Near Death experiences and the scientific method.

[gnostic]

No scientist has ever proven an emotion, memory, or data is stored in the brain.

Then how do you explain that certain drugs, diseases or head trauma can affect a person emotion, memory or person’s bodily functions?

For instance, a person who suffer from Alzheimer’s disease, suffered from short-term or long-term memory losses or both, they can even forget their families or even themselves.

If you think spirit or soul exist, and the soul control everything of human body, including memory, then that by that logic, the soul itself would suffer from Alzheimer’s, it would suffer from mental deterioration and memory loss.

You cannot say soul that controlled human body and how it think or feel, and yet be independent and isolated from diseases or chemical imbalance of brain.

Furthermore you haven’t shown any evidence that the soul or spirit exist in the first place.

All your claims - particularly the spiritual aspects of NDE - are just based on woo, not on any evidence.

 

[Lekatt]

Then how do you explain that certain drugs, diseases or head trauma can affect a person emotion, memory or person’s bodily functions?

For instance, a person who suffer from Alzheimer’s disease, suffered from short-term or long-term memory losses or both, they can even forget their families or even themselves.

If you think spirit or soul exist, and the soul control everything of human body, including memory, then that by that logic, the soul itself would suffer from Alzheimer’s, it would suffer from mental deterioration and memory loss.

You cannot say soul that controlled human body and how it think or feel, and yet be independent and isolated from diseases or chemical imbalance of brain.

Furthermore you haven’t shown any evidence that the soul or spirit exist in the first place.

All your claims - particularly the spiritual aspects of NDE - are just based on woo, not on any evidence.

Most people can understand the spiritual nature of mankind.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The brain is an interface between us and the body. No we are not our bodies. We wear bodies in order to live and maneuver in the physical realms. We are pure energy. In our intrinsic form we can not be seen or heard in the physical. Most people call this the Spirit. You could call it the Soul, Vitality, or many other names. Most of the people living in this world believe in their spiritual form and that there is an afterlife. Only a small percentage don't. A small percentage of people still believe the world is flat also.

You can believe that and I can believe something else. Neither of us is right or wrong, since nothing you or I believe can be validated with evidence. People believe lots of things. They all can't be right. Energy seems logical, but if it is the ability to do work, then one would expect it to be observable and measurable.

I believe in the soul, free will and life after death. I don't know what NDE's are other than what we can know from the evidence. They might be evidence of the afterlife, but how would you know and how would you show it?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The same way a damaged TV will forget its programs.

Old television sets didn't have memories. They had no ability to forget. Modern sets have computers that can be damaged.

How do you reconcile head trauma altering personalities, causing amnesia, coma, etc. The evidence indicates and supports that the brain is where thinking occurs, actions are plotted and data is stored. That fact does nothing to belief in a spirit.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

No scientist has ever proven an emotion, memory, or data is stored in the brain.

No scientist every will. Proof is not the standard of science. Proof is for mathematics, logic and alcohol.

All the evidence supports the brain as our data storage device. Refute the theories and provide substantial, valid alternatives with evidence.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Understanding what you are in the context of spirit has got nothing to do with conception or belief (same thing actually). Reality is on the other side of the concept, which btw is why I like to say "the reality represented by" such and such a concept, eg., spirit, God, etc.. Think of the concept of say 'spirit' as merely a sign post that directs your attention to a reality represented by 'spirit'. Now initially all students of religion only are aware of the concept, they may believe it exists but haven't a clue what it is except as a verbal description which they believe in. So how do you get from the belief in, from the concept of, to the actual reality represented by the concept/belief. The answer is, by religious practice, by will, by devotion to, by sheer desire to know. In time, the reality represented by the concept of spirit is realized, meaning it becomes a real aspect of your being, it is undeniable to your awareness, though it is totally subjective and can not be demonstrated to another except in the sense that people who know you may notice a change in your nature.

It is a basic error of religious novices to imagine religion is about belief, it is not, it is about realizing the reality represented by the concepts and beliefs of religion.

Finally this instruction also applies to all subjects, not only religion, never make the error of mistaking the concept for the reality which the concept is meant to represent, the real is forever on the other side of the mind's cogitations.

Since spirit is a concept with many definitions, understanding is always going to be an argument. Reality, as we see it, is the only place where we can find evidence to support our views about it. Everything else is belief.

Many different concepts of spirit are believed with the devotion you describe. Does that mean all are true? How can that be? I do not accept reincarnation for instance.

Religion at its very basic definition is organized believers. Beyond that, they usually have doctrines that they follow which are based on their personal views and interpretations. In Christianity, there are many different doctrines supported by a large number of different groups all under the same umbrella.

That is the problem that I see here and everywhere. You are confusing reality that we can observe, draw conclusions on, make predications and share all that with others with what you, I and many others believe. Believing on faith, by its very meaning does not require evidence. Why others believe what they do and why they do is beyond my ability to know from observation. I can experience revelation, but again, not something I can show you actually took place.

The theory of evolution is a model or concept that describes what has been observed. It can be tested, used to make predictions and has been so with success. But it is not evolution, just a description of the process. But it is not an absolute to be believed in. It can change based on the discovery of new evidence. That is the strength of a theory. What you seem to be saying is that a religious concept is immutable and never changing and that the only way to understand that is to believe it before you are even introduced to it. That just does not make any sense to what I know and believe. Religious practice reinforces belief, but the experience remains individually subjective and without means of demonstration. If the subject of belief were demonstrable, it would have been done by better theists than myself long ago.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The same way a damaged TV will forget its programs.

There is something wrong with the data storage unit.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Since spirit is a concept with many definitions, understanding is always going to be an argument. Reality, as we see it, is the only place where we can find evidence to support our views about it. Everything else is belief.

Many different concepts of spirit are believed with the devotion you describe. Does that mean all are true? How can that be? I do not accept reincarnation for instance.

Religion at its very basic definition is organized believers. Beyond that, they usually have doctrines that they follow which are based on their personal views and interpretations. In Christianity, there are many different doctrines supported by a large number of different groups all under the same umbrella.

That is the problem that I see here and everywhere. You are confusing reality that we can observe, draw conclusions on, make predications and share all that with others with what you, I and many others believe. Believing on faith, by its very meaning does not require evidence. Why others believe what they do and why they do is beyond my ability to know from observation. I can experience revelation, but again, not something I can show you actually took place.

The theory of evolution is a model or concept that describes what has been observed. It can be tested, used to make predictions and has been so with success. But it is not evolution, just a description of the process. But it is not an absolute to be believed in. It can change based on the discovery of new evidence. That is the strength of a theory. What you seem to be saying is that a religious concept is immutable and never changing and that the only way to understand that is to believe it before you are even introduced to it. That just does not make any sense to what I know and believe. Religious practice reinforces belief, but the experience remains individually subjective and without means of demonstration. If the subject of belief were demonstrable, it would have been done by better theists than myself long ago.

It is not surprising that you do not understand what and who your are yet, that is the purpose of religious practice.. So long as you think religion is about belief, then it is not likely imho to ever discover what and who you really are. When I explained it is a subjective experience to realize the spiritual side of being, the concept of experience is probably not the right term to use as it implies a duality, the experiencer and the experience, whereas actually realizing what you really are is not a dualistic experience it is a realization of what you actually are and always have been. Hint....the Father and I are one. This realization is not dualistic, therefore it is not an experience you have, it is reality itself.

Science is a dualistic process, it can never in all eternity realize spirit because of that, and you apparently didn't get what I said about concepts, the reality represented by the concept of spirit is not in words, math, concepts, ideas, etc., it is what you actually already are if you go beyond the thought of it. When the mind is totally free from any thought, then and only then will reality be present that is on the other side of conceptualization. Cease having a thought arise in your mind and reality will be present directly instead of an idea about reality. When reality is present, there is nothing left to think about, in fact you can't because you are that reality, there is no separation, no duality present, the journey is over.

 

[Lekatt]

You can believe that and I can believe something else. Neither of us is right or wrong, since nothing you or I believe can be validated with evidence. People believe lots of things. They all can't be right. Energy seems logical, but if it is the ability to do work, then one would expect it to be observable and measurable.

I believe in the soul, free will and life after death. I don't know what NDE's are other than what we can know from the evidence. They might be evidence of the afterlife, but how would you know and how would you show it?

The person who experiences the NDE knows, but showing it to others, well, that is a matter of trust.

 

[Lekatt]

Old television sets didn't have memories. They had no ability to forget. Modern sets have computers that can be damaged.

How do you reconcile head trauma altering personalities, causing amnesia, coma, etc. The evidence indicates and supports that the brain is where thinking occurs, actions are plotted and data is stored. That fact does nothing to belief in a spirit.

The evidence does not show any of that. A TV receives a signal from a satellite, that signal is processed by the TV and shown on the screen. The brain receives a signal from the Soul, that signal is processed by the Brain and some part of the body moves, or sees, or hears, etc.

 

[Lekatt]

There is something wrong with the data storage unit.

TVs do not store data unless they are equipped with a computer and told to do so. The signal comes in and is presented and is dismissed.

 

[gnostic]

Most people can understand the spiritual nature of mankind.

Lekatt.

You realize that this thread about NDE and the Scientific Method.

YouTube videos of what someone believe or not believe is merely making claim, do not count as “evidence”, nor following the requirements of "Scientific Method".

YouTube videos don’t count as “scientific evidence”.

As to Scientific Method.

1. There are no formulation of explanations and predictions (explanations and predictions make up a model or hypothesis or theory) in the existence of spirits or afterlife.
2. And more importantly, there are NO TESTING (no evidence) in the existence of spirits or afterlife.

Claims made in Youtube videos, or testimonials do not count as “evidence”.

Of course, you can believe in spirits, soul, afterlife, resurrection, gods, angels, demons, reincarnation, and you can even believe in fairies, vampires, Bigfoot, ufo & alien abductions, magic, ESP, astrology, and so on...BUT none of these involved sciences.

 

[tas8831]

The same way a damaged TV will forget its programs.

So then programs ARE stored in the brain, but not data?

I think you are really lost and trying to save face. But that is not going so well, is it?

 

[tas8831]

No scientist has ever proven an emotion, memory, or data is stored in the brain.

No religionist has proved their is such a thing as a soul, a sprit, or an extracerebral storage place for emotion, memory, or data.

No religionist mapped out the sensory pathways in the brain, nor the functions of the brain. No praying answered any questions about brain function.

 

[tas8831]

TVs do not store data unless they are equipped with a computer and told to do so. The signal comes in and is presented and is dismissed.

So you cannot even produce an apt analogy - do you realize you just undercut your own claims?
Do you actually understand any of the things you've been writing about?

 

[tas8831]

No, Scientists have looked for data for years and found none.

Then surely you can provide links or documentation of some sort of this happening?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The person who experiences the NDE knows, but showing it to others, well, that is a matter of trust.

So trust establishes that witness is valid. And all those we trust never do anything to invalidate that trust. Therefore, what the trusted say is immutable truth.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The evidence does not show any of that. A TV receives a signal from a satellite, that signal is processed by the TV and shown on the screen. The brain receives a signal from the Soul, that signal is processed by the Brain and some part of the body moves, or sees, or hears, etc.

I have evidence of signals, satellites, televisions, and the operations taking place in telecommunication. What is the conduit for signals between the brain and soul? You mentioned the aura and how it is part of the soul that cannot be contained by the body. How does the body retain that part of the soul that it does? What limits the soul/aura further beyond the body? If a thing is limited by the physical, can interact with the physical and is detectable by the physical, does that mean it is no longer spirit that we are talking about?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It is not surprising that you do not understand what and who your are yet, that is the purpose of religious practice.. So long as you think religion is about belief, then it is not likely imho to ever discover what and who you really are. When I explained it is a subjective experience to realize the spiritual side of being, the concept of experience is probably not the right term to use as it implies a duality, the experiencer and the experience, whereas actually realizing what you really are is not a dualistic experience it is a realization of what you actually are and always have been. Hint....the Father and I are one. This realization is not dualistic, therefore it is not an experience you have, it is reality itself.

Science is a dualistic process, it can never in all eternity realize spirit because of that, and you apparently didn't get what I said about concepts, the reality represented by the concept of spirit is not in words, math, concepts, ideas, etc., it is what you actually already are if you go beyond the thought of it. When the mind is totally free from any thought, then and only then will reality be present that is on the other side of conceptualization. Cease having a thought arise in your mind and reality will be present directly instead of an idea about reality. When reality is present, there is nothing left to think about, in fact you can't because you are that reality, there is no separation, no duality present, the journey is over.

I am interested in what people believe they know and how they know it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

TVs do not store data unless they are equipped with a computer and told to do so. The signal comes in and is presented and is dismissed.

So, when the tv's brain is damaged the signals are interrupted no Kardashians.