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

Abhedananda was an Advaita Vedantin, it should be noted, follower of Ramakrishna.

Just to throw another contender into the ring:

"I mean something very specific by “Tantric” and “Tantra” and probably not what you think. Much too briefly and simply, Tantra is a comparative term used by scholars of Asian religions to describe any number of Asian philosophical, ritual, and practice systems that profess a bipolar but nondual vision of reality that consists of a transcendent form of Consciousness, Mind, or Godhead that emanates or expresses Itself, energetically and immanently, in and as the human body and the material universe. The physical cosmos is not an illusion (māyā), neither quite real nor unreal, as one has it in some forms of Advaita Vedanta. Here, in the Tantric traditions, the physical universe is an actual, intimate, even erotic expression of the Godhead, and the human body, particularly in its esoteric dimensions, constitutes the surest set of contact points into this same cosmic Being."

-Kripal

"The materialist theory is a logical blunder, because it is based on a confusion between the object and subject. It asserts that matter is objective, but at the same time it tries to show that it is also the cause of the subject, which it can never be. “A” can never become “non-A.” Materialism begins with the idea that matter is objective, and ends in attempting to prove that this objective something has become the subjective mind, spirit or ego. It first takes for granted that matter is that which is perceived, or the cause of sensations, then it gradually claims to show that it produces that which feels the sensations, which is contradictory and absurd.

As materialism is onesided and imperfect, so is the spiritualistic or idealistic theory of the world, which denies the existence of matter or object, and says that everything is mind . . . that all is mind and that there is no matter, is as erroneous as the materialistic theory. Spirit or mind or ego, which is always the subject, can exist as perceiver or knower so long as there is an object of perception or knowledge. If we admit the existence of one, that of the other is implied. Therefore, Goethe was correct in saying: “Matter cannot exist and be operative without spirit or spirit without matter.”

The universal substance appears as possessing these two attributes of subject and object, of spirit, mind or ego and matter or non-ego. They are like the two modes of the one eternal substance, which is unknown and unknowable existence. . . . This substance is not many but one. All varieties of phenomena have come out of this one source, Brahman, and into it they will be reduced at the time of dissolution. It is the universal energy, the mother or producer of all forces. We know that all forces are related to one another and that they are, as modern science explains, the manifestations of the same eternal energy or the infinite substance. From this one source all mental and material forces have come into existence, and have evolved into various forms and shapes.

This is monism."

-Swami Abhedananda

So rather than dualism or idealism (or materialism), this would be something more along the lines of a "dual-aspect" theory? This might fit the paranormal data best?

I prefer Sankara's Advaita Vedanta. Kripal's model doesn't propose a system that automatically unfolds as the actual human-experienced duality of empirical physical realm and separate empirical spiritual realm or system of subrealms, with there at the same time being the very much deeper "realer than real" ground state or Source or Brahman of absolutely all that exists that is sometimes sensed by NDEers and in episodes of "cosmic consciousness". A teaching of an absolute Monism at the bottom of all that exists, in addition to very much real separate physical and spiritual realities. It seems to me that this system of existential philosophy somewhat more simply and completely and automatically accomodates the paranormal data. Kripal's system as he expounds it (like Idealist Monism) doesn't explain the how (the mechanism) and the why (the teleology) of the "two attributes" of the ground monistic substance splitting up in actual human experience.

Going back to the idea of Eternal Individual Selves, from the Monika Mandoki paper that Ninshub posted...

I think I might be somewhat like McTaggart...

From the SEP:

McTaggart’s Metaphysical Pluralism

McTaggart’s realism about relations seems to be a relatively mild realism: he believes in the existence of relations, and grants that statements attributing relations to things might be true to the fullest degree, but it is not clear the extent to which he believed that facts about the obtainings of relations were metaphysically basic.[32] It is true that the notion of perception, which is on the face of it a relational notion, plays a fundamental role in his idealistic system. Recall that McTaggart held that reality consists of immaterial selves that are unified by perceiving each other. What is not clear is whether McTaggart believed that whenever some x perceives some y, it is virtue of the intrinsic qualities of x and y. (In one sense of the term “intrinsic relation”, perception would be an intrinsic relation if this claim were true.)

McTaggart believed that the most extreme kind of monism, namely the doctrine that there is exactly one thing, is incoherent. For if there were exactly one thing, it could have no attributes or features, and hence, on McTaggart’s view, would really be nothing.[33] For this reason, McTaggart held that we must not think of ‘the absolute spirit’ as an undifferentiated unity. In McTaggart’s early paper, “The Further Determination of the Absolute”, McTaggart argues that if the absolute has features, then it must have parts standing in relations to one another.

McTaggart also rejected the less radical version of monism that holds that there is only one substance. In first volume of the Nature of Existence, sections 65 and 73, McTaggart defined “substance” as that which has features without being a feature. In his later article, “an Ontological Idealism”, he defines “substance” as that which has features without being a feature or having a feature as a part. The reason for the revision is that at this point in McTaggart’s career, he accepted the existence of facts construed as complexes of particulars and properties. Facts satisfy the older definition of “substance” but not the newer one. McTaggart argues that we perceive that there are many substances, but also holds that it is a priori that, if there is one substance, then there are many, since it is a priori that every substance has infinitely many parts. McTaggart also rejected solipsism understood as the view that reality consists of a single person, which although infinitely divided is such that nothing exists that is not a part of him. Solipsism thus understood is strictly compatible with the existence of a plurality of substances; however, McTaggart held that solipsism was ruled out by the requirement that there be a relation of determining correspondence.[34]

"We must next comment briefly on terminology.[3] None of the metaphors currently in circulation for the sort of picture we are advancing is very satisfactory. James’s “transmission” idea connotes faithful conveyance from one place to another, which does not fully capture what Myers had in mind. The “filter” metaphor also seems to us inadequate, although it has gained considerable historical currency and is by now the one most commonly encountered. For one thing it shares with “transmission” the notion of something entering the filter on one side and coming out faithfully on the other (albeit disentangled from other components of the input), and for both metaphors this engenders a homunculus problem (see IM, pp. 606–607). More contemporary technological metaphors picturing the brain as an antenna, a TV set, or radio receiver, or a laptop or smart phone connected to the Internet or the Cloud have similar issues. Most importantly, all are too rigidly mechanical in connoting a system somehow designed in advance to let through specific types of subliminal materials or capacities, without transformation or distortion. Myers’s picture is much more fluid and dynamic than that. He conceives the subliminal region itself as stratified in depth, but the “strata” are not quasi-geological entities, static, immobile, or rigidly separated by impassable barriers: “They are strata (so to say) not of immovable rock, but of imperfectly miscible fluids of various densities, and subject to currents and ebullitions which often bring to the surface a stream or bubble from a stratum far below” (Myers, 1892, p. 307). Note in passing that such a picture potentially explains, at least metaphorically, why material from the depths of the subliminal region often emerges in disguised or distorted form, cloaked in accretions deriving from more superficial layers.

What ultimately gains access to supraliminal consciousness is also determined by something much more complicated than simple movement up or down of a mechanical “threshold” or “barrier,” or the opening and closing of a Huxley-type “reducing valve,” something more akin to an overall change in “permeability” or “tuning,” which provides entryway or access to these normally inaccessible subliminal capacities and contents. These “openings” clearly must be tied, in ways we presently do not understand, to functional states of the brain. James’s alternative “permission” metaphor really comes closest to what we have in mind: the brain-based perspective of the early James and the more purely psychological perspective of Myers can be reconciled by thinking of dynamic alterations of brain function as somehow permitting various sorts of incursions into supraliminal conscious life from these deeper layers of the psyche, through some as yet ill-defined process of cooperation or resonance between psyche and brain. The broad consistency of such a picture with empirical realities such as psi phenomena, genius, and mystical experience should already be evident, and we will be developing it further throughout the remainder of this volume."

Beyond Physicalism . Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Kindle Edition.

"The main common ingredient here, psychologically, amounts to “abeyance of the supraliminal” in Myers’s terms, or withdrawal of the mind/brain system from its customary “attention to life,” in those of Bergson (1913). From this point of view it seems natural to start by taking deep mystical-type NDEs occurring under extreme physiological conditions as the limiting case, and viewing various other conditions as approaching that limit from different directions. A recurring element from our survey above which seems to make sense in this light is the feature of variously altering, disabling, or intensifying executive functions normally associated with frontal cortex, which appears common to psi performance, creative activity, and mystical experiences induced by psychedelics, along with sleep and dreams, hypnosis, meditation, mediumistic trance, the acute phases of psychosis, and altered states induced by shamanic rituals. Note that this alternative conceptualization also potentially helps us understand the diversity of “triggers” for the ASCs [Altered States of Consciousness] of interest, for as pointed out by Paul Marshall (2005), doors can be opened by sledgehammers as well as keys, with results that are both similar and different in various ways (p. 275), and to vary the metaphor a bit, one can perhaps open a given door a little or lot depending on the amount one applies of whatever is opening it."

Beyond Physicalism . Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Kindle Edition.

"The main common ingredient here, psychologically, amounts to “abeyance of the supraliminal” in Myers’s terms, or withdrawal of the mind/brain system from its customary “attention to life,” in those of Bergson (1913). From this point of view it seems natural to start by taking deep mystical-type NDEs occurring under extreme physiological conditions as the limiting case, and viewing various other conditions as approaching that limit from different directions. A recurring element from our survey above which seems to make sense in this light is the feature of variously altering, disabling, or intensifying executive functions normally associated with frontal cortex, which appears common to psi performance, creative activity, and mystical experiences induced by psychedelics, along with sleep and dreams, hypnosis, meditation, mediumistic trance, the acute phases of psychosis, and altered states induced by shamanic rituals. Note that this alternative conceptualization also potentially helps us understand the diversity of “triggers” for the ASCs [Altered States of Consciousness] of interest, for as pointed out by Paul Marshall (2005), doors can be opened by sledgehammers as well as keys, with results that are both similar and different in various ways (p. 275), and to vary the metaphor a bit, one can perhaps open a given door a little or lot depending on the amount one applies of whatever is opening it."

Beyond Physicalism . Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Kindle Edition.

I thought this quote was interesting as it held the mystical NDE as the transcendent/apex case, but I think this hierarchy may be flawed as I'm not sure how one fits reincarnation into this. It seems to occur in the normal course of a child's interactions, for example in this case:

William had birth defects that were very similar to the fatal wounds suffered by his grandfather. In addition, when he became old enough to talk, he began talking about his grandfather’s life. One day when he was three years old, his mother [Doreen] was at home trying to work in her study when William kept acting up. Finally, she told him, “Sit down, or I’m going to spank you.” William replied, “Mom, when you were a little girl and I was your daddy, you were bad a lot of times, and I never hit you!”

Tucker, Jim B.. Before (p. 2). St. Martin's Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

And in his past life, when he was a cop, William promised then daughter Doreen and now mother that "No matter what, I'm always going to take care of you." (A phrase the now son continually says to his now mother.)

This suggests that the body/brain relationship to the psyche/soul is not simply the brain limiting a transcendent consciousness as it seems William was not in some altered state when he talked about his past life.

Also it seems to be the kind of love of one individual to another that brings the grandfather back as his daughter Doreen's son William, which IMO yet again challenges the idea that the individuals are illusory. One can claim these two souls bonded by personal love are themselves illusory, but this seems like a just-so story that IMO doesn't match the data as given?

I thought this quote was interesting as it held the mystical NDE as the transcendent/apex case, but I think this hierarchy may be flawed as I'm not sure how one fits reincarnation into this. It seems to occur in the normal course of a child's interactions, for example in this case:


And in his past life, when he was a cop, William promised then daughter Doreen and now mother that "No matter what, I'm always going to take care of you." (A phrase the now son continually says to his now mother.)

This suggests that the body/brain relationship to the psyche/soul is not simply the brain limiting a transcendent consciousness as it seems William was not in some altered state when he talked about his past life.

Also it seems to be the kind of love of one individual to another that brings the grandfather back as his daughter Doreen's son William, which IMO yet again challenges the idea that the individuals are illusory. One can claim these two souls bonded by personal love are themselves illusory, but this seems like a just-so story that IMO doesn't match the data as given?

That seems to generally be the case with young child (approximately 2 1/2 - 5 yrs. old) cases, which are apparently the majority. Any good brain/spirit interaction model needs to take that into account, and it seems clear also that any good model of this must necessarily be somewhat complicated. It seems as if in these cases the spirit has brought over many memories of the previous life embedded in the structure of its immaterial "self complex", and the intricate body/brain/spirit interface mechanism is allowing certain of them through into conscious awareness. Or at least that is the kind of model that suggests itself to me.

Does any of the paranormal data bear on this? The Wilder Penfield epilepsy operation data seems to indicate that memories are at least mediated by if not actually stored by physical brain structures, since specific detailed memories (of the current life anyway) were found to be easily evoked by electrical brain stimulation of certain points on certain neural structures. Such memories are, according to that evidence, at least mediated by brain structure. I think they are probably actually stored in them for easy access by the conscious mind embedded in body.

My reasoning on this: in cases of stroke and senile dementias of various kinds (and even simple age-related minor memory loss) the patient typically can lose some or almost all memories. This could either be explained as decay or destruction of spirit/brain mediating interface structures in the brain, or of the memories themselves as stored in the brain. The Penfield data indicates that specific memories are evoked from specific localized spots on the brain, which implies that the data is probably actually stored in these structures.

In the young child past life memory cases generally the child is in a normal state of consciousness and awareness. So that would indicate that in these young child past life memory cases, the past life memory data carried by the spirit that merged with the child's brain and body was probably automatically transferred (or downloaded to use a rather crude analogy) to specific physical brain structures which could then send the data out into enveloping embedded consciousness using the normal in-body interface mechanism.

In other words, normally while in-body the spirit has to use this physical brain "portal" and storage system to access memories. In some altered states of consciousness but while still in body, the spirit can directly access soul memories held in the soul or spirit (for instance in some hypnotically induced past life regressions, when true past life memories are evoked). And something like this may also be what is happening in the rare cases of terminal awareness. Of course, when the spirit has left the body in the form of its immaterial mobile center of consciousness, the spirit can directly access memories, as stored in its own immaterial structure.

That seems to generally be the case with young child (approximately 2 1/2 - 5 yrs. old) cases, which are apparently the majority. Any good brain/spirit interaction model needs to take that into account, and it seems clear also that any good model of this must necessarily be somewhat complicated. It seems as if in these cases the spirit has brought over many memories of the previous life embedded in the structure of its immaterial "self complex", and the intricate body/brain/spirit interface mechanism is allowing certain of them through into conscious awareness. Or at least that is the kind of model that suggests itself to me.

Does any of the paranormal data bear on this? The Wilder Penfield epilepsy operation data seems to indicate that memories are at least mediated by if not actually stored by physical brain structures, since specific detailed memories (of the current life anyway) were found to be easily evoked by electrical brain stimulation of certain points on certain neural structures. Such memories are, according to that evidence, at least mediated by brain structure. I think they are probably actually stored in them for easy access by the conscious mind embedded in body.

My reasoning on this: in cases of stroke and senile dementias of various kinds (and even simple age-related minor memory loss) the patient typically can lose some or almost all memories. This could either be explained as decay or destruction of spirit/brain mediating interface structures in the brain, or of the memories themselves as stored in the brain. The Penfield data indicates that specific memories are evoked from specific localized spots on the brain, which implies that the data is probably actually stored in these structures.

In the young child past life memory cases generally the child is in a normal state of consciousness and awareness. So that would indicate that in these young child past life memory cases, the past life memory data carried by the spirit that merged with the child's brain and body was probably automatically transferred (or downloaded to use a rather crude analogy) to specific physical brain structures which could then send the data out into enveloping embedded consciousness using the normal in-body interface mechanism.

In other words, normally while in-body the spirit has to use this physical brain "portal" and storage system to access memories. In some altered states of consciousness but while still in body, the spirit can directly access soul memories held in the soul or spirit (for instance in some hypnotically induced past life regressions, when true past life memories are evoked). And something like this may also be what is happening in the rare cases of terminal awareness. Of course, when the spirit has left the body in the form of its immaterial mobile center of consciousness, the spirit can directly access memories, as stored in its own immaterial structure.

Do you think computers store memories? Or just 1s & 0s that have to interpreted by an actual mind?

It would seem that the same issue would be the case with our own brains storing memories?

As you note in terminal lucidity the person is amazingly able to work around the brain's deterioration. It just seems redundant and even against the filter/transmitter model to consider that memories are physically stored?

(Admittedly there's also a philosophical argument against memories being stored in brains by Stephen Braude and even the atheist neuroscientist Raymond Tallis...but I realize this sort of "abstract" argument has to be backed by data like terminal lucidity, deceased loved ones in the NDE, and children retaining memories of past lives + in between state to be convincing in this thread...)

It just seems to that reincarnation suggests a penetration from the spirit world to the mundane one. That said there does seem to be some kind of 'filter' mechanism as the children often seem to forget these incredible memories as they grow older.

Do you think computers store memories? Or just 1s & 0s that have to interpreted by an actual mind?

It would seem that the same issue would be the case with our own brains storing memories?

As you note in terminal lucidity the person is amazingly able to work around the brain's deterioration. It just seems redundant and even against the filter/transmitter model to consider that memories are physically stored?

(Admittedly there's also a philosophical argument against memories being stored in brains by Stephen Braude and even the atheist neuroscientist Raymond Tallis...but I realize this sort of "abstract" argument has to be backed by data like terminal lucidity, deceased loved ones in the NDE, and children retaining memories of past lives + in between state to be convincing in this thread...)

It just seems to that reincarnation suggests a penetration from the spirit world to the mundane one. That said there does seem to be some kind of 'filter' mechanism as the children often seem to forget these incredible memories as they grow older.

Computers (and it seems, brains) physically store data that is ultimately just 1's and 0's, that to become "memories" has to be accessed and interpreted by mind. This raw data then acquires meaning and becomes what has been termed functional complex specified "information" (FSCI). For stored data to become memories and consequently FSCI, it must be linked to and be processed by consciousness. The term "memories" inherently implies conscious awareness, knowing, mind, i. e. something remembered and known from the past; a recollection.

With terminal lucidity, the spirit may just have bypassed the physically damaged or destroyed neural memory storage, and accessed the knowledge directly from its own structure, as may happen with successful past life regression hypnosis during which the inductee is in an altered state of consciousness.

Maybe the truth about the nature of memory is only partially what is contended by Braude and Tallis - memories are both entirely and immaterially stored in the soul or spirit, and at the same time are selectively and partially physically stored as encoded data in the brain for easy instant access by the embodied consciousness. Braude and Tallis probably don't even consider the dualist sort of spirit/brain interface model I suggested.

Computers (and it seems, brains) physically store data that is ultimately just 1's and 0's, that to become "memories" has to be accessed and interpreted by mind. This raw data then acquires meaning and becomes what has been termed functional complex specified "information" (FSCI). For stored data to become memories and consequently FSCI, it must be linked to and be processed by consciousness. The term "memories" inherently implies conscious awareness, knowing, mind, i. e. something remembered and known from the past; a recollection.

With terminal lucidity, the spirit may just have bypassed the physically damaged or destroyed neural memory storage, and accessed the knowledge directly from its own structure, as may happen with successful past life regression hypnosis during which the inductee is in an altered state of consciousness.

Maybe the truth about the nature of memory is only partially what is contended by Braude and Tallis - memories are both entirely and immaterially stored in the soul or spirit, and at the same time are selectively and partially physically stored as encoded data in the brain for easy instant access by the embodied consciousness. Braude and Tallis probably don't even consider the dualist sort of spirit/brain interface model I suggested.

But why are there two memory storage mechanisms, one in the brain and one in spirit?