New interment practices and carbon molecules (nihilism)

As has been hinted at, I'm pretty sure that the dead (or newly disembodied) are not particularly bothered about what is in effect...or can be regarded at least...as a discarded "vehicle".  However, for the people left behind, and particularly those that have been successfully persuaded (a great many) that death is the end (materialists feel free to take a bow) then I think appropriate respect and care of the body is necessary in it's disposal.

I've attended the funerals of five family members in just less than two years. Even though I know I'm going to see them again, there's no point pretending that death is ever going to be easy to deal with (for the ones left behind). It never will be, even when we eventually get the cast iron proof that life goes on...it goes on for them elsewhere and sadly we want them to be here.

As has been hinted at, I'm pretty sure that the dead (or newly disembodied) are not particularly bothered about what is in effect...or can be regarded at least...as a discarded "vehicle".  However, for the people left behind, and particularly those that have been successfully persuaded (a great many) that death is the end (materialists feel free to take a bow) then I think appropriate respect and care of the body is necessary in it's disposal.

This is one aspect of our methods of dealing with the reality of death where I think the media, academia and the medical and social services should take a step back and consider the feelings and beliefs of those they are trying to advise and help. It seems to me that whenever the subject comes up there is an unspoken/unwritten assumption that we all ascribe to the materialist view. That science has, in effect, proved the materialist case. I don't recall ever seeing or hearing the views of an "expert" allow for the fact that the majority of those they are talking to believe in some form of afterlife. The subject is taboo. 

Surely this is, in effect, showing disrespect both to the surviving family and to the memory of the deceased. When you boil it down, materialist advice on death and bereavement is reduced to "grandpa is dust, get over it". Even the church is of no help with its talk of some approaching Judgement Day when the dead shall be raised and judged. WTF!? How is that any help for the grief-stricken?

This is one aspect of our methods of dealing with the reality of death where I think the media, academia and the medical and social services should take a step back and consider the feelings and beliefs of those they are trying to advise and help. It seems to me that whenever the subject comes up there is an unspoken/unwritten assumption that we all ascribe to the materialist view. That science has, in effect, proved the materialist case. I don't recall ever seeing or hearing the views of an "expert" allow for the fact that the majority of those they are talking to believe in some form of afterlife. The subject is taboo. 

Surely this is, in effect, showing disrespect both to the surviving family and to the memory of the deceased. When you boil it down, materialist advice on death and bereavement is reduced to "grandpa is dust, get over it". Even the church is of no help with its talk of some approaching Judgement Day when the dead shall be raised and judged. WTF!? How is that any help for the grief-stricken?

Yes, that's about it Dave. I don't know what to suggest either. I could post a thousand veridical OBE/NDE's that can't be explained by brain function and the sceptics would just ignore them as if they have no significance whatsoever. Personally I think they revel in it.

(Sorry to repeat but I can't help it) Two eminent heart surgeons tell us that one of their patients accurately described what occurred in the operating room after he'd been pronounced dead... and it's waved away with the dumbass explanation that they (the surgeons) somehow fed the patient the information.

And that case was in no way uncommon as Rudy told us (for instance)...thirteen other cardiac surgeons (in a special meeting) had also commonly experienced the same phenomena. And that doesn't even give them (sceptics) pause for thought ?

Highly credible witnesses dealing with real death and dying every day giving us unique insight into just about the most important question we have. And they (the sceptics) somehow think they are behaving reasonably and correctly by ignoring it.  :/

Yes, that's about it Dave. I don't know what to suggest either. I could post a thousand veridical OBE/NDE's that can't be explained by brain function and the sceptics would just ignore them as if they have no significance whatsoever. Personally I think they revel in it.

I agree, Tim, but I wasn't really concentrating on sceptics (we argue with sceptical intransigence all the time here). I was saying that talk of the afterlife has become a taboo among the most influential and professional circles in our society. Ordinary people who have suffered a bereavement may be convinced that their loved one lives on in some spiritual reality but they have no recourse to professional advice because the social and psychological services work within a dogma driven agenda which will not entertain such ideas, no matter how deep rooted they may be in the general populace. The church, as I said, is no better.

So ordinary people, often in desperation, end up in the hands of a local "psychic" and it is pot luck whether they get a charlatan or someone genuinely talented. Most often, I suspect, it will be someone with a modicum of ability in areas other than mediumship and no skill whatsoever in dealing with bereavement. 

Again, you are right to point out the influence of sceptics, especially in fields involving professional care and opinion. Cardiologists could publish thousands of NDE accounts and they would be ignored. The last time I spoke with a psychologist on this subject (just in conversation, not treatment) I was admonished for being so gullible and told that NDEs have been totally debunked by researchers like Susan Blackmore (so annoying that she is still regarded as the expert voice). This attitude, unfortunately, directly influences the "official" line on bereavement counselling. This might change in the future, we can only hope so, and in my google searches I did come across this encouraging abstract at ResearchGate:

Affirming the positive in anomalous experiences: A challenge to dominant accounts of reality, life, and death ...

Psychology’s “top down” approach has significantly contributed to the “othering” of people whose unusual experiences and beliefs do not fit the currently favoured materialist discourse of reality as exclusively physical, measurable, and ultimately controllable. By siding with a powerful natural science stance towards human experiencing, psychology has therefore neglected, ignored, and sidelined the perspectives of many ordinary people themselves.

Approximately 70% of the population report having had at least one unusual or “anomalous” experience in their lives (Schofield, 2012). These may include not only “sense-of-presence(SOP)" or “out-of-body” (OBE) experiences – the main foci of this chapter – but also a whole range of other phenomena such as mystical and unitive experiences, near-death experiences, or sensory experiences such as voice-hearing, precognitive visions, apparitions, poltergeist phe- nomena, peak and healing experiences, etc. [...] What we argue here is that neither researchers, nor clinicians, nor perceivers need to make a diagnostic decision that determines pathology or health in line with a medical-model approach to human experience. On the contrary, we would argue that such diagnosis can be harmful.

I was saying that talk of the afterlife has become a taboo among the most influential and professional circles in our society.

Yes it has, of course, Dave. My (old) friend is now a professor. He always emphasised to me that in academia, it is  forbidden to invoke any supernatural "being" or venture outside of the brain with relation to human experience. It is professional suicide, basically. 
 

Ordinary people who have suffered a bereavement may be convinced that their loved one lives on in some spiritual reality but they have no recourse to professional advice because the social and psychological services work within a dogma driven agenda which will not entertain such ideas, no matter how deep rooted they may be in the general populace.

Yes agreed again. I made a very diplomatic post on an NHS website forum that was used by dying cancer patients. I'd gone in there looking for any advice I could get on how to help a family member deal with this awful disease. The patients (surprisingly) were often well aware of their impending demise and many clearly were very depressed.

Should I ? Shouldn't I ? I thought about it for about a week before I posted what was just a very gentle hint (nothing over the top, no proselytizing ) that based on evidence alone, what we call death may not be the end, that kind of thing. Was that such a terrible thing to do ? The post was deleted within about ten minutes and I wasn't aloud to log in again. Make of that what you will.

The last time I spoke with a psychologist on this subject (just in conversation, not treatment) I was admonished for being so gullible and told that NDEs have been totally debunked by researchers like Susan Blackmore

I believe that woman has a lot to answer for and that's all I want to say about her.