More Sloppy Reasoning about Survival.

https://journalofscientificexploration.o.../view/2251

An article from the new Journal of Scirntific Exploration. Here, Braude is talking about why OBEs cannot be used as evidence for survival. That's pretty much all he brings up, but I thought you guys might find it interesting.

I don't particularly disagree, OBEs by themselves aren't particularly great evidence, though I find it weird that he singles it out and doesn't consider how it's used with other evidence as a whole. Seems to be one of his 'cheapest' articles.

But let’s now set aside the issue of what flavor of dualism is suggested by OBEs. There’s another major reason why survivalists are ill-advised to argue for their case by appealing to OBEs. If OBEs provide evidence for any kind of survival of bodily death, strictly speaking, it would be evidence only of short-term survival. 

OBEs provide no justification for assuming that mental activity could persist independently of the body for periods significantly longer than an OBE. 

Analogies are easy to come by. For example, a person’s last breath may linger briefly after bodily death. But it will dissipate quickly, and certainly it won’t persist indefinitely. 

Similarly, my farts can leave my body; they’re distinct from my body; and they can affect the world outside my body. But they’re also entirely causally dependent for their existence on my body. Now of course, farts can linger for a while after coming into existence. 

But despite an enormous database of human farts, we have no reason to anticipate the production of a fart everlasting, even if that remains an empirical possibility. So it seems that even under the most charitable of readings, the evidence from OBEs shows too little. It gives us no reason to believe that the mind is more substantial, resilient, and self-sustaining than a fart

You might wonder if Braude had been drinking when he assembled this tosh. If he's not joking (surely he must be ?) it really is unbelievable.

But let’s now set aside the issue of what flavor of dualism is suggested by OBEs. There’s another major reason why survivalists are ill-advised to argue for their case by appealing to OBEs. If OBEs provide evidence for any kind of survival of bodily death, strictly speaking, it would be evidence only of short-term survival. 

OBEs provide no justification for assuming that mental activity could persist independently of the body for periods significantly longer than an OBE. 

Analogies are easy to come by. For example, a person’s last breath may linger briefly after bodily death. But it will dissipate quickly, and certainly it won’t persist indefinitely. 

Similarly, my farts can leave my body; they’re distinct from my body; and they can affect the world outside my body. But they’re also entirely causally dependent for their existence on my body. Now of course, farts can linger for a while after coming into existence. 

But despite an enormous database of human farts, we have no reason to anticipate the production of a fart everlasting, even if that remains an empirical possibility. So it seems that even under the most charitable of readings, the evidence from OBEs shows too little. It gives us no reason to believe that the mind is more substantial, resilient, and self-sustaining than a fart

You might wonder if Braude had been drinking when he assembled this tosh. If he's not joking (surely he must be ?) it really is unbelievable.

Leaving aside Braude’s analogy which is pretty lame I think (if correctly reported as you say Tim). I’d say evidence that consciousness can exist apart from a physical body for any length of time shows that it’s possible in principle. Without knowing exactly how it functions when the body is to all intents and purposes dead, it’s certainly not unreasonable to consider it may be able to function that way permanently afaics.

There is also the evidence of communication during NDEs with people who’ve actually permanently died to to be considered too isn’t there?

Leaving aside Braude’s analogy which is pretty lame I think (if correctly reported as you say Tim). I’d say evidence that consciousness can exist apart from a physical body for any length of time shows that it’s possible in principle. Without knowing exactly how it functions when the body is to all intents and purposes dead, it’s certainly not unreasonable to consider it may be able to function that way permanently afaics.

There is also the evidence of communication during NDEs with people who’ve actually permanently died to to be considered too isn’t there?

Certainly is, Obiwan !

Leaving aside Braude’s analogy which is pretty lame I think (if correctly reported as you say Tim). I’d say evidence that consciousness can exist apart from a physical body for any length of time shows that it’s possible in principle. Without knowing exactly how it functions when the body is to all intents and purposes dead, it’s certainly not unreasonable to consider it may be able to function that way permanently afaics.

There is also the evidence of communication during NDEs with people who’ve actually permanently died to to be considered too isn’t there?

Well he doesn't mention NDEs specifically in this case, only regular OBEs, which is why I kinda agree with him. Them on their own aren't an indication of anything, especially anything permanent. In context with other stuff then yeah maybe.

Well he doesn't mention NDEs specifically in this case, only regular OBEs, which is why I kinda agree with him. Them on their own aren't an indication of anything, especially anything permanent. In context with other stuff then yeah maybe.

I'm not talking of survival here. But I just wondered, have you any first-hand experience of an OBE or anything of a related kind? For me, the feeling of leaving the body was very definite. As was, on at least one occasion, a feeling of being somewhere out in the vastness of the universe.

Incidentally, I recall Robert Snow (who described his encounter with past-life regression at great length). He has talked about the ordinary police work he did as a day job, and chats he had with fellow police officers. It seems OBEs are quite commonplace during some of the stressful situations they encounter. But, it just isn't talked about. What we in Britain would call keeping a stiff upper lip. At any rate, anything involving consciousness leaving the body during an incident does not find its way into official police reports.

I'm not talking of survival here. But I just wondered, have you any first-hand experience of an OBE or anything of a related kind? For me, the feeling of leaving the body was very definite. As was, on at least one occasion, a feeling of being somewhere out in the vastness of the universe.

Incidentally, I recall Robert Snow (who described his encounter with past-life regression at great length). He has talked about the ordinary police work he did as a day job, and chats he had with fellow police officers. It seems OBEs are quite commonplace during some of the stressful situations they encounter. But, it just isn't talked about. What we in Britain would call keeping a stiff upper lip. At any rate, anything involving consciousness leaving the body during an incident does not find its way into official police reports.

I haven't had anything no. No paranormal experiences of any way shape or form.

And it can certainly be said that they happen often, but it's important to distinguish what's genuine and what's not. We know that we can prob the brain and trigger OBEs that are purely hallucinatoty in nature, so we need to make sure we don't get that and genuine OBEs with veridical information that's correct mixed up.

IIRC this is pretty much an excerpt from his book Immortal Remains, where he does actually say he leans in favor of Survival.

I think I covered this stuff about the OBE in the Survival vs Super Psi thread, but may have just glossed over it...it's just bizarre and unexpectedly poor reasoning from someone as sharp as Braude...

I haven't had anything no. No paranormal experiences of any way shape or form.

And it can certainly be said that they happen often, but it's important to distinguish what's genuine and what's not. We know that we can prob the brain and trigger OBEs that are purely hallucinatoty in nature, so we need to make sure we don't get that and genuine OBEs with veridical information that's correct mixed up.

Yes, though the question of veridical information is to me a separate one.

By the way, I wasn't asking from a sort of 'what qualifications do you have' sort of angle, it was only curiosity. For me, years ago, when I came across the idea of OOBEs, out of curiosity I decided to try it. Following the instructions in a library book, it may have been Robert Monroe's Journeys out of the body. It took time, patience, practice, and and eventually things started to happen. None of my experiences contained veridical information. But nothing would make me deny that they happened. Indeed the different feeling, the mode of moment-to-moment existence had a reality to it, something which cannot be communicated, any more than an NDE experiencer can explain when they say they saw different colours, colours which don't exist in our visible spectrum here in physical life.

Even feeling pain, there is no measurement for that, it is dependent entirely upon what is reported by the patient. The same with grief or emotional trauma. I bring this up partly to show that even in ordinary life, not everything can be proved, but we accept that it is real. (Strictly speaking proof belongs only to the realm of mathematics.) Also, past-life recall may consist overwhelmingly of pain and trauma from past events, ones not in this life. Again this is not 'veridical' but it is more powerful and convincing of a previous existence than mere facts ever could be.

Also, past-life recall may consist overwhelmingly of pain and trauma from past events, ones not in this life. Again this is not 'veridical' but it is more powerful and convincing of a previous existence than mere facts ever could be.

I think this is an important point that I think those who see scientific papers as the only ‘useful’ method of getting ‘closer to truth’ should consider in more depth. I don’t have an answer, but it’s clear to me that ‘scientific papers may be far from perfect but it’s the best method we have’ just isn’t good enough. We are totally ignoring a really rich vein.

To me that’s like keeping materialism at the top of the philosophical pyramid, and non-material thinking somewhere ‘beneath’. Facts equating to materialism and people’s ‘knowing things’ like your example here equating to things like idealism. 

Sooner or later we are going to have learn to take (honest) anecdotal evidence as being a very powerful tool. It will not be easy working out a way to integrate such evidence and I for one have nowhere near the intellect to work out how we do this, but I do feel that it’s a very important point. Our current holy grail is failing us badly imo.