NDE's the problem ??

#21
To me, the ethical problem is larger. I just don't dig how a tremendously loving source, especially one, the love of which is "millions of times greater than anything humans can imagine" would NOT contact someone who was undergoing suffering, assuming that it could, or would require them to undergo abominations of suffering first before it would even contact them.

One really has to assume that it can't, imo, for this to make any real ethical sense.
 
#22
Hello everyone,

Many thanks for the diversity of views here. I thought I may get some common sense from a forum such as this, and it so healthy to see so many takes on the problem. It has certainly given me pause for thought !.

I am particularly interested in possible 'depth' of experience. it may be that an individual can only 'trigger' such an event the closer to physical death they become. The notion of some individuals without 'souls' also is intriguing to say the least !.

The notion of close to physical death is an interesting one, as some individuals who have remained unconscious and in a critical state for long lengths of time ( ie 20 mins and above ) report nothing while other do. Again it may be due to what is taking place in the body at that time. The majority of cardiac arrest sufferers we cannot ask as the survival rate after such an event is in the order of 5% so many indeed do die. I clearly remember a patient many years ago having a pacemaker fitted and he arrested on the table, but we got him round very quickly. and he told me he had seen me working from the ceiling !!! ( all before I knew about this )

As for the issue of survival I am somewhat on the fence, although an investigation of multiple sources and approaches; including that of NDE research and meata analysis of data certainly raises its possibility. However thank you all for your responses and viewpoints. I certainly look forward to contributing where I can.
 
#23
If the NDE phenomena is real, and is applicable to ALL humans ( just as -breathing or dreaming is for instance ) why do we only get a small percentage reporting NDE's or at least having memory of them ??. I do not think you can say this is a universal phenomena if only a small % of people report this. Many more report nothing after say a cardiac arrest, ie consciousness ceases to exist, or at leas to them it seems to.
Among the two examples of universal phenomena you cite, we see one (dreaming) which is usually not remembered after the fact; I undoubtedly dreamed last night, and may have had very profound or special dreams, at that, but I remember nothing of it now. I have heard accounts of researchers having subjects who temporarily woke from their coma or what-have-you and described themselves as having just been in the midst of a Near-Death Experience, but who remembered nothing of the matter when interviewed days later. The group (people who come near to death or die and are revived) who you think "should" be having Near-Death Experiences are also a group of people likely to be going through brain trauma strongly associated with impaired memory formation-- ergo, it seems prima facie quite plausible that far larger numbers of people have Near-Death Experiences than retain the memory of those experiences.

It is also the case that although there are various circumstances broadly associated with Near-Death Experiences, we really don't know of any one precise trigger for the experience, such that everyone who undergoes X ordeal "should" have one. Heart attacks are broadly associated with obesity, indolence, high cholesterol, etc., but not every obese, indolent, high-cholesterol individual has a heart attack; in fact, only a fraction do. This means neither that heart attacks are not real or that they are not caused by the things they seem to be.
 
Top