Explaining the near-death experience

An exceptionally weak debunking article about NDEs:


Explaining the near-death experience

Every few weeks, an attention seeker – er, truth seeker – raves to a media outlet about what they experienced when they were ‘clinically dead’.

Dying is a permanent, irreversible shutdown of all the physiological processes in the body. A near-death experience – floating, travelling through a tunnel, seeing angels and what not – may feel real in the same way that if you press your eyelids hard you see flashes of light, but that doesn’t mean it is.

Science has been able to explain many of the elements of the near-death experience, for example those who report their life flashing before their eyes.

One might expect patients who insist they were looking down from the ceiling to be able to identify objects on the top shelves of the room, but nope, no research has found that they are able to.

Nothing new here. Same old skeptical arguments.

[Laird]

Every few weeks, an attention seeker – er, truth seeker – raves to a media outlet

Projection?

Nothing new here.

Indeed.

An exceptionally weak debunking article about NDEs:


Explaining the near-death experience






Nothing new here. Same old skeptical arguments.

I don't know about same old, I haven't ever heard any arguments as bad as these!

I think they have some valid points. A 61-year-old suddenly needing to publicly report an experience she had at 21 is not evidence of anything other than a need for attention. That's why primarily reports from prospective trials can be used to draw conclusions about NDEs. Reports conducted by medical professionals from retrospective trials can be great for hypothesis generation; the rest is just like FTL UFOs crashing in the American desert in terms of evidential value.

I think they have some valid points. A 61-year-old suddenly needing to publicly report an experience she had at 21 is not evidence of anything other than a need for attention. That's why primarily reports from prospective trials can be used to draw conclusions about NDEs. Reports conducted by medical professionals from retrospective trials can be great for hypothesis generation; the rest is just like FTL UFOs crashing in the American desert in terms of evidential value.

There clearly are attention seekers but I got the impression the article was supposed to be a complete debunk but it was full of absurdities like comparing how real NDEs seem to the colours you see when you press your eyes.  NDEs are mostly life-changing to those who experience them which is more than I can say for mental colours caused by pressure on the eyes.  I got the feeling the writer has never looked into this and is just regurgitating hearsay.  I am not convinced NDEs are real myself but I like to think I would have better quality arguments than this if I was going to write a debunking article.

There clearly are attention seekers but I got the impression the article was supposed to be a complete debunk but it was full of absurdities like comparing how real NDEs seem to the colours you see when you press your eyes.  NDEs are mostly life-changing to those who experience them which is more than I can say for mental colours caused by pressure on the eyes.  I got the feeling the writer has never looked into this and is just regurgitating hearsay.  I am not convinced NDEs are real myself but I like to think I would have better quality arguments than this if I was going to write a debunking article.

Yes the article is crap. It’s a counter reaction to the NDE hype.

Projection?

Yeah this doesn't get talked about enough, the attention seeking of the pseudo-skeptics and their cottage industry.

What's interesting to me is that this puff piece was allowed to be put out despite its weaknesses and ignorance. These are the same people who will say Creationists are shutting their eyes and ears against evidence then go show their commitment to the materialist faith follows the same playbook.

There clearly are attention seekers but I got the impression the article was supposed to be a complete debunk but it was full of absurdities like comparing how real NDEs seem to the colours you see when you press your eyes.  NDEs are mostly life-changing to those who experience them which is more than I can say for mental colours caused by pressure on the eyes.  I got the feeling the writer has never looked into this and is just regurgitating hearsay.  I am not convinced NDEs are real myself but I like to think I would have better quality arguments than this if I was going to write a debunking article.

They are real in that people do have such experiences. Personally I look at them like say the weather, it can be varied, take many forms from mild and unobtrusive to powerful and overwhelming. I don't take much heed of any particular elaboration of the fluff and embroidery which is sometimes attached or associated with them. But common themes are ideas such as compassion and understanding of others - it would seem from my perspective overly cynical to suggest that that is not real.

They are real in that people do have such experiences. Personally I look at them like say the weather, it can be varied, take many forms from mild and unobtrusive to powerful and overwhelming. I don't take much heed of any particular elaboration of the fluff and embroidery which is sometimes attached or associated with them. But common themes are ideas such as compassion and understanding of others - it would seem from my perspective overly cynical to suggest that that is not real.

I didn't mean not real at all, I just couldn't think how else to say it.  People definitely experience these things and they seem to be profoundly life changing.

I didn't mean not real at all, I just couldn't think how else to say it.  People definitely experience these things and they seem to be profoundly life changing.

Yes, I understand the difficulty in expressing things. Turning thoughts into words isn't easy at the best of times and especially in areas such as this.