Induced after death communication

#1
i have recently read some information regarding induced after death communication. while it seems intriguing i am wondering how exactly it works, if the patient is in a hypnotised or sleep like state then would the spirit their seeing not just be a hallucination?
 
#2
Is that a meaningful question, how is hallucination defined or interpreted in this context? If it simply means the person sees or perceives something by means other than the normal five senses, does it help to explain anything, or does it merely leave the topic where it was, at the starting point.
 
#3
i meant is there evidence to suggest that what they are seeing is a genuine real spirit of a deceased loved one or a trick conjured up by the mind.
 
#5
Read the experiencers reports here:
http://www.induced-adc.com/experiences/

Once case includes veridical information, in other cases the experiencers say the experience was real. Most people can tell the difference between a dream or hallucination and a real experience.


Botkin and Hogan's book refutes the assertion that IADC are due to hallucinations and the book contains examples of veridical, shared, and concurrent IADC's.

INDUCED AFTER DEATH COMMUNICATION

A New Therapy for Healing Grief and Trauma

ALLAN L. BOTKIN, Psy.D.

WITH R. CRAIG HOGAN, PH. D.
...
1. IADCs are remarkably consistent across experiencers, not idiosyncratic
as hallucinations are.
...
2. Many IADCs contain information unknown to the experiencer that is
later verified to be true.



3. Experiencers commonly perceive messages they don't want to hear or
don't expect to hear and would not be able to imagine because of their
psychological limitations.


4. Many messages contain perspectives far beyond the patient's ability to
stand outside of the situation, evaluate it, diagnose the need, fabricate
the perfect scenario to satisfy the need, enact it in a mental drama, and
be so convincing to the psyche that it reverses the patient's beliefs and
heals long-standing, intractable trauma and grief. Years of psychother-
apy were not able to affect the patient's beliefs that created intense feel-
ings of guilt and anger, but these experiences heal in minutes. The
IADC messages violate the patient's belief system by showing it to be
misleading or false and the patient accepts the intruding perspective as
truth, immediately reversing a deeply rooted belief system without ques-
tion.


5. Nearly all of the most reliable witnesses, the experiencers themselves,
assert strongly, at times defiantly, that they communicated with the
deceased.

...

6. The experiences are always positive and loving. They always contain the
exact comforting and insightful message the patients need. The experi-
ences are strikingly different from the scenes the patient might construct
from whole cloth, considering the normal inclinations of human beings
to be negative, judgmental, and unloving, and the anger and guilt in
which the patients are embroiled that brought them to therapy.


7. We now have on record a number of sessions during which people in
the room with the experiencer (observers and therapists) have had pri-
vate mental experiences while the experiencer was quietly having an
IADC, and the experiences have been identical to the experiencer's
IADCs.
...
We discovered that an observer in the room with the patient and psy-
chotherapist as the IADC occurs seems to be able to eavesdrop on the
internal IADC experience the patient is having. The preliminary evidence
for the eavesdropping appears strong, and it was replicated across thera-
pists, observers, and patients. We came to call the incidents "shared
IADCs." A variant of it, in which the observer experienced a separate ADC
during the same session and involving the same deceased people that
appeared in the patient's IADC, we termed "concurrent ADCs."
 
#6
In another context that of NDEs, both Sartori and Parnia have independently expressed that a hallucination is a very different type of experience to the NDE. However, they would be using the word 'hallucination' as a technical term with a tightly-defined meaning. I've a feeling that among non-specialists, the word is used more loosely, sometimes to denote uncertainty over the source of the experience and occasionally as a pejorative term.

Certainly in the case of receiving after-death communications, these can take many forms, including what we might describe as an 'ordinary' dream. However, we should not use that as an excuse to dismiss the experience, on the contrary, dreams can be a valid source of all sorts of knowledge, ranging from precognition or clairvoyance to insights both mundane and spiritual. In addition there are sometimes experiences which though nominally a dream, can take the form of a reality at least as real as the one we experience while awake.
 
#7
An interesting short essay on IADCs on Michael Tymn's blog:

http://whitecrowbooks.com/michaelty...osure_with_induced_after_death_communication/ .

What are supposedly spirits of the deceased immediately come to and appear to those needing closure, forgiveness, etc. whenever called using the special procedure, regardless of how long since death, the personality of the departed person, the circumstances of the death, etc. I think it is more likely that the phenomenon is illusory, generated by a subconscious mind that wants to heal itself. The veridical aspects could be due to ESP on the part of the unconscious mind.
 
#8
Botkin and Hogan's book refutes the assertion that IADC are due to hallucinations and the book contains examples of veridical, shared, and concurrent IADC's.

Many messages contain perspectives far beyond the patient's ability to
stand outside of the situation, evaluate it, diagnose the need, fabricate
the perfect scenario to satisfy the need, enact it in a mental drama, and
be so convincing to the psyche that it reverses the patient's beliefs and
heals long-standing, intractable trauma and grief.

The experiences are always positive and loving. They always contain the
exact comforting and insightful message the patients need.
If these kinds of messages and experiences are actually the spirits of the departed this has a lot to say about the nature of whatever it is that survives. It evidently isn't the ideosyncratic and flawed personality of the physical person - it seems more to be some sort of higher self or soul of the departed, which has about as much in common with the physical person as a butterfly has with the caterpillar that precedes it.

Another interpretation is that these experiences are generated by the higher self or soul of the IADCer himself. This would manifest in the person through the unconscious mind, and know everything there is to know about the person. The same conclusion would follow, that whatever it is that survives is not the cherished personal self, and that survival may not be meaningful in any human sense.
 
#9
If these kinds of messages and experiences are actually the spirits of the departed this has a lot to say about the nature of whatever it is that survives. It evidently isn't the ideosyncratic and flawed personality of the physical person - it seems more to be some sort of higher self or soul of the departed, which has about as much in common with the physical person as a butterfly has with the caterpillar that precedes it.
Maybe here and now you do not understand, but the flawed self and the higher self are the same, but taken from different perspectives, so postmortem survival remains significant from a human point of view.
 
#10
Maybe here and now you do not understand, but the flawed self and the higher self are the same, but taken from different perspectives, so postmortem survival remains significant from a human point of view.

How do you know this? If the communicating being is actually the IADCer's higher self or soul, then it is obviously separate from the IADCer's human personality, which exists separately during the IADC. If the being that appears is the dead person's spirit or soul, it would seem that little or nothing of the human personality remains, since the human personality would not likely have such unconditional love regardless of the circumstances or the death, like murder, etc.
 
#11
How do you know this? If the communicating being is actually the IADCer's higher self or soul, then it is obviously separate from the IADCer's human personality, which exists separately during the IADC. If the being that appears is the dead person's spirit or soul, it would seem that little or nothing of the human personality remains, since the human personality would not likely have such unconditional love regardless of the circumstances or the death, like murder, etc.
From the IADC does not follow that the personality of the deceased is gone, but part of a greater whole, as with the cases of mediumship.
 
Top