Near death experience - did he really mean that?

I would love to believe that I would get to live forever with my loved ones and it's ok if people find some solace in such irrational beliefs but I choose to be a true stoic and give up such childish beliefs.

And that is so commonly expressed as self evident truth, it's pointless trying to argue. If one does, it can easily become a shouting match with them doing most of the shouting; accusing you of believing the most contemptible nonsense.  In an age of reason and science you're telling me you believe in ghosts ? Come on...? 

I don't argue with anyone about it now away from here (I sometimes make a few comments on you tube but that's also a waste of time, the ignorance and stupidity of some people's comments is unbelieveable). When I go to a funeral and see the grief (and it is absolutely understandable) I never try to offer any solace or tell them anything. You just have to let people get on with it.

And yet I've heard some truly remarkable stories and reports. Ernst Rodin, for instance, who was kind enough to "speak" to me was a meticulously careful commenter on these issues, sticking to the scientific line. And yet his daughter told me an amazing story (or a wonder story as Woerlee would say). Stories used to be allowed in centuries gone by but scientism has banned them.

I often quote short excerpts from others' posts, so I don't mind your doing so. However in this case it needs to be read in conjunction with what I wrote next, regarding a possibly 'difficult' next day - to say the least - people's waking lives encompass a whole range from comfort to terror. One may not always wish to wake up at all. Not all suffering and pain is the result of mental illness.

Sure, I can't walk in the shoes of others Typoz.  But, my point was that any serious consideration of annihilation would seem to end up with at least a small, faint hope of that not being the case.  That's different from having a tough day and hoping not to wake up.  So I stand by what I was poking at which is, I haven't come across nor can I imagine anyone, sane or otherwise for that matter, who seriously hopes for annihilation.

As I said I don’t believe any non-suicidal person really hopes for annihilation.

I don't know if there is any literature on the mindset of someone who is suicidal on this topic, but I would imagine the primary motivation is to leave THIS life and perhaps not existence in its entirety (i.e., annihilation).  Anyone have any insight here?

In discussing these matters with my son in law who is an ardent athiest, he has stated to the effect of: I would love to believe that I would get to live forever with my loved ones and it's ok if people find some solace in such irrational beliefs but I choose to be a true stoic and give up such childish beliefs. I find plenty of awe and wonder in the natural world as it is without having to impose such patently false notions.  He also loves it when children have such wonderful fantaises that make them so happy. I also notice a conspicuous unwillingness for him to even consider any evidence to the contrary and a sense of loss and resignation that seems ot accompany his position.

I'd be curious to hear what he has to say on the topic of annihilation.  Meaning, is it something he simply and stoically accepts as his fate or is it something he 'hopes for'?  We've all heard the ardent atheist criticism of continuation/survival notions, but to say one 'hopes for annihilation' struck me as a different thing altogether.

I'd be curious to hear what he has to say on the topic of annihilation.  Meaning, is it something he simply and stoically accepts as his fate or is it something he 'hopes for'?  We've all heard the ardent atheist criticism of continuation/survival notions, but to say one 'hopes for annihilation' struck me as a different thing altogether.

it's definitely something he accepts. It's very freudian actually, the male heroic ego gets to revel in "the truth" having sublimated the more primitve wishes of the ID and the scientific method is the new faith. If one narrows their focus it seems to work pretty well.

I don't know if there is any literature on the mindset of someone who is suicidal on this topic, but I would imagine the primary motivation is to leave THIS life and perhaps not existence in its entirety (i.e., annihilation).  Anyone have any insight here?

I'm not aware of any literature. Though I have from time to time come across NDE accounts of those who attempted suicide. At least some of them were expecting, hoping for oblivion and were surprised to find out they still existed. Of course since I'm talking about NDEs these are accounts from those who returned from such a journey. That part is interesting in itself, for the rest of us too as the understanding gained during the experience usually meant no further attempts were made. (There will always be exceptions.)

It seems, like it or not, we are indestructible and there is only life.

In one case I heard recently, the experiencer on the way back to their body in this present life passed a sort of area where a number of those who damaged their body beyond any possible return were waiting for something. It was not stated what - I've a few different ideas, but I should not speculate on such matters.

Note: when I do come across videos of NDEs in the case of attempted suicide, I'm unlikely to post them here. But I don't avoid watching/listening since they can be very interesting.

I don't ever recall being bothered by something coming after death, or not. I've always taken the position that I don't know, and that we all get to find out, or not, whether something comes after.

Therefore it seems totally normal to me to have people who take either position with varying degrees of exclusively. I perfectly understand that there may be people who hope for nothing, and other people who hope for something at death.

Personally, I think the evidence which is often used in support of an afterlife position, is actually to do with the living, and is far more important to our experience right now, than fighting (or worrying) about what might come after death. As I've said before, this division may actually be a deliberate misdirection/distraction by the 'they's', to keep the majority blind to what this evidence might actually tell us about life (not death).

The whole mass of subjective human anomalous evidence has generally either been labeled woo, or, has been pushed into only having meaning after life itself has ended. This is the most shocking and disappointing demonstration of how easy it is to influence us, distract us, and keep us blind to our true situation.

I don't ever recall being bothered by something coming after death, or not. I've always taken the position that I don't know, and that we all get to find out, or not, whether something comes after.

Therefore it seems totally normal to me to have people who take either position with varying degrees of exclusively. I perfectly understand that there may be people who hope for nothing, and other people who hope for something at death.

Personally, I think the evidence which is often used in support of an afterlife position, is actually to do with the living, and is far more important to our experience right now, than fighting (or worrying) about what might come after death. As I've said before, this division may actually be a deliberate misdirection/distraction by the 'they's', to keep the majority blind to what this evidence might actually tell us about life (not death).

The whole mass of subjective human anomalous evidence has generally either been labeled woo, or, has been pushed into only having meaning after life itself has ended. This is the most shocking and disappointing demonstration of how easy it is to influence us, distract us, and keep us blind to our true situation.

Who are the “they’s”? I always had a hard time believing in “cigarette man” (x-files)

In discussing these matters with my son in law who is an ardent athiest, he has stated to the effect of: I would love to believe that I would get to live forever with my loved ones and it's ok if people find some solace in such irrational beliefs but I choose to be a true stoic and give up such childish beliefs. I find plenty of awe and wonder in the natural world as it is without having to impose such patently false notions.  He also loves it when children have such wonderful fantaises that make them so happy. I also notice a conspicuous unwillingness for him to even consider any evidence to the contrary and a sense of loss and resignation that seems ot accompany his position.

I think that your atheist is somewhat more arrogant than mine. Reminds me of the assertions of people like Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss or Stephen Fry.

In discussing these matters with my son in law who is an ardent athiest, he has stated to the effect of: I would love to believe that I would get to live forever with my loved ones and it's ok if people find some solace in such irrational beliefs but I choose to be a true stoic and give up such childish beliefs. I find plenty of awe and wonder in the natural world as it is without having to impose such patently false notions.  He also loves it when children have such wonderful fantaises that make them so happy. I also notice a conspicuous unwillingness for him to even consider any evidence to the contrary and a sense of loss and resignation that seems ot accompany his position.

Sounds like he's the one believing false notions considering that he's disregarding evidence. He needs some philosophy books, NDE books, and DBV books

He reasons that there was nothing before he was born and there will be nothing after he dies.

Apologies for selectively quoting a tiny fragment of your interesting post.

The 'nothing before he was born' is, I would say, an assumption, a proposition to form a basis for an argument certainly. But is it supported by evidence? Evidence is always the sticking point I think.

Of course I accept that he likely has no recall of anything. But in everyday life there are many things of which we have no recall, but we can be certain that they took place - at least as certain as we can be of anything. In my interpretation, his position is a simple act of faith, a chosen belief.

Still, the more important question is, does it cause harm? Probably it doesn't, it might even be helpful. At any rate, I don't think we can or should expect a single orthodox view, it is valuable to have differing opinions.

I'm still not convinced anyone seriolusly hopes for "annihilation". It must be a way to mentally come to terms with the prospect supported by the materialist/panpsyhcist worldview.

Montague Keen of the Scole Report claimed to in an interview. IIRC, he said that he enjoyed life as a mortal man, couldn't imagine a timeless, noncorporeal existence, and didn't want anything more than "pure death." The difference between him and the fellow you quoted at the start is that Keen was convinced there was some form of life after death.