Freethought & Rationalism Archive

yahwehyadayada · 09-20-2002, 07:20 AM

Just wanted to horn in here to note that HD is a he, not a she.

cjack · 09-20-2002, 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by galiel:

you suggest that the pre-science explanations of superstitious human beings provide empirical evidence of the reality of a phenomenon you just admitted was fabricated by theocrats with an agenda.

Of COURSE current accounts of "OBE's" match ancient accounts. The same humans with the same electro-chemistry "experience" them, and the idea of an afterlife is a compelling myth. That doesn't make it true.

The question was "why is HD so afraid of death," and I was trying to answer that. The idea of an afterlife IS a compelling myth, after all.

Quote:

And how can you reconcile such a self-contradictory statement that "OBE's and NDE's seem to point to the possibility of an afterlife, and that is very, very comforting for even those of us who no longer accept the notion of gods playing with our fate."

Whence came your afterlife if you have rejected the existence of the supernatural? Ah, but you have not really shed yourself of supernaturalist superstition or the anti-science approach of starting with a conclusion and seeking its justification by any means. You have simply put hip new threads on old-time religion.

I'd say the short answer to the above accusation is that I am open to the possibility of some sort of continued existence after this one ends. As a person who very much enjoys existing, I'd be very interested if someone could present empirical evidence for such an afterlife.

I'm not "seeking justification by any means." I'm just saying that it is also anti-scientific to claim "there is NO afterlife." That is also starting with a conclusion and seeking justification. It would be more proper to say that there is no compelling evidence for an afterlife.

In any case, I wasn't attempting to prove or disprove the existence of an afterlife, but merely trying to explain why this study of OBE's will be so difficult for people to accept.

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: cjack ]

Veil of Fire · 09-20-2002, 09:01 AM

Quote:

I'm not "seeking justification by any means." I'm just saying that it is also anti-scientific to claim "there is NO afterlife." That is also starting with a conclusion and seeking justification.

Welcome to "Science and Skepticism". You've just stumbled onto the cardinal rule of being an atheist here: "It's only non-scientific when FUNDIES do it; when WE do it, it's skepticism."

It's right up there with "If we can't debunk it, it's just the placebo effect."

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: Veil of Fire ]

Marduk · 09-20-2002, 09:28 AM

I can sympathize witnh VoF on this one. Compare the comments of the real scientist who said:

"Neurologist Dr. Bruce Greyson of the University of Virginia said the experiment does not necessarily prove
that all out-of-body experiences are illusions.

"We cannot assume from the fact that electrical stimulation of the brain can induce OBE-like illusions that all
OBEs are therefore illusions," Greyson said.

To what the Kneejerk debunker who can't wait to grab someone's teddy bear said:

"It's another blow against those who believe that the mind and spirit are somehow separate from the brain,"
said psychologist Michael Shermer, director of the Skeptic Society, which seeks to debunk alien abductions
and other paranormal claims.

There is a huge difference between investigation and "we will debunk this" deciding beforehand what is or isn't true.

[ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]

Plebe · 09-20-2002, 10:41 AM

QueenofSwords posted September 20, 2002 04:00 AM
Science should not have to tiptoe around myth.

Science tiptoes around myth in mainstream media all the time and I think it's in recognition of the variable ability of the audience to comprehend or have interest in "the plain facts." Also, we are quite aware of the Political/Economic status of religion and media doesn't want to "bite the hand that feeds them"..Anyone who is a science professional or psychiatry professional already is aware of the way the brain functions and it is in these professions that you will likely tend to find a higher percentage of those holding an agnostic/atheistic/materialistic viewpoint on reality. One "pet" myth put forth in most media for the sake of example is that Alcoholism and other addictions is not a disease when in fact research for the past 50 years already recognizes that there is a definite biochemical makeup that differentiates the addict or potential addict from those who never become addicted. I also know from first hand experience having known someone who has Alcoholism in it's more severe form that there is something or rather, several somethings that differentiate the addict from the non-addictive. The Psychiatrists at the mental hospitals called him a "Recycler" because he would get clean and sober and then along with his underlying manic-depressive disorder at the end point of the manic phase to the depressive he could not stop himself from taking that first drink back to oblivion only to repeat the horrible cycle of being admitted either by ambulance [from calling 911 to rescue him because we found him cyanotic and barely breathing on more than one occasion.] As long as he was in the hospital, the Dr's could stabilize him so that tells me they KNOW how to control his complex of disorders chemically [and to an extent, psychologically]. The only problem is, when they release someone like him, naturally they revert back because they do not have the 24 hr per day supervision and maintenance or the capability to be objective in their self treatment. The saddest thing is that these diseases do not discriminate, before his illnesses worsened over the years he was a successful businessman[owned a few real estate offices] with two degrees, a B.S. in Science and a B.A. in Business-his father was at one time a prestigious M.D. in Oakland in the 1950's & 60's and committed suicide because of depression.

Veil of Fire · 09-20-2002, 12:04 PM

If science didn't tiptoe around myth, nobody would ever be taught the Bhor model of the atom.

Deimos · 09-20-2002, 03:57 PM

I remember the day when I had my first 'what if there's no afterlife' thought. It happened after watching a SciFi film in which an alien craft crashes on Earth. After trying to figure out the ships systems, the scientists discover that the aliens were in fact our creators, who planned on coming back to check on the progress of their experiment.

I remember it quite vividly and it was very frightening at the time, my heart was pounding.

My position on life after death (or perhaps more correctly, consciousness after death) is simply this, I'm not convinced.

If you are floating around during an OBE in which you can see or hear stuff that's going on in the room, why do you need eyes and ears in the first place? It all sounds like some form of internally generated illusion - the brain is great at this kind of thing.

I think I've mentioned before in a previous thread that certain hospitals have installed 'symbols' in ORs etc that can only be seen from a high vantage point. The idea is to see if any patients who report a NDE describe these symbols in their account.

From the grand quantum wave function you came, and back to the grand quantum wave function you shall return.

galiel · 09-21-2002, 06:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Veil of Fire:
If science didn't tiptoe around myth, nobody would ever be taught the Bhor model of the atom.

And if fish had bicycles, floors wouldn't sing.

Feather · 09-21-2002, 06:58 PM

That science even has to tiptoe around myth is just further evidence that most humans are scared emotionally driven ignorant savages and like it.

It makes me physically ill when I experience an individual willingly preferring a lie over the truth.

JohnR · 09-21-2002, 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by marduck:
""We cannot assume from the fact that electrical stimulation of the brain can induce OBE-like illusions that all
OBEs are therefore illusions," Greyson said.
"

I agree with the good Doctor. Simply being able to duplicate sometheing doesn't mean much. You can duplicate most anything.
I see HD's point as well. Why would anyone be in such a hurry to prove that we are stuck in these smelly old bodies anyway?
"I want to lose this skin
that I'm imprisoned in" T. Dog

(Marduck, flying high, over a city near you.)

[ September 19, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]

So that would mean death is just circumcisiom of the soul?

<img src="confused.gif" border="0">

09-20-2002, 09:28 AM	#34
Marduk Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: the 10th planet Posts: 5,065	I can sympathize witnh VoF on this one. Compare the comments of the real scientist who said: "Neurologist Dr. Bruce Greyson of the University of Virginia said the experiment does not necessarily prove that all out-of-body experiences are illusions. "We cannot assume from the fact that electrical stimulation of the brain can induce OBE-like illusions that all OBEs are therefore illusions," Greyson said. To what the Kneejerk debunker who can't wait to grab someone's teddy bear said: "It's another blow against those who believe that the mind and spirit are somehow separate from the brain," said psychologist Michael Shermer, director of the Skeptic Society, which seeks to debunk alien abductions and other paranormal claims. There is a huge difference between investigation and "we will debunk this" deciding beforehand what is or isn't true. [ September 20, 2002: Message edited by: marduck ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-20-2002, 07:20 AM	#31
yahwehyadayada Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: WI Posts: 290	Just wanted to horn in here to note that HD is a he, not a she.

09-20-2002, 10:41 AM	#35
Plebe Regular Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Contra Costa County Posts: 168	QueenofSwords posted September 20, 2002 04:00 AM Science should not have to tiptoe around myth. Science tiptoes around myth in mainstream media all the time and I think it's in recognition of the variable ability of the audience to comprehend or have interest in "the plain facts." Also, we are quite aware of the Political/Economic status of religion and media doesn't want to "bite the hand that feeds them"..Anyone who is a science professional or psychiatry professional already is aware of the way the brain functions and it is in these professions that you will likely tend to find a higher percentage of those holding an agnostic/atheistic/materialistic viewpoint on reality. One "pet" myth put forth in most media for the sake of example is that Alcoholism and other addictions is not a disease when in fact research for the past 50 years already recognizes that there is a definite biochemical makeup that differentiates the addict or potential addict from those who never become addicted. I also know from first hand experience having known someone who has Alcoholism in it's more severe form that there is something or rather, several somethings that differentiate the addict from the non-addictive. The Psychiatrists at the mental hospitals called him a "Recycler" because he would get clean and sober and then along with his underlying manic-depressive disorder at the end point of the manic phase to the depressive he could not stop himself from taking that first drink back to oblivion only to repeat the horrible cycle of being admitted either by ambulance [from calling 911 to rescue him because we found him cyanotic and barely breathing on more than one occasion.] As long as he was in the hospital, the Dr's could stabilize him so that tells me they KNOW how to control his complex of disorders chemically [and to an extent, psychologically]. The only problem is, when they release someone like him, naturally they revert back because they do not have the 24 hr per day supervision and maintenance or the capability to be objective in their self treatment. The saddest thing is that these diseases do not discriminate, before his illnesses worsened over the years he was a successful businessman[owned a few real estate offices] with two degrees, a B.S. in Science and a B.A. in Business-his father was at one time a prestigious M.D. in Oakland in the 1950's & 60's and committed suicide because of depression.

09-20-2002, 12:04 PM	#36
Veil of Fire Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: South Carolina Posts: 451	If science didn't tiptoe around myth, nobody would ever be taught the Bhor model of the atom.

09-20-2002, 03:57 PM	#37
Deimos Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Posts: 97	I remember the day when I had my first 'what if there's no afterlife' thought. It happened after watching a SciFi film in which an alien craft crashes on Earth. After trying to figure out the ships systems, the scientists discover that the aliens were in fact our creators, who planned on coming back to check on the progress of their experiment. I remember it quite vividly and it was very frightening at the time, my heart was pounding. My position on life after death (or perhaps more correctly, consciousness after death) is simply this, I'm not convinced. If you are floating around during an OBE in which you can see or hear stuff that's going on in the room, why do you need eyes and ears in the first place? It all sounds like some form of internally generated illusion - the brain is great at this kind of thing. I think I've mentioned before in a previous thread that certain hospitals have installed 'symbols' in ORs etc that can only be seen from a high vantage point. The idea is to see if any patients who report a NDE describe these symbols in their account. From the grand quantum wave function you came, and back to the grand quantum wave function you shall return.

09-21-2002, 06:58 PM	#39
Feather Veteran Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Gainesville, FL Posts: 1,827	That science even has to tiptoe around myth is just further evidence that most humans are scared emotionally driven ignorant savages and like it. It makes me physically ill when I experience an individual willingly preferring a lie over the truth.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.