David Bailey
Member
Doesn't this explanation illustrate the problem with using an idealist model - even if it is ultimately right, it is very, very confusing and messy to use (or is it just me?).Again, from an Idealist perspective, people could be regarded as not so much "separating" from their bodies during NDEs (a dualistic way of putting it) as entering a state where, temporarily, they don't perceive their bodies and brains as being, respectively, their lives and individual mentations. Instead, since the notion that these icons are literal agents is no longer sustainable, they lose this ordinary perception and connect/reconnect with a more refined, "non-physical" perception of their truer nature; with their being processes occurring in the consciousness of MAL (though they might not apprehend it in exactly those terms).
The reality as reported by NDE experiencers fits much more neatly into a Dualist model, and as I keep on saying, scientific theories don't really need to represent ultimate truth. Physics is happy to use QM and GR, knowing that these two foundational theories of modern physics are incompatible. If ultimately the Dualist model turns out to be underpinned by an Idealist model, nothing will have been lost!
If asked, I think physicists would claim that either of those two theories will probably only need the tiniest tweak - at least in normal conditions.
David
Last edited: