animals with smaller brains, dogs for example, are incapable of performing that activity.

And in the case of recreational drugs when the effect of the drug wears off then the synapses also return to normal and the hallucinations disappear.

When a brain is damaged or starved of vital nutrients and oxygen then the normal functioning of the brain is repressed. The brain even under such extreme conditions will still try to do its job and its fabulous ability to create meaning out of limited data results in hallucinations.

Also, identical results to NDEs have also been perfectly simulated in the laboratory by using hallucinatory drugs.

Hope that helps.
Cris

Cris,

And how the brain recover memory, learned skills and this kind of stuff...? Healing too?

Love,
Nelson

They "mix" well depending on the way you look to them...


So what logic do you see in religion that I seem to have missed?

Originally posted by Bebelina
Oh, you morons...


actually i know very well that Nuetrino_Albatross is not a moron and neither is mech. you are the moron here...

Originally posted by Bebelina

The circular logic is meant to make you dizzy so that I can attack you while you are unconscious with my amazing ideas, that you willfully will accept under dizzy circumstances, and then wake up like a new person, totally brainwashed! :D


... and judging by that post i also believe you are also on very large amounts of drugs that you use quite frequently!

-misunderstood poet-

truthseeker,

And how the brain recover memory, learned skills and this kind of stuff...? Healing too? I don't understand what you are asking. Please re-phrase.

Cris

as far as death goes, i don't know much about it. i know what people think happens(discovery&TLC) but i'm not sure wether believe them. the first thought that pops into my mind is 'death oh, you rot in the ground'. it would be interesting to avtually know what happened to your spirit/soul. sometimes they get stuck here and they haunt houses(i've lived in three) and other buildings, i know that much. i'm done babbling now. take care.

lilgothprincess

p.s. you can ignore my post if you want to. i probabley has nothing to do with what youre talking about.

I see that you too have no sense of humour whatsoever, but what can one expect from a "gothprincess"? ..:rolleyes:....:D

Cris,

And how the brain recover memory, learned skills and this kind of stuff...? Healing too?

I'm asking you that if the brain is damaged, memory, learned skills and this kind of thing might be lost. So how this is recovered? The cells of the brain can multiply again, but lost information, as I know, can't be recovered? What do you say?

Love,
Nelson

The human brain, once damaged, is capable of relearning things (it's called rehabilitation) that were lost. It is also capable of "re-routing" information around damaged areas, so if the area of the brain that controls you hand is damaged, over time you will probably regain use of your hand (to an extent anyways, the human brain can't heal everything!).

And high levels of stress (i.e. NDE's) <b>are</b> capable of producing hallucinations in the brain. I'd post citations of it but I'm too damn lazy, look it up if you don't believe me.

SpyFox_the_KMeson,

Thanks for supporting my view... :D

Now, I ask you and Cris how people that supposedly had brain damage don't lose ANY information and simply get out of the hospital with NO problems!!!!!

:D:D:D:D

I'm listening... ;)

Love,
Nelson

truthseeker,

Now, I ask you and Cris how people that supposedly had brain damage don't lose ANY information and simply get out of the hospital with NO problems!!!!!I think you are making an assumption that you are not communicating here.

There is an enormous range of injuries that can occur to the brain that will result in an irrecoverable state, i.e. death, to just oxygen starvation. The degree of damage and location of the damage may result in various degrees of memory loss and other functional loss. Many people remain permanently disabled while others stay in coma. Other types of damage are very transitory, e.g. oxygen starvation, which can heal very quickly (minutes or hours) once the cause of the problem is removed.

Of the number of those people who recover, a miniscule number report NDEs. NDEs are just hallucinations which means those cells that that were damaged or starved of oxygen were able to recover, otherwise the patient would not have been able to recall the NDE hallucination. If the cells were permanently damaged then those patients would not have been able to report an NDE.

We should perhaps be more precise about our definitions here since you are assuming brain damage is always severe, whereas the NDE reports I have seen refer to recoverable brain trauma.

I hope that helps.
Cris

Dear Poet~PriestOfNothing
Welcome to the club!

but what can one expect from a "gothprincess"?

What can one expect from a person who's logic is so full of holes they can play ring toss with it?


Oh, and before you object to my post:I see that you too have no sense of humour People tend not to find insults humorous. Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but perhaps not insulting people's intelligance would be in order.

Cris,

I'm talking about any kind of brain damage...
My point is that how much damaged a brain has to be in order to produce an NDE. As you see... "Near Death Experience" seems pretty severe to me...

Besides that, why people always describes it in the same way...?

Love,
Nelson

I don't think I did a very good job of wording my earlier post...
The damaged part of the brain, in any severe damage (or anything that physically destroys or disconnects neurons) is unrecoverable. What the brain <b>can</b> do is relearn things. I think it's also important to note here that under stress it is very easy to have false memories. I'm not going to go into detail as I am not an expert on it, but I do know it happens.

My personal opinion is that an NDE is just a hallucination of the brain produced by stress and damage.

And by the way, only certain cells of the brain (in the hippocampus I believe) can reproduce, this is the area associated with memory. But don't quote me on that.

Originally posted by Mech_The_Muon

Oh, and before you object to my post: People tend not to find insults humorous. Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but perhaps not insulting people's intelligance would be in order.

I agree completely with that. :D

*goes back to looking at her ring that changes colors on it own*

*edit* Ack, sorry guys, this was supposed to go in another thread. My apologies.

Hello-ooooo!

Can Cris or anyone read me here...
I have a point here, you know...

Posted by Me:
I'm talking about any kind of brain damage...
My point is that how much damaged a brain has to be in order to produce an NDE. As you see... "Near Death Experience" seems pretty severe to me...

Besides that, why people always describes it in the same way...?


SpyFox_the_KMeson,

And by the way, only certain cells of the brain (in the hippocampus I believe) can reproduce, this is the area associated with memory. But don't quote me on that.

I quoted... :D
Well, you are right. Thanks for remembering that... it's an important point here... ;)

So... people that experience "Near Death" "brain damage" will be able to recover from it? Or there's no brain damage and NDE is real, not an hallucination...?

Love,
Nelson

So it´s ok for you to call me deluded, drug addict and other insulting names, but when I humorously call you morons YOU get offended????
Allow me to not believe a word that you write.....:rolleyes:
And if you didn´t catch the obvious non-malicious humour in my post, then it is embarrasingly obvious that you have very low understanding for the written word, possibly combined with a non existing self distance and a frightening lack of humour.
Fell free to get offended now, you morons. :D

And I have explained over and over again why and how my logic is in fact not circular, so explain to me again why you can´t see that, and I will try to elaborate my ideas to the kindergarten level that you are on. Now , THAT was mean. ;)
I apologize for that, but I´m really getting sick and tired to carry on the same fruitless conversation with different but as narrow minded people as the ones before.
I think I will take a pause from visiting this forum.

Bebelina!

Don't get away from here! I Love your posts... :)

Btw... did you changed the color of your text...?
I begun writting in this color today... ;)

Anyways... I know how do you feel!!!
Have you already voted in my other thread about who is the most close-minded...? :D

Anyways...
Here is the evidence about NDE as non-hallucination fact.
It's from the book "God: The Evidence" that I just happened to have bought one hour ago...

"Coincidence", huh?

"Hallucination
One of the earliest hyphothesis offered for the NDE was that it was a hallucination (possibly drug-induced) or a dream. 34Not only do many people encounter NDEs with no drug involvement, but also, as a number of researchers have argued, the experience does not have the normal charactheristics of a hallucination. First, the otherwise normal people who have NDEs do not interpret them as hallucinations, but as very "real" experiences- "as real as you and me sitting here talking" is a common characterization. Normally those who have experience hallucinations are aware afterwards that they have been hallucinating. Sabom had two patients who had each experienced drug-induced hallucinations and a near-death experience on separate occasions. Both perceived sharp distinctions between the hallucinatory state and the NDE. Second, hallucinations normally involve serious distortions of reality. But the NDE is normally ordered. While imagery may vary, the experience is remembered as highly coherent. Moreover, there are common patterns to the experience, across individuals and across cultures, 35whereas hallucinations tend to be more idiosyncratic. third, hallucinations are characteristically accompained by anxienty and disturbance; the vast majority of those who report having had NDEs describe a feeling of peace and calm once they have separated from their bodies. Fourth, a number of studies have shown that NDEs normally have a life- transforming effect on the beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors of those who experience them. Diminished fear of death is among the most universal aftereffects. A heightened sense of spirituality and purpose-often reflected in major lifestyle changes-is also common. 36 mere hallucinations do not normally have this kind of carryover into individuals' lives."

God: The Evidence by Patrick Glynn, page 123

After that it talks a little bit about time in NDEs as experienced differently from time we have here. 37

Notes:
34. Ronald K. Siegel, "The Psychology of Life After Death," in Bruce Greyson and Charles P. Flynn, eds., The Near Death Experience (Springfield, IL: Thomas, 1984), pp. 78-120.

35. Karlis Osis and Erlendur Haraldsson, At the Hour of Death (New York: Avon, 1977), provided an extensive cross-cultural survey of near-death apparitions and experiences in the United States and India and found similar patterns.

36. See Melvin Morse, with Paul Perry, Transformed by the Light (New York: Ballantine, 1992), and Kenneth Ring, Heading Toward Omega (New York: Morro, 1985)

37. Fenwick and Fenwick, p. 118.


Is that enough EVIDENCE for you...?

Love,
Nelson

I was joking when i called you a druggy. i even tell my friends they are on crack when they say something that just make me think 'what the f***?!?' I usaully ask them what the heck they are smoking or tell them to lay off the crack for a while. then they burst out laughing and roll around on the floor.
It's rather interesting.

don't call us morons just because we don't agree with what you're saying. that is a very childish thing to do. before you even start with me, i didn't call you a moron because i disagreeed with what you were saying. i called you a moron because you said Nuetrino and mech were morons, and only a moron would think that.
-depressedangel-

Guys, if I were you, I'd just ignore Bebelina.

She hasn't really made any sort of point, just a vast number of circular assumptions, and then snidely attacks anyone who disagree's with her.

And THEN- After you make an inquiry reguarding her condencending behavior, she skirts away claiming she wasn't really insulting you, just making a joke.

Not worth any salt to bother with, in my opinion.

Ok, my 2 cents on the topic.

Firstly, I firmly believe in the Liberal Scientific Method: That all information is up for grabs.

For example, somebody can disprove the law of gravity. They can do this, but it would first require they overturn a mountain of evidence to support.

Likewise, while I do believe that their is a possiblity of an afterlife, I've yet to see any hard evidence that supports it. What I have heard has either sounded like wishful thinking, or very real delusions.

However, I do hold that it's possible. But until I do, I dont have any reason to believe in it, so I won't.

Death is simply when God wants us to go into a better place in the Blessed Trinity unless you die purposely.

After Death is the life beyond earth and space.
It depends on your personality and how you lived.
If you lived sad in your life you will have a sad after life if you lived happy you will have a happy after life.

Bebalina,

Why dont you try your own arguement out. Throw out your worldview than assume im right. That shouldn't be too hard all I ask is that you look at facts (not circular logic) assume they are true and that there is no reason to assume anything beyond them.

What are you afraid of? You might be wrong?

P.S. Don't be so sensitive you've called me closed minded, moronic, and have no sense of humor and i'm not offended.

"It depends on your personality and how you lived.
If you lived sad in your life you will have a sad after life if you lived happy you will have a happy after life."

Says who? Have you experienced it? Christianity says this? Who? And secondly, what if a rapist lives quite happily?

Tyler,

And secondly, what if a rapist lives quite happily?
Do you know something called "conscience"...?

Love,
Nelson

Yes. And I also know that many rapists do not feel remorse or heavy conscience for their acts.

This reminds me of that one SNL Celebrity Jeopardy episode where Sean Connery is asked to pick a catagory, he see's "Therapists" on the board so he says "It looks like this is my lucky day, I'll take The Rapists for 200" so Trebeck says "That's Therapists..... not The Rapists.." :D

Sorry, I have nothing useful to add at this time :p

Yes. And I also know that many rapists do not feel remorse or heavy conscience for their acts.

Tyler,

Are you a rapist to know what one might feel or not...?

Love,
Nelson

I've studied psychiatric profiles hugely.

The first thing I got largely into was psychiatry. When I realized psychiatry was too much of a math for me, I moved on to political theory. Than philosophy.


I used Bernardo before, and I will again. In his profile psychiatrists believe he feels no remorse for his actions.

Tyler,

Are you a rapist to know what one might feel or not...?

Well Nelson, you are the one who feels more sympathy for them than for thier victims.

Seriously dear, Tyler reads. He studies psychiatry. He has probably heard of 'anti-social personality disorder' and 'sociopathy'.

Xev,

Seriously dear, Tyler reads. He studies psychiatry. He has probably heard of 'anti-social personality disorder' and 'sociopathy'.

And I studied Modern Psychology for years... ;)

Love,
Nelson

"Sociopathy is chiefly characterized by something wrong with the person's conscience. They either don't have one, it's full of holes like Swiss cheese, or they are somehow able to completely neutralize or negate any sense of conscience or future time perspective. Sociopaths only care about fulfilling their own needs and desires - selfishness and egocentricity to the extreme. Everything and everybody else is mentally twisted around in their minds as objects to be used in fulfilling their own needs and desires. They often believe they are doing something good for society, or at least nothing that bad. The term "sociopath" is frequently used by psychologists and sociologists alike in referring to persons whose unsocialized character is due primarily to parental failures (usually fatherlessness) rather than inherent features of temperament"
- http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/401/401lect16.htm

Chronic Depression also fits the bill;
"The group of symptoms which doctors and therapists use to diagnose
depression ("depressive symptoms"), which includes the important
proviso that the symptoms have manifested for more than a few weeks
and that they are interfering with normal life, are the result of an
alteration in brain chemistry. This alteration is similar to
temporary, normal variations in brain chemistry which can be
triggered by illness, stress, frustration, or grief, but it differs
in that it is self-sustaining and does not resolve itself upon
removal of such triggering events (if any such trigger can be found
at all, which is not always the case.)

Instead, the alteration continues, producing depressive symptoms and
through those symptoms, enormous new stresses on the person:
unhappiness, sleep disorders, lack of concentration, difficulty in
doing one's job, inability to care for one's physical and emotional
needs, strain on existing relationships with friends and family.
These new stresses may be sufficient to act as triggers for
continuing brain chemistry alteration, or they may simply prevent the
resolution of the difficulties which may have triggered the initial
alteration, or both."

There's many more.

And technically, there's no such thing as over thinking as every human is thinking every second of every day. There is such a thing as over pondering on a certain topic though.

Tyler,

And technically, there's no such thing as over thinking as every human is thinking every second of every day. There is such a thing as over pondering on a certain topic though.

I see...
You never tried to shut up your head, did you?
Try it. Try to stay 5 seconds without thinking. Next time try 50 sconds. Then, 1 minute. Go, and build it up!

Once you stop thinking, your right brain will enter in contact with your left brain and you will understand what I'm telling you here... ;)

Love,
Nelson

That's called meditation. And it was something we used daily in Kung-Fu. Did I mention I trained for 8 years? Yeah, so I have a pretty good idea what meditation is about.

And no, its not stoping thinking. It's about clearing your mind. It's a sleep-like trance. But it's not stoping thoughtl. Your mind still processes information.

And how many people in Canada meditate? Out of 30 million? Maybe a million? So then those other 29 million by your description are constantly thinking and therefore will go insane.

Depend in your idea of thinking...

What the hell are you talking about?
Are you going to change the definition of thinking now?

"To have or formulate in the mind"

What the hell are you talking about?
Are you going to change the definition of thinking now?

Poor, poor masochistic* Tyler. I think he might.

P.S: The right and left brains are already connected, by the corpus callosum.

*Yeah, I'm using the word out of context. So hit me. :p

Xev,

P.S: The right and left brains are already connected, by the corpus callosum.

I'm not talking physically... I'm talking neurologically.
For example, why women have enhanced intuition?
Because the informations are more exchanged from one side of the brain to the other. Their corpus callosum are more active.

That's what I'm talking here. For one to experience true meditation AND what I'm saying here, it's absolutly necessary that the two hemispheres of the brain are connected and easily interchanging information.

Already answerwed Tyler... ;)

Love,
Nelson

I'm not talking physically... I'm talking neurologically.

Neurology is physical, dear.

Because the informations are more exchanged from one side of the brain to the other. Their corpus callosum are more active.

Actually, it is thicker and the neurons are more dense.

For one to experience true meditation AND what I'm saying here, it's absolutly necessary that the two hemispheres of the brain are connected and easily interchanging information.

Unless you are a split-brain patient, the two hemispheres are already connected.

Xev,

Neurology is physical, dear.

I'm talking about the impulses...

Actually, it is thicker and the neurons are more dense.
Yes...

Unless you are a split-brain patient, the two hemispheres are already connected.

Again, I'm talking about exchange of impulses between the two hemispheres. When you read this message, your right hemisphere get the words and rationalize, while your left brain is more "worried" about meanings and sensations...

Love,
Nelson

Nelson:
I'm talking about the impulses...

With all due respect, you have no idea what you are talking about. The chemical and electrical signals (impulses) are physical.

Again, I'm talking about exchange of impulses between the two hemispheres. When you read this message, your right hemisphere get the words and rationalize, while your left brain is more "worried" about meanings and sensations...

Yes, and the two are connected, and the two hemispheres do share some functions.

I believe TS may be referring to the nature of thoughts and such as they occur in the different parts of the brain, rather than actual electrical impulses. Perhaps a problem of language.

Hey! you gone from "space monkey"

to "single space monkey"

and now you a "depressed space monkey"?

Now he's 'stupid space monkey'. Poor Adamski, love sucks.*

Adamski, you could be right. Nelson, is that it?

*Ha ha ha. You know what I meant.

:D

DEATH:
to die, to expire, to pass on, to perish, to peg out, to push up dasies, to push up posies, to become extinct, curtins, desceased, demised, departed and defunct, dead as a doornail, dead as a herring, dead as mutton, dead as nits , the last breath, paying a dept to nature, The Big Sleep, God's way of saying:Slow down, to check out, To shuffle off this mortal coil, To head for the happy hunting ground, To blink for an exceptionally long period of time, To find oneself without breath, To be The Incredible Decaying Man, Worm Buffet, Kick the bucket, By the farm, Take the cab, Cash in your chips, and if we bury you ass-up we'll have a place to park my bike.

That was awesome - Hahahahahaha

P.S. - Too much 'Dead Parrot Sketch' by Monty Python eh?

Yes it is!
Thanks Adam! :)

Which hardly explains how neurology is not physical, and how thought is not physical.

*sights...

Originally posted by Neutrino_Albatross
Bebalina,

Why dont you try your own arguement out. Throw out your worldview than assume im right. That shouldn't be too hard all I ask is that you look at facts (not circular logic) assume they are true and that there is no reason to assume anything beyond them.

What are you afraid of? You might be wrong?

P.S. Don't be so sensitive you've called me closed minded, moronic, and have no sense of humor and i'm not offended.

I have been there, then evolved. ;)

Bebelina,

I rest my case. Thank you

Bebalina,

Thats funny ive been where you are but then i started thinking :D