is super-psi/living-agent psi an actually adequate explanation for NDE's?

Hello! I'm new on this forum but i have kinda skimmed through it in the last days and decided to make an account to engage with this community , i'm really curious what you guys think about the super-psi explanation supported by Michael Sudduth and Stephen Braude , i'm a little scared that it can actually explain everything about NDE's and that s why i'm making this post , what do u guys think? Best regards. 

Hello! I'm new on this forum but i have kinda skimmed through it in the last days and decided to make an account to engage with this community , i'm really curious what you guys think about the super-psi explanation supported by Michael Sudduth and Stephen Braude , i'm a little scared that it can actually explain everything about NDE's and that s why i'm making this post , what do u guys think? Best regards. 

Why don't you tell us about this 'explanation', and why you think it might explain everything about NDE's?

Hello! I'm new on this forum but i have kinda skimmed through it in the last days and decided to make an account to engage with this community , i'm really curious what you guys think about the super-psi explanation supported by Michael Sudduth and Stephen Braude , i'm a little scared that it can actually explain everything about NDE's and that's why I'm making this post , what do u guys think? Best regards. 

In answer to your post, super-psi simply can't explain the boatload of empirical evidence NDEs supply that has accumulated over many years and establishes the existence of an afterlife, where temporarily the soul separates from the body, may observe the rescusitation team working on the body from the ceiling of the operating room , and then sometimes goes on through some sort of tunnel into a spiritual realm. 

Of course, in order to report this the NDEr has to return back into the body. 

I wouldn't worry that super psi can account for NDEs.

An even better argument against super-psi is that super psi produces paranormally derived information about the dead, such as independently verified mediumistic communications, whereas NDEs are experiences. There is a fundamental, existential difference between information and conscious experience. They are in entirely different categories of existence.

Hello! I'm new on this forum but i have kinda skimmed through it in the last days and decided to make an account to engage with this community , i'm really curious what you guys think about the super-psi explanation supported by Michael Sudduth and Stephen Braude , i'm a little scared that it can actually explain everything about NDE's and that s why i'm making this post , what do u guys think? Best regards. 

This link (below) doesn't address NDE's specifically, but if you eliminate super psi as an explanation for other afterlife phenomena, super psi becomes less credible as an explanation for NDE's

Super-psi does not Explain the Evidence for the Afterlife
https://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2009/06/surv...r-psi.html

Much more at the link, this is the summary:

Spirits have to learn to communicate through certain forms of mediumship and some spirits are better learners than others. Super-psi is not a good explanation for this phenomenon.

Other characteristics of spirit communication vary with the spirit not the medium or the sitters.

Some haunting phenomena are not dependent on the presence of any single person, some of which are ended through spirit communication. Guy Lyon Playfair, William Roll, and Ian Stevenson all thought some poltergeist phenomenon were caused by spirits.

Birthmarks: When a child remembers a past life, and has a birthmark at a location of an injury in the past life, it suggests the spirit body may carry information from one life to the next. It would be absurd to believe the fetus was psychic and was fulfilling a psychological need by unconsciously creating the birth mark.

Shared Death Bed Visions, Shared Near-Death Experiences, and Multiple Witness Crisis Apparitions are not well explained by super-psi. You'd have to be a super-duper-psychic not just a super-psychic to induce hallucinations in other people.

Near Death Experiences: Cases of NDEs where the experiencer has vivid realer-than-real experiences when there is no brain activity and no veridical information, cannot be explained as psi from a living person because there is no evidence of psi and no live person during the experience. These experiences cannot be explained as ESP during an abnormal brain state shortly before or after the experience. Near-death experiencers neurosurgeon Dr. Eben Alexander, psychiatrist Dr. Carl Jung, and military remote viewer Joe McMoneagle, who have special qualifications to judge the phenomenon, all believed their near-death experiences represented evidence for survival after death.

Drop-in Communicators: A medium might be said to be fulfilling an unconscious psychological need when using super-psi to obtain information about deceased relatives of the sitters. However when the medium brings through spirits who are unrelated to the sitters and who communicate for purposes of their own, there is no psychological motivation. Super-psi cannot explain these cases.

Cross Correspondences: When more than one medium spontaneously, without being prodded by an investigator, brings through parts of a message, and the message only makes sense when the parts are put together, this indicates that spirits are independent of any medium. This also shows that spirits have initiative and the ability to organize complex tasks. Super-psi cannot explain this.

ESP is not Produced by the Brain: ESP is not limited by time or distance. It cannot be explained by the known laws of physics including quantum entanglement. Since human consciousness is capable of ESP, consciousness cannot be the result of any physical process in the brain. Anyone who acknowledges the reality of ESP has already admitted that consciousness is non-physical so they have no grounds upon which to deny survival of consciousness.

This link (below) doesn't address NDE's specifically, but if you eliminate super psi as an explanation for other afterlife phenomena, super psi becomes less credible as an explanation for NDE's

Super-psi does not Explain the Evidence for the Afterlife
https://ncu9nc.blogspot.com/2009/06/surv...r-psi.html

Much more at the link, this is the summary:

When you have a hypothesis like super psi that could be pushed to an extreme and used to explain anything, the fact that it could be true is not grounds for believing it is true. 

You can invent an infinite number of hypotheses that could be true, but you don't believe one of them unless you have evidence that it is true. 

So the evidence that super psi might be true is not evidence that it is true. 

In this case people believe super psi because of their opinions not because there is evidence it is true. 

In order to make an argument convincing to other people that super psi is true, they have to provide evidence that it is true not just that it could be true because it can explain anything.

So what is the argument that it is true?

I would say Super Psi leaves a lot of questions:

1. Psi, in and of itself, suggests there is more to minds than brains.

2. Psi makes stark certain issues with Physicalism, just as QM makes stark issues with the usual takes on Causality. Of course Physicalism could be false AND life after death could be false, but IMO examining what it means for a Person to be non-physical does make Survival evidence something I somewhat expect rather than something I find extraordinary. (I do wonder if I'd learned the arguments against Physicalism when I was young would I be surprised at all by Survival evidence. Sadly schools lean toward the Materialist religion while claiming to separate Church & State...)

3. Super Psi has to explain Psi in terms of the corporeal world, which means - as Chris Carter points out - it should be expected to fall under natural selection. So why does so much of this power only seem manifest around faking an afterlife rather than preventing death.

4. The idea that we have subconscious personalities capable of the kind of planning it takes to fake an afterlife seems questionable. Additionally there is at least some suggestive paranormal evidence that sub-personalities are independent spirits themselves.

None of this is specific to NDEs, though it does seem odd that Super Psi explanations need to have brain-dependent consciousness perform feats of Psi while the brain is compromised. One can try to explain away this problem by saying Psi got the information before or after the person is near or at clinical death, but in tandem with the other listed issues I don't think Super Psi is a great explanation.

When you have a hypothesis like super psi that could be pushed to an extreme and used to explain anything, the fact that it could be true is not grounds for believing it is true. 

You can invent an infinite number of hypotheses that could be true, but you don't believe one of them unless you have evidence that it is true. 

So the evidence that super psi might be true is not evidence that it is true. 

In this case people believe super psi because of their opinions not because there is evidence it is true. 

In order to make an argument convincing to other people that super psi is true, they have to provide evidence that it is true not just that it could be true because it can explain anything.

So what is the argument that it is true?

I agree with this, but I continue to think that the best argument against super-psi is that psi of the extreme magnitude of super-psi has never been demonstrated in all the research into parapsychology.