Dualism or idealist monism as the best model for survival after death data

[Ninshub]

In terms of Kastrup, who of course is only one voice, he's asked about the data of NDEs and reincarnation/past-life memories in this interview, between 11:21 and 21:29 to be precise. I don't think it would be fair to characterizeg him as "ignoring" this data, though I'd agree with nbtruthman that he hasn't adequately put his "nose to the grindstone" of it!

When we discuss dualism vs. monism on this topic, of course, the mind-body connection (the topic of this thread) is only one aspect, which doesn't get too much discussed here. Another would include identity (as in does the individual finite consciousness persist or dissolve into universal mind after "death"). There seems to be an open-mindedness on his part here.



When talking about the reincarnation data (and he admits that a few cases sound very probable to him), I favor the idea of what sounds conceivable to him as a possibility at least (which we could apply to all "afterlife" data), that there may be "hierarchical levels of dissociated consciousness" to explain expanded individual realities after consciousness that nevertheless retain an individual continuity and particularity (though he doesn't seem too keen on that being probable).

Where I personally see something I'm less impressed with or convinced by if you follow the conversation after this excerpt is how he repeatedly bases his assumptions on the nature he observes around him, like how his cats behave instinctively, so that the basic take away is the universal mind "doesn't know what it does", it just blindly evolves. If I'm understanding him right. It's almost like a "naturalistic idealism" if that makes any sense or is a proper label. Of course he's only one set of views with its own coloring.

I was hoping this next video, from this American vedanti swami, would provide some illumination about an idealist framework, which unfortunately it doesn't. (He's from the Ramakrishna school, so this should be advaita, meaning non-dual, vedanta.) There's no attempt at explanation in a nondual away for the kind of explanatory model this thread is about. But nevertheless I'm including it just because I find it interesting and encouraging to see that this person seems very up to date on the NDE field (the man with the dentures, Moody, Jeffrey Long, Moorjani, etc. etc.) and is spreading the information. He views it simply as very supportive of vedantic philosophy which sees consciousness as separate from the brain.

Edward Kelly is an Idealist now though, and he's one of the people who has extensively looked at the evidence?

(IIRC the general trend at Esalen was a shift toward Idealism.)

From Kelley's afterword to Kastrup's Idea of the World ->


edit: To be clear I'm not whole-heartedly advocating Idealism, but I am also wary of Dualism because it just seems odd to me that you have these points of causal intersection of two distinct substances...If I had to pick I'd go with a Neutral Monism though I guess some might see that as a cop-out since I'm not saying what the "stuff" of reality actually is...then again does anyone have a clear conception of the "mental", "spiritual", or "physical"?

Kelley: "...that we humans are intimately linked with that ultimate reality in the depths of our individual psyches, and can experience it directly in a variety of ways...."

It seems to me (at least from these words expressing a general Idealist concept) that he hasn't really thought through what the NDE data and other dualism suggestive paranormal phenomena such as reincarnation memories would indicate as to the contrived complexity of the ways that humans would have to be deceived by a systematic illusion in order to generate these experiences - the sheer complexity of such a system would be tremendous. For what purpose and by who or what?

[Ninshub]

Just to add a note to Kastrup's views here. I see him these days very accepted and welcomed by non dual spiritual teachers as an academically accepted philosopher whose views are sympathetic to their teachings, Rupert Spira for example. They've appeared in interviews together.

However I see an important, major difference here where Kastrup is talking about human consciousness, through evolution on earth, as "evolving" the universal mind (at around 23-23 minutes), which seems to be equated with instinctive nature.

In Advaita Vedanta, by contrast, enlightenment is a process where we discover that self (atman) is identical with Brahman (God/Source) by recognizing that identity and what's been wrongly superimposed on it, but that God awareness/consciousness at the base already is complete, omniscient, etc. Source's creation is a dumbed-down, contracted manifestation so that it can experience itself, but not "evolve". (That's my understanding of it anyway).

Kelley: "...that we humans are intimately linked with that ultimate reality in the depths of our individual psyches, and can experience it directly in a variety of ways...."

It seems to me (at least from these words expressing a general Idealist concept) that he hasn't really thought through what the NDE data and other dualism suggestive paranormal phenomena such as reincarnation memories would indicate as to the contrived complexity of the ways that humans would have to be deceived by a systematic illusion in order to generate these experiences - the sheer complexity of such a system would be tremendous. For what purpose and by who or what?

Why would it be illusory based on what Kelly says? It would just mean that the spirit/soul and physical body and the silver cord that connects them, in addition to the non-physical realms that seem quite physical at times (Heaven, Hell, Shamanic spirit worlds, etc) is all made of a singular "stuff" which is Mind.

The very fact we see these spirit aspects as apparitions with our physical senses suggests a causal continuity. Though computers aren't conscious, we can look at the fact some video games can have ghosts that the user can play as if the physical body dies. The explanation of why things are set up this way in our reality may be somewhat similar to why this was done in these games - it is an interesting player experience. Haisch muses on this when he considers reality as a "simulation" running not on a physical computer, but instead within the infinite consciousness of some Ur-Mind.

I think it's important to make a distinction between Kelly's (or Haisch's, or other Idealists') views and those of Kastrup's. For example, there's also the Idealist Paul Marshall who wrote Shape of the Soul - another Idealist who seems very open to the idea of Survival.

[Ninshub]

Yes, I've noted it earlier in this thread, but it's a mistake to assume that idealism calls what appears to us as "matter" as an "illusion". It's more that we misinterpret what it is (mind, as Sci said) (according to idealism).

With reference to idealism, I don't think an object only exists if you look at it. If you plant a flag on the moon, why would it not be there just because you've gone back to earth and can't observe it anymore. I think there is a material world and a spiritual world, separate but accessible to each other and you can't have one without the other, because how would you know what perfection was (the spiritual world) if you haven't already experienced the imperfect (the material world).  

I don't think that is a completely fair criticism of Idealism. As I understand it Idealism postulates that we are all parts of a larger consciousness, which also contains conscious components that are specialised to simulate reality like the moon.

As I said above, if it is true, I think we have to get to it via Dualism.

I have really gone off super complicated hypotheses - such as those above. If that is the ultimate truth, it will ultimately become obvious. If we lived in the eighteenth century, we would achieve far more using Newton's laws than speculating in the direction of GR.

[Ninshub]

 For example, there's also the Idealist Paul Marshall who wrote Shape of the Soul - another Idealist who seems very open to the idea of Survival.

Thanks for this - I'm gonna add this to my reading list. Keep 'em coming if you have any more like these!

[Ninshub]

Where I personally see something I'm less impressed with or convinced by if you follow the conversation after this excerpt is how he repeatedly bases his assumptions on the nature he observes around him, like how his cats behave instinctively, so that the basic take away is the universal mind "doesn't know what it does", it just blindly evolves. If I'm understanding him right. It's almost like a "naturalistic idealism" if that makes any sense or is a proper label. 

I'm just going to share something I came across Googling phenomenology, idealism and Kastrup. I'm not sure I fully understand every word and sentence this person writes, but I wonder if he's reacting to what I reacted to here. He also happens to mention near-death experiences.

His name is Misha Rogov and it appears to be some sort of blog. (October 4, 2021). I'm understanding that he's not criticizing Kastrup for his idealism, but for his brand of it, which he considers terribly wrong, the wrongness seeming to being connected to this "instinctive" aspect I was myself noting.

Kastrup’s absurd Schopenhauerish vision of Transcendence (consciousness-in-itself) as a dissociating instinctive impetus conflicts with countless mystical (transpersonal) experiences of Transcendence — the nondual Light — in which there is nothing dissociative, instinctive, and impetuous.

Kastrup doesn’t seem to understand and appreciate the Copernican Turn of transcendental idealism/phenomenology in Kant and mature Husserl, hence his erroneous interpretation of the dissociative identity disorder (DID) phenomena at the foundation of his absurd vision of individual subjects as “dissociated alters”: Kastrup doesn’t understand that the dissociating empirical subject is not the subject proper but the subject’s phenomenal self-representation, whereas the subject proper is transcendental subject which constitutes/projects all phenomena and meanings, including empirical subject, and there is zero evidence that it ever dissociates.

Kastrup’s ridiculous understanding of individual subjects as transient, illusory, and limited to metabolizing bodies conflicts with countless near-death out-of-body experiences (my bold) which support the view that individual existence of transcendental subjects, their universal intersubjectivity and intersubjectively constituted/projected phenomenal worlds is a beginningless and endless emanation of nontemporal Transcendence.

Kastrup’s bizarre understanding of each metabolizing body (e.g., a bacteria in his toilet — strangely, his favorite example) as a representation of an individual subject is absolutely groundless, for we can neither communicate with primitive organisms nor empathically feel the presence of other transcendental subjects behind such phenomena, and hence such phenomena most likely represent insentient autonomous processes of constitutive transcendental intersubjectivity.

I'm not posting this to "bash" Kastrup, or to criticize all of his ideas. There's probably more worthwhile than less, and this person's aversion is pretty extreme, but he's picking up on something perhaps that makes Kastrup's view not so metaphysically or spiritually concordant with what comes out of near-death experiences.

He ends by saying I should stick to Yogacara Buddhists, Kant, mature Husserl and Jaspers. That's cool because Yogacara I find very compelling, as I do phenomenology!

Why would it be illusory based on what Kelly says? It would just mean that the spirit/soul and physical body and the silver cord that connects them, in addition to the non-physical realms that seem quite physical at times (Heaven, Hell, Shamanic spirit worlds, etc) is all made of a singular "stuff" which is Mind.

The very fact we see these spirit aspects as apparitions with our physical senses suggests a causal continuity. Though computers aren't conscious, we can look at the fact some video games can have ghosts that the user can play as if the physical body dies. The explanation of why things are set up this way in our reality may be somewhat similar to why this was done in these games - it is an interesting player experience. Haisch muses on this when he considers reality as a "simulation" running not on a physical computer, but instead within the infinite consciousness of some Ur-Mind.

I think it's important to make a distinction between Kelly's (or Haisch's, or other Idealists') views and those of Kastrup's. For example, there's also the Idealist Paul Marshall who wrote Shape of the Soul - another Idealist who seems very open to the idea of Survival.

But why would a Reality ultimately made up only of "mind stuff", with no separation between an objective physical reality and consciousness, be actually experienced by humans as having an objective physical reality and separate consciousnesses? Even further, why would NDEs and certain other paranormal phenomena be experienced by humans exactly as if they as beings were separate mobile immaterial centers of consciousness that can travel to other regions of the physical world and also to astral or spiritual realms? When ultimately there is no such thing as distance, motion to or from, and any differentiation between objective and subjective. 

There then appears to be some underlying plan or design generated by some level of Mind in which the basal undifferentiated mind-stuff is manipulated so as to create the experiences humans have in both the physical and spiritual worlds. It looks to me like this certainly could be termed the generation of illusions.

But why would a Reality ultimately made up only of "mind stuff", with no separation between an objective physical reality and consciousness, be actually experienced by humans as having an objective physical reality and separate consciousnesses? Even further, why would NDEs and certain other paranormal phenomena be experienced by humans exactly as if they as beings were separate mobile immaterial centers of consciousness that can travel to other regions of the physical world and also to astral or spiritual realms? When ultimately there is no such thing as distance, motion to or from, and any differentiation between objective and subjective.

But this separate consciousness is sometimes embodied, sometimes seemingly connected to the physical body by a silver cord and sometimes not, sometimes traveling to different realms that are themselves apparently physical. The person having an OOBE can perceive the physical world while in a non-physical state, and sometimes these figures are seen by people with their physical eyes. There are even cases of these subtle bodies themselves making physical contact - in one case leaving a kiss on the cheek, and at least one case where the OOBE apparently eats a biscuit and drinks tea.

As for the spirit realms...are the different spirit realms in different higher dimensional directions along 4th/5th/6th/etc spatial axes, or reached by just going further along a simple 4th dimensional axis? Why are these realms experienced in a sensory manner, with people seeing/hearing/touching their dead loved ones before returning to their bodies?

When mediums claim to be in some kind of spirit realm while the control - or some other spirit or deceased person - is utilizing their body...where is this place?

There's also the variations of afterlife experiences - in some you are in a very mundane space, IIRC in at least one case you even needed to get a job. In other afterlife experiences it seems that the truth of all reality is revealed as one's guide in an NDE is able to to help you travel across physical time & space and/or beyond it.

All this speaks to a few clear issues with Dualism - that these supposedly distinct substances have causal interactions, that the spirit realm is itself experienced oftentimes in a physical manner, and that the location of these realms is hard to map in some kind of definitive spirit place that allows some travel from our presumed physical world.

It all actually seems much easier to think about if the distances and places are akin to the sense of the physical in our dreams or in our video games. Now one could point to the claims by some physicists that our space/time - if not all space/time - is emergent from some underlying processes...but this then leaves one in a similar boat as the Idealist with a "physical" that seems constructed from something that is not like what we usually think of as the "physical". And of course if physical space/time is emergent from something the precedes it, one can ask the same of all the varied spirit realms where one physically interacts with others + the environment.

But then further issues rear their head. What makes it possible for the mental/spiritual to move the physical beyond the supposedly special intersection point of the brain? How can Psi work if there are two distinct realms? Because of some intersection point between mental & physical? What about physical mediumship's ectoplasm & conjuration, or the varied extra/ultra-terrestrial contact stories collected by people like Vallee? Or the indigenous spirit healing ceremonies where mist resolves itself into a wolf or an ectoplasmic form comes out of a person?

What about poltergeists moving objects? Possessions - both the positive ones that are done through explicit ceremonies, and the negatives ones which seem to require exorcisms that deal with them? The varied accounts of ghosts - for example in one case shifting from balls of light into apparitions, or varied claims of the ghosts' presence cooling the temperature of a room?

And none of the above really begin to adddress the issues with synchronicities?

There are so many variations/gradations of interaction between the supposed mental/spiritual (psychical?) and supposed physical that it is hard to believe these are distinct substances. Distinct realms possibly, but suggestive of a singular "stuff" constituting it All...not necessarily Mind but perhaps Steven Taylor's Pan-Spiritism or some other kind of pantheism/pandeism/panentheism option...

There then appears to be some underlying plan or design generated by some level of Mind in which the basal undifferentiated mind-stuff is manipulated so as to create the experiences humans have in both the physical and spiritual worlds. It looks to me like this certainly could be termed the generation of illusions.

It seems to me these aren't illusions so much as constructions, where structure + causation are set up in a specific way. But isn't this also the case for the supposed physical and spirit worlds - for any regularity one discovers in any reality one can ask why it was not some other way?

It is possible there are two intersecting realities, possibly both extended as neuroscientist Smythies and physicist Carr posit. I'm not sure this really answers most of the above issues though? After all, why are humans - in spite of cases of possessions and the [like] - seemingly not just safe in that phenomenal dimension but also so largely unaware of it until in some OOBE/NDE/post-life state?