Oddly when you die , you are the only person who does not know you are dead ! Afraid of dying or empathy for the living ?
Why most people is afraid of death?
- Thread starter Saint
- Start date
Hermann
Registered Senior Member
Are you so sure?
The main problem is, that materialists could be as fanatic as religious people, which does not allow an unbiased discussion!
—————————
http://rational-weltanschauung.blogspot.com
One person here is so sure. I'm also sure you yourself know of experiments performed under controlled conditions showing Near Death Experiences to be hallucinations of the brain or made up fabrications
I would still put me in the unbiased basket but unwilling to go into deep discussion due to the unrewarded nature of such discussions
The book writing frauds want their moment of fame (money) and the delusional know (believe) what they saw, so no point in taking away a belief
Hermann
Registered Senior Member
Of coarse, I know about experiments, which showed, that special NDEs were just hallucinations. But these are in a relation of 1:1000 with proved ones. However real proofs are only possible in natural sciences, where identical experiments can be endless repeated - all others could be fakes. It needs to question the own belief over and over with a real understanding of opposite positions. I have done this as shown in my blogspot. I wonder, whether you would still stick to your position, when you have really read the outstanding NDE of Anita Moorjani „Dying to be me“ (Kindle book)?One person here is so sure. I'm also sure you yourself know of experiments performed under controlled conditions showing Near Death Experiences to be hallucinations of the brain or made up fabrications
I would still put me in the unbiased basket but unwilling to go into deep discussion due to the unrewarded nature of such discussions
The book writing frauds want their moment of fame (money) and the delusional know (believe) what they saw, so no point in taking away a belief
Special ? What makes a special NDE special and different from a mundane?
Wonder no more. I am certain if I really read the outstanding NDE of Anita Moorjani I would remain convinced there is no such animal as afterlife
A quick Google and Wikipedia and into the having her moment of fame basket she goes
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
I guess the reason why most people are afraid of death is that they believe they will be locked in a dark room forever afterwards or some such thing.
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
I honestly doubt that this would happen though.
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
I have heard that lots of different people experience exactly the same things during near death experiences without having had any contact wit one another beforehand, which indicates to me that these NDE's are little glimpses of what happens afterwards.
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
If person x has a spirit, then person x must know that.
I don't know why most people are afraid of death, but I guess its because they think they will be locked in a dark room forever afterwards or some such thing.
They're probably wrong. NDE's are probably the most accurate way to figure out what happens after death.
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
The purpose of existing is to enjoy one's existence, and that is all.
Also, sorry to go off on a bit of a tangeant, but I think I will bring up the contradiction of non existence here:
That is, that in order for anything not to exist, it must be around to do so.
That's why stuff exists, including entities. I don't mean to be a know it all or anything, but this is just where my studies led me.
Hermann
Registered Senior Member
I think, the main problem of sciences is now their dogma of materialism. The introduction of materialism as working base for natural sciences was a great success and freed sciences from the cage of the church 500 years ago. But unfortunately this dogma commits also scientists in medicine, psychotherapy and psychology to work along the same lines.
There is an interesting book by Bob Olson “Answers about the Afterlife” (also available as Kindle version from Amazon).
Bob was a skeptic and private investigator. After the death of his father he started in 1999 together with his wife to interview very many psychic mediums leading to his astonishing book, which I can highly recommend.
So you think the main problem of sciences is now their dogma of materialism (my bold) even though with materialism there is actually and objective something present which can be examined?
I understand science really does not have a problem with objectivity. It, or more correctly scientists, have problems with many ideas, concepts, theories in conflict
But each of the conflicts are being worked on
Question, is there ANY idea, concept or theory of the so called afterlife which has been proposed to scientists?
I am sure interesting is appropriate. Has the book any tangible guide lines for scientists to follow?
As I remarked re Anita Moorjani, reading her books I would remain convinced there is no such animal as afterlife and I am sure I would express the same view after reading Bob Olson's books
A quick Google and Wikipedia into Bob Olson and into the having his moment of fame basket he goes
Hermann
Registered Senior Member
Wikipedia is a science related organisation, which is committed to the dogma of materialism. There you will not find objective statements about afterlife and all related topics. There were many channellings from the afterlife in the past, but they were not in public, because they wanted to avoid biased attacks from sciences. You may remember the NDE report from the neurosurgeon Eben Alexander. He tried to convince his community, but ended up with a very unfair shit storm. I did not like his very theatrical way of writing, but I have no doubts that his experiences were real. I would recommend, that you or a group of scientists should read the book of Bob Olson unbiased and discuss it with him via www.afterlifetv.com.So you think the main problem of sciences is now their dogma of materialism (my bold) even though with materialism there is actually and objective something present which can be examined?
I understand science really does not have a problem with objectivity. It, or more correctly scientists, have problems with many ideas, concepts, theories in conflict
But each of the conflicts are being worked on
Question, is there ANY idea, concept or theory of the so called afterlife which has been proposed to scientists?
I am sure interesting is appropriate. Has the book any tangible guide lines for scientists to follow?
As I remarked re Anita Moorjani, reading her books I would remain convinced there is no such animal as afterlife and I am sure I would express the same view after reading Bob Olson's books
A quick Google and Wikipedia into Bob Olson and into the having his moment of fame basket he goes
Not going to happen
At the slight risk of anthropomorphising Near Death Experiences you understand there is no rational behind there being a afterlife life?
Why not a few more afterlifes? Die in your afterlife? Don't worry you have another afterlife after your afterlife
Near Death is NOT DEATH and nobody has come back to life from being dead in this life
In what manner do these biased attacks from sciences manifest themselves please?
I think NDEs may well have value in that I anticipate that fear of death or injury/pain goes out the window (which fear sits on our shoulders like an albatross all through our lives).
Sounds like a drug experience to me.The first time I smoked grass I felt that my life had changed forever as if a lot of previous assumptions were instantly jettisoned as being of no consequence.
I have little doubt that NDEs are mental phenomena and no more supernatural than any other unexplained phenomena(there may be research but these seem to be very subjective experiences and intrisically very hard to describe scientifically)
Sounds like a drug experience to me.The first time I smoked grass I felt that my life had changed forever as if a lot of previous assumptions were instantly jettisoned as being of no consequence.
I have little doubt that NDEs are mental phenomena and no more supernatural than any other unexplained phenomena(there may be research but these seem to be very subjective experiences and intrisically very hard to describe scientifically)
Last edited:
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
Okay. I would say that, as you imply with your bit about freeing science from the church, materialism is a great tool which led to the advent of many new and wonderful technologies. It's just wrong though. When it comes down to it, all that exists is awareness because words which mean anything other than some or other kind of experience mean absolutely nothing. They're just uninterpreted, so they can't mean anything. The conclusion from this is that anything other than some or other kind of experience is nothing at all. Thanks for the book recommendation. I might read it.
Anyway, if it is so unfortunate for people to believe in materialism dogma, maybe they should be taught to think critically and make up their own minds so that they can avoid dogma in general. Honestly, I would say that this is the only good solution here because if someone is just taught to abandon one type of dogma, without knowing how to think critically they're just going to adopt a new and equally harmful dogmatic belief system to replace it.
No such animal
exists
dogma
Please check the agreed meaning of both the above words, and re-read your post
Holly-May Leslie
Registered Member
No such animal
exists
dogma
Please check the agreed meaning of both the above words, and re-read your post
I know what I am talking about. I did.
You may know what you are talking about but if you checked the words, before you wrote them in your reply, why did you still use them?
Hermann
Registered Senior Member
Michael 345,
Materialists can be as fanatic as all kind of religious people. They are unable to understand other positions, which kills any fruitful discussion before it begins. You recommended many afterlives, but there is only one, which lasts forever. Perhaps you may be interested in Buddhism, which assumes an endless sequence of lives on earth. However I assume, you have never tried to understand other “religions” than materialism.
It takes always some time to understand another position, but this has to be spend for a fruitful discussion with possible benefits for oneself.
I have written a booklet - “A Rational Philosophy of Life” by Hermann Raith, with the subtitle “A possible way toward a believable belief”, available as Kindle book for 1 $. I would like to discuss this with somebody in detail.
Materialists can be as fanatic as all kind of religious people. They are unable to understand other positions, which kills any fruitful discussion before it begins. You recommended many afterlives, but there is only one, which lasts forever. Perhaps you may be interested in Buddhism, which assumes an endless sequence of lives on earth. However I assume, you have never tried to understand other “religions” than materialism.
It takes always some time to understand another position, but this has to be spend for a fruitful discussion with possible benefits for oneself.
I have written a booklet - “A Rational Philosophy of Life” by Hermann Raith, with the subtitle “A possible way toward a believable belief”, available as Kindle book for 1 $. I would like to discuss this with somebody in detail.