Mega-thread for help with rebuttals against skeptical talking points

There is a phrase "God of the gaps". The idea being that as scientific (read materialist) knowledge advanced, there would be less and less which was not specified according to mathematically-defined laws, and hence less room for whatever we mean by 'God' to be active. I'm not sure about the phrase "materialism of the gaps", not sure I've heard that, but it sounds like a sort of retort, turning the onus of responsibility back in the other direction.

So apparently Dr Greyson has been involved in a new, more proactive study on terminal lucidity, which has included speculation of possible mechanisms and skeptical explanations that sound familiar: 
https://www.bipartisanalliance.com/2020/...a.html?m=1

For reference, they refer to Terminal Lucidity as Paradoxical Lucidity (PL):

...Detailed case reports of 124 dementia patients who experienced an episode of paradoxical lucidity were received. In more than 80% of these cases, complete remission with return of memory, orientation, and responsive verbal ability was reported by observers of the lucid episode. The majority of patients died within hours to days after the episode. Further prospective study is warranted, as paradoxical lucidity suggests that there may exist a reversible and functional aspect of pathophysiology in severe dementia.

...Because the episodes of PL occur rather suddenly, it is unlikely that regeneration of neurons can account for them. Such fluctuations may reflect complex adjustments in signaling cascades, synaptic modifications, neuronal network interactions, and, perhaps, temporary reversal of, or compensation for, chronic functional inhibition due to neurotoxic proteins [37]. We acknowledge that there are different modes of cognitive fluctuation in varying types of dementia [38], [39], such as dementia with Lewy bodies. As noted in the Introduction, our focus is on the dramatic behavioral recovery at the time when the functional consequences of the neurodegeneration are thought to be irreversible, although a more comprehensive understanding of mechanisms of cognitive fluctuation across the full disease course for a range of dementias is lacking.

There have been no neuroscientific studies of PL, and thus, any mechanistic framework must be considered speculative. However, the related phenomena described previously speak to the biological possibility of PL and provide some insight into a potential mechanism. Because episodes of PL often occur just before death, the emerging neurobiological data related to NDEs are of relevance. As noted, surges of neurophysiological activity have been observed in humans just before death in the critical or operative care setting [21], [22], [23] and in experimental rodent models after cardiac or respiratory arrest [24]. It is thus conceivable that some patients with severe dementia might also experience a surge of neurophysiological activity before death, which is manifested as a lucid episode. Furthermore, extrapolating from studies of rats assessing neurochemistry after two minutes of asphyxia [25], it is possible that as oxygen and glucose levels fall or fluctuate, there is a surge of neurotransmitter levels that results in transient or metastable activation of the brain. However, such surges of electrical activity or neurotransmitter release do not explain how there can be enhanced synchronization or communication across the brain, which has been observed in dying rats and which could possibly account for a spontaneous recovery of cogent behavior in a patient with severe dementia. A network-level explanation is likely required.

...There are precedents for the spontaneous recovery of nonbiological networks after periods of inactivity or damage [40]. In fact, network concepts related to “amplitude death” and “oscillation death” might be applicable to the observed surge in neurophysiological coherence just before functional network breakdown in the brain around the time of death. Using a Stuart-Landau model, one investigation described the dynamics of how such oscillations can spontaneously “revive,” [41] while another study described how the revival of such oscillations can be accompanied by rhythmicity and dynamic activity across the network [42]. These concepts have also been instantiated in neuronal models, with the conclusion that at a certain point of neuronal inhibition in a sparsely connected network, there is a counterintuitive “rebirth” of neuronal activity [43] that is manifested across the network. Furthermore, conditions for rapid and nonlinear synchronization (sometimes referred to as “explosive synchronization”) occur in association with arousal when brain network hubs are suppressed [44], as in dementia [45].

Thus, although the mechanism of PL is unknown, there is evidence that the dying or hypoxic brain can generate neurochemical and neuroelectrical surges that might be associated with the network dynamics of complex systems and that might generate spontaneous network integration manifesting as lucid behavior. We emphasize that this is speculative, but computational modeling studies of large-scale brain networks, which have been applied to Alzheimer's disease, could be investigated to establish foundational credibility for such network phenomena in those with severe dementia. It must also be noted that there may not be a unique mechanism for PL that is restricted to the days before death but rather a mechanism that is common to cognitive fluctuations in less severe stages of the disease [12], [13]. Furthermore, changes in systemic factors, rather than intrinsic neural dynamics, might drive the causal mechanisms responsible for lucid episodes. For example, one case report of a patient with Parkinson's disease dementia was able to correlate cognitive fluctuations with paroxysmal episodes of hypotension [46]. Thus, systemic physiologic factors must also be considered in the mechanism of PL.

This sounds to me like they're closer to a more naturalist explanation that it's just the brain behaving like a rebooting or rerouting computer or something, I don't know. I know they're saying it's only speculation, but this could still be taken seriously if Dr Greyson was involved. That's what has me concerned. I have also emailed him about this as well. What should I make of this, especially if Greyson is involved? Is this speculation to be taken lightly or seriously? 

Edit: Also, apologies for the litter of font codes on the quote, I have no idea how to get rid of them.

You really need to check the links within the links you provide. Cuz if you did, you would have found that those potential physiological explanations are from the second link from 2019, not the paper with Greyson attached. The person probably included that other paper on the blog because it also had to do with terminal lucidity. Also, under BK’s model, there being a physical correlate that then leads to TL isn’t a big deal since he expects there to be correlates anyway.

[Laird]

You really need to check the links within the links you provide. Cuz if you did, you would have found that those potential physiological explanations are from the second link from 2019, not the paper with Greyson attached. The person probably included that other paper on the blog because it also had to do with terminal lucidity

Bruce Greyson is listed as an author on both papers.

Well, guess I need to read better then.

Neurologists (experts) have to try to account for this phenomenon (terminal lucidity) but they won't find a satisfactory physiological explanation for the complete return of a person's faculties, using a brain that's been ravaged by cancer or Alzheimer's so that there's no relevant brain tissue left. 

What will they appeal to ? Maybe a small 'untouched' zone somewhere, that suddenly kicks in to do the work of all the other (previously indispensable) areas that used to work in concert together (so they tell us) ?

Just before death you can be conscious without a brain but materialism prevails ? Doesn't make any sense.

Neurologists (experts) have to try to account for this phenomenon (terminal lucidity) but they won't find a satisfactory physiological explanation for the complete return of a person's faculties, using a brain that's been ravaged by cancer or Alzheimer's so that there's no relevant brain tissue left. 

What will they appeal to ? Maybe a small 'untouched' zone somewhere, that suddenly kicks in to do the work of all the other (previously indispensable) areas that used to work in concert together (so they tell us) ?

Just before death you can be conscious without a brain but materialism prevails ? Doesn't make any sense.

I understand that, but they're saying there's 'evidence' that some sort of brain processes might be involved, if I have that right? They reject the theory that it's akin to rat brain processes it seems, but do suggest alternative explanations with no mention of the idea that it's simply consciousness 'overpowering' the disease's effects. There's a lot of 'mights' and comparisons made to other concepts or things observed in nature or technology, but I'm unsure what they mean exactly. I understand they're not jumping to conclusions, but still; I'm surprised this is coming from Dr Greyson, I guess, but I'm not certain about the implications of their research.

You get more funding opportunities if you don't mention souls leaving bodies in your research.

Though if Greyson has changed his mind about NDEs so be it. [I doubt he has though, especially since his co-author isn't exactly a traditional materialist if a materialist at all.]

It's about terminal lucidity, not NDEs, but you're right I guess. Materialism makes money. 

Titus Rivas commented on Twitter too expressing confusion at this research they've done, which does indeed come across like they're speculating materialist explanations for the phenomena. This study just confuses me greatly, give my recent interaction with Greyson, his upcoming book and his lengthy stance against materialism. You'd think they'd at least point out more flaws in these speculations surely, such as those I think we have already addressed?

It's about terminal lucidity, not NDEs, but you're right I guess. Materialism makes money. 

Titus Rivas commented on Twitter too expressing confusion at this research they've done, which does indeed come across like they're speculating materialist explanations for the phenomena. This study just confuses me greatly, give my recent interaction with Greyson, his upcoming book and his lengthy stance against materialism. You'd think they'd at least point out more flaws in these speculations surely, such as those I think we have already addressed?

My point is that Greyson could think Terminal Lucidity is just physical but given he does make mention of NDE research he might also have changed his mind on NDEs.

Personally, knowing something about both authors, I think the goal here is simply to increase research into Terminal Lucidity and NDEs. Even Irreducible Mind notes that no one is advocating a stop to neuroscientific research, that only when the vast majority of mind-is-brain explanations are exhausted will we see a complete paradigm shift.

But if no one else is doing the research or even pointing out the potential implications of Terminal Lucidity someone has to carry this forward, and it won't be done by making bold claims about immortal souls. Rather it depends on the idea that you can reverse or at least prevent dementia, that's where the billions of dollars are to be found.

Then again, who knows - maybe there is a brain based explanation for Terminal Lucidity. I doubt it, but there needs to be more research done before it becomes a major point for abandoning or at least strongly doubting mind-is-brain at the academia level.