Explaining Near-Death Experiences: Physical or Non-Physical Causation?

Explaining Near-Death Experiences: Physical or Non-Physical Causation?

Robert G Mays & Suzanne Mays

A recent comparison of near-death experiences (NDEs) occurring with life-threatening events leading to coma to " NDE-like " experiences occurring with non-life-threatening events showed no significant difference in intensity or content between the two experiences, suggesting that neither the apparent proximity to death nor the specific physiological or psychological factors present influence quality or " depth " of such experiences. This study directly contradicts previous findings of significantly more enhanced perception of light and enhanced cognitive powers in near-death experiencers (NDErs) very close to death compared to those not in danger of dying. We argue that findings of the recent study are more valid due to more appropriate methodology. The general assumption has been that NDEs result from some physical cause that brings people close to death, but such explanations are problematic. An adequate scientific explanation of NDEs needs to be complete, accounting for all aspects of all NDEs. The commonality among NDEs occurring in a wide range of conditions suggests that there is a common underlying " proximate cause " to all NDEs. The proximate cause could be physiological, for example, a common brain circuit in a particular brain region, or non-physiological, for example, the separation of consciousness as an autonomous entity from the physical body. We argue that the latter hypothesis has greater explanatory power, although it posits elements beyond the current physicalist paradigm. Which explanation of NDEs is correct will be resolved only with further scientific investigation.

Explaining Near-Death Experiences: Physical or Non-Physical Causation?

Robert G Mays & Suzanne Mays

Robert and Suzanne Mays are thinkers, who for a long-duration tenure have toiled on the issues of mind and body interaction.  Their work is sincere and considered.  The paper linked above is an excellent summary of their model of mind.

 In earlier papers, we have proposed an other possible proximate causes of NDEs that is independent of 
physiology and psychology, based on the view that the human being consists of a nonmaterial “mind” that is spatially coextensive and usually intimately integrated with the physical body (Mays & Mays, 2008; 2011) during life. J. Kenneth Arnette’s (1992, 1995, 1999) theory of essence is another exposition of this idea. The mind or “essence” of a person is an objective, autonomous entity, a “field of consciousness,” that interacts energetically with the brain’s neural electrical activity to mediate all cognitive faculties. The mind is the seat of consciousness of the person, the subject in which phenomenal experience occurs. Ordinarily, the electrical interaction between the brain and the mind is required for phenomenal experience and consciousness.

An informational view, in my humble opinion, fits with modern science better than an a strictly energetic one.  The interaction mode of mind and brain - as an electrical one - is a historical conclusion and has not been confirmed with a century of research.  That there are electrical forces and potentials that are not measured by the current units of physics is problematic.

On the other hand, the presence and influence of information objects is one that is rising in science.  "Substantial" structures that are nonphysical and not measured as material properties can be defined as structured real-world probabilities.  They need not be energetic, in themselves, to organize future states in a catalytic manner.  As the essence of a plan will organize coming process sequence and ingredients, a mind can organize intentions and understandings into rational behavior that can achieve goals and future target states.