Ophiolite, please read the links I have given to BWE1 on this page. There you will find already a lot. But there are much more elsewhere. Perhaps read books from Elizabeth Kuebler Ross.
I think Raymond Moody as well as Elizabeth Kuebler Ross have a very high reputation and they are out of questioning. What about Eben Alexander?
I asked you to provide reliable citations. I elected to use the word reliable deliberately. I do not consider an internet page containing anecdotal information to be reliable. For the record, I do not consider my own recollections of events to be reliable, so why would I place any confidence in third person reports of anecdotal events on an internet site? Now do you have any reliable citations, or may I now dismiss your entire thesis?
Ophiolite, I have given you reliable citations in my opinion. Nobody can force you to believe anything. Therefore do what you want.
I can only take from this that you lack any meaningful education in the methods of science and therefore are ill-placed to reach a sound conclusion as to evidence you consider supports your beliefs. Such a position had nothing to do with science and everything to do with religion, at best, and superstition, at worst. Or to put it another way, which may strike you as offensive, but is not intended at such, in this matter your opinion is worthless.
We are not talking about natural sciences! Please give an example of a "reliable citation", which would convince you. I assume only an own NDE could do that.
An article in a peer-reviewed journal might be a starting place. That is the common standard for reliable citation.
Don't know. A journal claiming to be peer-reviewed doesn't necessarily mean it is. I did little digging and found that it is NOT listed in the Thomson-Reuters Master Journal List http://ip-science.thomsonreuters.com/mjl/ (it should be under J, records 1901 thru 1910). You'd have to ask Ophi if he will accept it.
Not reliable citations, reliable data. The reports of NDEs should contain specific information that would be impossible to know if a soul weren't actually separate from its body. Describing a room isn't good enough.
1. I think we are talking about natural sciences. You assert that there is life after death and that NDEs are evidence for this. I accept that these constitute evidence, but that the quality of that evidence is so poor that it can generally be disregarded. Science currently follows the principle of methodological naturalism and some might feel this would exclude investigation of a supernatural phenomenon, i.e. life after death. I do not follow this rigid view and think NDE as evidence of life after death (as one of the options) is a viable subject for study within the natural sciences. 2. A reliable citation would be any study from a peer reviewed research article in a respected science journal. 3. You suggest that I would find my own NDE suitable evidence. I am at a total loss as to why you would think this. I clearly stated this in an earlier post: "For the record, I do not consider my own recollections of events to be reliable, so why would I place any confidence in third person reports of anecdotal events on an internet site?" Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. It seems you either do not understand or accept this. Perhaps that is why you completely ignored my quoted comment. I have not yet had an opportunity to review your latest link. Once I have done so I shall offer my thoughts.
Thanks for your study. It does not matter whether Ophi accept it or not. Lets consider a statistical approach: There are thousands of NDE reports. All are very similar and all NDE patients believe in afterlife when coming back. I think this is also amazing!
Ophiolite, we are not talking about natural sciences! Natural sciences depend on fully reproducible experiments, which are not possible in case of NDE. This topic is more similar to psychology, where most theories cannot be generally proved.
Nothing is ever proved in any science. Geology is a natural science and relies upon observation of experiments conducted by nature millions and billions of years ago.
This makes sense. A brain starved of oxygen is a brain starved of oxygen. This is where you break from logic and take it on faith. Of course they're going to believe it was an afterlife experience. They experienced something quite profound - the near-death of their mind. But it is no more a reflection of reality than the dream I had last night. It sure seemed real.
I think, we will not come any further with OBE and NDE. But what about Reincarnation? There are two highly recommended books (both Kindle version), which are real eye-opener: 1. Children Who Remember Previous Lives by Ian Stevenson 2. Past Lives Therapy by Morris Netherton and Thomas Paul
Reincarnation belongs to the purpose of life (earth-school). If there is reincarnation, there is also afterlife.
