New Sam Parnia book!

Yeah I've seen this one, and frankly this paper doesn't really give us much beyond the stats.

And the survey apparently included people who weren't even sure they had an NDE:




Actual descriptions of the NDEs would give us way more to work with, just having the survey conclusions makes it difficult for me to take this one seriously.

The study examplifies why we shouldn’t take it too seriously when someone claims they had an NDE unless they were interviewed shortly after the event and medical records proves it actually happended.

The study examplifies why we shouldn’t take it too seriously when someone claims they had an NDE unless they were interviewed shortly after the event.

Lol, the study basically doesn't show anything.

Lol, the study basically doesn't show anything.

I think it shows many people “think” they had an NDE.

I think it shows many people “think” they had an NDE.

Since the survey process is unknown, we don't even really know what their initial question(s) were to get people to do the survey.

They apparently discounted some of their own applicants, but we don't even know that exact process.

To me this seems like a study in search of a conclusion, and the debunking process was obfuscated behind supposed rigor. Even if I'm wrong about that at best it's a study that has so much of its process hidden that nothing much of value was obtained.

Since the survey process is unknown, we don't even really know what their initial question(s) were to get people to do the survey.

If you had actually read the study you would know that to get a distribution of german NDErs they used ZUMA (the Center for Survey Research and Methodology) in Mannheim, now part of GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, which has historically been heavily involved in conducting and analyzing opinion polls. It plays a key role in developing survey methodologies and public opinion research in Germany and internationally. It’s a good as it gets when you can’t go and ask all of the 80 million german population individually.

The article is also quite explicit about the questions of the survey. I suggest you read it.

If you had actually read the study you would know that to get a distribution of german NDErs and used ZUMA (the Center for Survey Research and Methodology) in Mannheim, now part of GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, has historically been heavily involved in conducting and analyzing opinion polls. It plays a key role in developing survey methodologies and public opinion research in Germany and internationally. It’s a good as it gets when you can’t go and ask all of the 80 million german population individually.

I actually read they used ZUMA which is why I noted we don't actually know the survey questions or the method of excluding respondents.

It's amusing that now you're trying to accuse me of something. Just admit the study wasn't the great debunking piece you were hoping it would be seen as.

I actually read they used ZUMA which is why I noted we don't actually know the survey questions or the method of excluding respondents.

They aimed to gather statistics on the distribution of NDEs in Germany, similar to how Gallup conducts polls for predicting U.S. presidential elections. That's why they used ZUMA, known for its expertise in survey methodologies. ZUMA utilizes random sampling to reach a statistically representative sample of the entire German population, ensuring that everyone has an equal chance of being selected, and no one is excluded.

To quote the article:

It should be stressed that this can be considered the first representative survey of the frequency of NDEs in Germany. Since our sample was representative of the German population in a statistical sense, with respect to the total population of 82 million in the 1995 German census, the results suggest that about 3 million Germans have had such an experience.

I understand that this dataset doesn't align with your views on NDEs, and as such, you attempt to explain them as part of a materialist conspiracy. However, I remain unconvinced.

Vast numbers? As you mentioned in an earlier post, most people who suffer a cardiac arrest die, with less than 10% surviving long term. Of those survivors, maybe 10% experience an NDE, and of that group, perhaps 20% have detailed memories of their 'experience.' It's a very uncommon phenomenon, with reports heavily influenced by cultural background.

When Parnia changed from studying NDE's that he 'caught' in his experiment, to studying these reports more generally, he obviously had a much, much larger pool of reports to explore.

Regarding cultural backgrounds, I would say NDE's reports are distinctly odd from Christian, other related religions, or atheist points of view. Only the relatively small number of people - such as us - would recognise what had just happened - people would not come up with an NDE story that fitted their culture.

When talking about NDE's, always remember that some of these reports contain verifiable information - such as the guy who recognised a nurse who resuscitated him and told her where she had put his false teeth, or the man who drifted away from his body and observed details from a discussion among his family in another room etc.

You also need to remember that we are talking about ordinary people, not people trying to play games.

Informally, we all tend to think about these matters in a Bayesian way. I suspect you start off with an enormously low prior probability - probably never explicitly stated - and you must remember that a sufficiently small prior probability will always counter and evidence.

Since you are interested enough to debate this subject, I'd still advise you to read Parnia's book.

David

They aimed to gather statistics on the distribution of NDEs in Germany, similar to how Gallup conducts polls for predicting U.S. presidential elections. That's why they used ZUMA, known for its expertise in survey methodologies. ZUMA utilizes random sampling to reach a statistically representative sample of the entire German population, ensuring that everyone has an equal chance of being selected, and no one is excluded.

To quote the article:


I understand that this dataset doesn't align with your views on NDEs, and as such, you attempt to explain them as part of a materialist conspiracy. However, I remain unconvinced.

Childish insults/accusations aside, you're not really addressing the central point of my criticism. All we're getting here are some questionable numbers with no access to the raw data.

20% of people fear death more after an NDE? Okay, what were their NDEs like?

They even mention other death related paranormal events that people attested to, but we don't get any deep investigations there either.

I think you should set aside your bias and realize that if the shoe was on the other foot, and the survey supported the proponent view, you would be digging into the results and criticizing the methodology. It's at best a preliminary investigation that actually says very little.

Regarding cultural backgrounds, I would say NDE's reports are distinctly odd from Christian, other related religions, or atheist points of view. Only the relatively small number of people - such as us - would recognise what had just happened - people would not come up with an NDE story that fitted their culture.

The historical record is at least a bit complicated here. I vaguely recall an argument that medieval European [NDEs] helped develop the idea of Purgatory, but I'd need to double check that.

Other cultures also have their beliefs changed due to NDEs.