NDEs - brain or non-brain products

As far as people meeting still living persons, what do we make of it? Are those true NDEs, or are they different like lacking some core elements? If they are true NDEs it's a problem because it sounds absurd that they "go on the other side" and meet somebody alive. It makes the theory of the experience being a hallucination a lot more credible doesn't it?

You would need to read (or listen to) the account I mentioned. I described it vaguely, unfortunately I don't have a reference available right now, don't know where to find that example. But without the actual example it seems difficult to make strong arguments, since we are commenting on just some vague idea.

On the other hand hallucinations depend upon having an active brain. This can be ruled out as a general explanation for all NDEs because (a) there is usually insufficient or no brain activity for a hallucination, and (b) the veridical observations made during the NDE show it is not a hallucination.

But ... these points are surely made rather better in the book "The Self Does Not Die".

It makes the theory of the experience being a hallucination a lot more credible doesn't it?

It would make the hallucination theory more likely only if that element of the NDE was the major consideration...and it occurred a lot more than it does, but it isn't. And what people see in this "otherworldly dimension" is not testable. The only element that needs to be verified to demonstrate that NDE's are not hallucinations, is the out of body experience when the brain is off-line. And I think that's been achieved although not "proven" ...yet. 

As to people who see the living in this other dimension, I've seen very few of those cases. How do we know that the person is not misremembering/mixing things up without realising it. Sceptics can't have it both ways. They can't make a case for people's memories being faulty in the out of body portion of the experience and then say that that can't happen in the transcendental part.

Don't we have to allow a certain percentage of human error and fraud in anything we examine ? What I find amazing is the largely very consistent elements occurring over and over again. Why should that be if NDE's are just hallucinations,  remnants of the chaotic activity of a dying brain, signifying nothing ?

It would make the hallucination theory more likely only if that element of the NDE was the major consideration...and it occurred a lot more than it does, but it isn't. And what people see in this "otherworldly dimension" is not testable. The only element that needs to be verified to demonstrate that NDE's are not hallucinations, is the out of body experience when the brain is off-line. And I think that's been achieved although not "proven" ...yet. 

As to people who see the living in this other dimension, I've seen very few of those cases. How do we know that the person is not misremembering/mixing things up without realising it. Sceptics can't have it both ways. They can't make a case for people's memories being faulty in the out of body portion of the experience and then say that that can't happen in the transcendental part.

Don't we have to allow a certain percentage of human error and fraud in anything we examine ? What I find amazing is the largely very consistent elements occurring over and over again. Why should that be if NDE's are just hallucinations,  remnants of the chaotic activity of a dying brain, signifying nothing ?

I don't know, the idea that people also report meeting living persons or made up/fictional characters (seems like penny sartori reported it in one of her books or so I heard), troubles me. It makes me a bit skeptical about the whole thing, re-evaluating skeptical positions.

Maybe the way NDEs are reported is a bit flawed due to the greyson scale? Although the vast majority still seems to include deceased individuals, sometimes even with the peek in darien experience.

And Sartori, even after getting accounts of people meeting non-deceased individuals, still is a believer after all.

I'm a bit confused.

I don't know, the idea that people also report meeting living persons or made up/fictional characters (seems like penny sartori reported it in one of her books or so I heard), troubles me. It makes me a bit skeptical about the whole thing, re-evaluating skeptical positions.

I don't understand why you are using actual living people and made-up/fictional characters together as a single argument. Surely each has a different role to play, and a different explanation and a different consequence?

I'm a bit confused.

Me too.

I don't understand why you are using actual living people and made-up/fictional characters together as a single argument. Surely each has a different role to play, and a different explanation and a different consequence?

Me too.

Because their presence makes the idea that they visited some kind of afterlife less likely. It reinforces the materialist idea that it is a product of the mind, doesn't it?

I don't know, the idea that people also report meeting living persons or made up/fictional characters (seems like penny sartori reported it in one of her books or so I heard), troubles me. It makes me a bit skeptical about the whole thing, re-evaluating skeptical positions.

Maybe the way NDEs are reported is a bit flawed due to the greyson scale? Although the vast majority still seems to include deceased individuals, sometimes even with the peek in darien experience.

And Sartori, even after getting accounts of people meeting non-deceased individuals, still is a believer after all.

I'm a bit confused.

Can you give me an example of someone (a credible witness) reporting an accurate veridical OBE in the operating room (verified by the medical personnel) and then in addition adamantly claiming they saw Captain Marvel for real ?

I'm a bit curious to know why your confidence has suddenly evaporated, Raf. That's okay, everyone's free to change their mind of course ! It certainly would be one of the fastest "reverses" I've seen, though.

Can you give me an example of someone (a credible witness) reporting an accurate veridical OBE in the operating room (verified by the medical personnel) and then in addition adamantly claiming they saw Captain Marvel for real ?

I'm a bit curious to know why your confidence has suddenly evaporated, Raf. That's okay, everyone's free to change their mind of course ! It certainly would be one of the fastest "reverses" I've seen, though.

Oh no it hasn't evaporated, just still looking for evidence and to get things straight. In fact, I don't know how frequent reporting fictional characters is and if these events are reliable. I heard this is mentioned on a Penny Sartori book, but she is believer so maybe it's an incredibly rare phenomenon.

Let me be clear, I still think that the vast majority of NDEs effects support some sort of surivival. Like Pam Reynolds, loyd rudy's patient, dentures man and many other cases are pretty clear that the people having the experience were pretty much dead. Clinical death, at least. But after consciosness trascends what happens? Is it afterlife like a heaven of sorts or something else shaped by our own mind? Is light always gonna be there, and in what shape? If our afterlife is based on our disembodied mind projections we could meet captain marvel there after all ?

Let me be clear, I still think that the vast majority of NDEs effects support some sort of surivival. Like Pam Reynolds, loyd rudy's patient, dentures man and many other cases are pretty clear that the people having the experience were pretty much dead. Clinical death, at least. But after consciosness trascends what happens? Is it afterlife like a heaven of sorts or something else shaped by our own mind? Is light always gonna be there, and in what shape? If our afterlife is based on our disembodied mind projections we could meet captain marvel there after all ?

All I can tell you is that the people I've personally spoken to who've had a cardiac arrest (were dead) and a near death experience, had absolutely no doubt that they saw another world. I'm not telling you that to make you feel better or try to influence you, it's just a fact. Doesn't mean they definitely did see another world. You have to make up your own mind, everyone does.

I'm not going to argue in favour or against anything here. What I would suggest though is the importance of simply studying, reading, listening to many, many NDE accounts. To me that has been a far more beneficial use of my time than trying to make sense of sceptical arguments. For example Nderf.org, ndeRadio as well as youtube. In doing so I do ask myself whether what I am reading/listening to is in any way false or fraudulent, or simply mistaken.

With a background knowledge it then becomes possible to see through the holes in various arguments, or what makes sense, far more easily than trying to do so as purely an intellectual exercise, which it might otherwise be.