2021-09-01, 12:40 PM
(2021-07-06, 06:40 AM)Smaw Wrote: [ -> ]I'd advise people to read the paper as well, the articles are pretty bare bones
https://academic.oup.com/braincomms/adva...32/6307709
Good call. I've just read it. I think your own comments are for the most part very good (and there's no reason a labourer can't be as intelligent and insightful as a researcher). I'll add a few comments of my own in response to some direct quotes from the paper, given that David has just resurrected this thread:
Under the broad heading "Discussion", the authors write:
Quote:We hypothesize that the greater sophistication of the human brain and the acquisition of language enabled humans to record and share their experiences in detail with others, thereby transforming these events from relatively uniform tonic immobility into the rich perceptions that form NDEs and extend to non-predatory situations.
Like you, Smaw, I don't see the logic in this sort of suggestion. Feigning death doesn't entail "rich perceptions", and it is unclear why a mere "greater sophistication of the human brain and the acquisition of language" would cause "rich[er] perceptions" in this scenario. There is probably even an argument against such a thing: in a dangerous situation in which as a last resort a being feigns death, that being needs to be as in the moment as possible, rather than "off with the fairies", so to speak, so as to best be ready to flee when the opportunity arises.
Under the sub-heading (of "Discussion"), "Thanatosis and the benefit of survival", the authors write:
Quote:Awareness is necessary to be able to react when the chance to escape from imminent danger suddenly comes, against all odds
As I suggested above, it is not clear how this is helped by being aware only of an apparently spiritual world, rather than of the immediate reality. How does one become aware of a chance to escape an imminent physical danger when one is instead focussed on a life review, or on a tunnel of light, or on the appearance of dead relatives, etc etc?
Under the sub-sub-heading, "The link between thanatosis and NDEs", the authors write:
Quote:[W]e suggest that the survival benefit of NDEs is limited to predatory situations and that NDEs in non-predatory situations may have no such purpose. Corroborating this idea, the human behavioural repertoire comprises a variety of behaviours which are phylogenetically highly preserved but whose benefits are restricted to certain situations. Examples include yawning and laughing when being tickled.
Summing up my thoughts above: I don't see how NDEs confer any survival benefit even in predatory situations. I don't see how transferring one's awareness to a non-physical realm (even if only imaginary) helps one monitor and survive a physical threat.
Of course, this is all academic anyway, given that, as we all well know, this hypothesis utterly fails to account for such features of NDEs as veridical perceptions - as nbtruthman pointed out right at the very start of the thread.