Life After Death?

[feral chile]

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201408/seeing-the-light

It's about time this was researched, instead of unscientifically dismissed as being unscientific.

I'm particularly interested, because I had an experience similar to this when my first child was born, except that as far as I know, I wasn't near death. But I was extremely anaemic to start with, and I lost a lot of blood. So my brain would have been low on oxygen.

I remember the tunnel with light at the end, and passing into a light so bright that it hurt my eyes, and an incomprehensible meeting with beings both one and many, and a sense of compassion and welcome.

Except that I think I remembered my birth, and the non verbal experience of it, and that the tunnel is the birth canal, and the light is our first experience of existence outside the womb, and the perception of other beings is our first encounter with other humans, before we've learnt where our bodies and theirs end, and the language to understand/create identity and difference, and physical boundaries.

What do people think?

Edited September 21, 2014 by feral chile

[kaosmark2]

I find it hard to believe that there's life after death and not before birth. If there's something about people that we can't detect in any way that magically stays around when every part of you has stopped, why would it form at conception/birth rather than having been there before?

[feral chile]

I find it hard to believe that there's life after death and not before birth. If there's something about people that we can't detect in any way that magically stays around when every part of you has stopped, why would it form at conception/birth rather than having been there before?

I pretty much equate consciousness with language. And life with consciousness. And I'm fairly certain you need a brain for language.

[zero000]

My interpretation of NDE is that they're a mechanism which helps calm a person when they're close to death so they feel at peace. People see what is culturally appropriate for them, Jesus, Mohammed etc... to feel at peace.

I think Feral is right however in that more research needs to be done in this field. I don't think we'll find evidence of life after death as such, but it will provide interesting insights into consciousness and perception.

[Guest]

I pretty much equate consciousness with language. And life with consciousness. And I'm fairly certain you need a brain for language.

so... (referencing the other thread), if there's just consciousness, would there need to be a language too? Sort of seems a bit pointless (an ability to communicate through just consciousness) if we still need language. Or is it that, if there was just consciousness, there wouldn't be a need to communicate?

I know it was only a hypothetical concept in the first place....

[feral chile]

so... (referencing the other thread), if there's just consciousness, would there need to be a language too? Sort of seems a bit pointless (an ability to communicate through just consciousness) if we still need language. Or is it that, if there was just consciousness, there wouldn't be a need to communicate?

I know it was only a hypothetical concept in the first place....

interesting. Language isn't just to communicate with others though, it's a reference point for all other experiences (obviously, pure consciousness might not be possible just with language alone, as there'd be nothing to describe).

Wow, deep for a Sunday

[Guest]

interesting. Language isn't just to communicate with others though, it's a reference point for all other experiences (obviously, pure consciousness might not be possible just with language alone, as there'd be nothing to describe).

Wow, deep for a Sunday

but if there wasn't language, the reference points would still be there, you just wouldn't be able to talk about them... and, as you say, if anything, language gets in the way

which I think it does, all the time!

Sunday's the best day for 'deep'

[feral chile]

but if there wasn't language, the reference points would still be there, you just wouldn't be able to talk about them... and, as you say, if anything, language gets in the way

which I think it does, all the time!

Sunday's the best day for 'deep'

But say you saw a colour, then a few days later you saw a colour - if you hadn't identified the first colour by classifying it as red (or scarlet, or anything more precise), how could you be sure whether the 2 experiences were of the same colour?

Language allows us to classify - this might be limiting or liberating, I'm not sure - but would every experience lack familiarity if we couldn't sort and file it under memories of 'red'? Would each experience seem totally unique? which, in reality, they must be - which is why I'm not sure if classification is a filter or or an expansion of experience.

Edited September 21, 2014 by feral chile

[Guest]

But say you saw a colour, then a few days later you saw a colour - if you hadn't identified the first colour by classifying it as red (or scarlet, or anything more precise), how could you be sure whether the 2 experiences were of the same colour?

Language allows us to classify - this might be limiting or liberating, I'm not sure - but would every experience lack familiarity if we couldn't sort and file it under memories of 'red'? Would each experience seem totally unique? which, in reality, they must be - which is why I'm not sure if classification is a filter or or an expansion of experience.

I'm going with the filter. As soon as you describe something, it's not as intense, or as full as what you experienced. And people exaggerate too.... it might not be possible to ever recount to another person what you have ever experienced.

People talk to me about colours I've never heard of. And how many times have people argued about what colour something is.. "well, it's more of a deep purple than aubergine" etc...

I am being as obtuse as possible here. But I think I agree with me

Edited September 21, 2014 by tonyblair

[zero000]

Interesting discussion with Stephen Pinker here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5ljEBkCeMQ

He's basically arguing that we don't think in words as such, at least not initially.

Edited September 21, 2014 by zero000

[feral chile]

Interesting discussion with Stephen Pinker here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5ljEBkCeMQ

He's basically arguing that we don't think in words as such, at least not initially.

Now that's interesting. maybe language allows us to provide a context for our experiences, and a way in which to share them, obviously.

I've given this example before, but it's relevant. When my son was little, he hurt himself, and grabbed my hand and put it against the hurt spot, so I could feel the pain for myself. Maybe language can activate parts of the brain like empathy based on observation does, so that we can experience things vicariously.

The more I try to understand life the more it amazes me what consciousness is capable of.

Edited September 21, 2014 by feral chile

[bucko]

this website http://www.cfpf.org.uk/ might be worth a look at.

its called the campaign for philosophical freedom and claims to be the secular scientific case for life after death

The scientific proof that we all survive death.
The philosophical, historical, and religious background.

i'm just not clever enough to get my head round the scientific side of things but i hope its true.

[zero000]

this website http://www.cfpf.org.uk/ might be worth a look at.

its called the campaign for philosophical freedom and claims to be the secular scientific case for life after death

The scientific proof that we all survive death.

The philosophical, historical, and religious background.

i'm just not clever enough to get my head round the scientific side of things but i hope its true.

I don't think there's any scientific basis on that website that suggests that we all survive death. It seems like a load of smart sounding jargon designed to baffle people in to thinking there is something to it that's beyond their comprehension.

Edited September 21, 2014 by zero000

[viberunner]

Your braincells becoming deoxygenated is not evidence they'll wake-up after they cease to function.

That 14 billion years before your life? That's coming-up, except for MUCH longer.

[kaosmark2]

Language allows us to classify - this might be limiting or liberating, I'm not sure - but would every experience lack familiarity if we couldn't sort and file it under memories of 'red'? Would each experience seem totally unique? which, in reality, they must be - which is why I'm not sure if classification is a filter or or an expansion of experience.

Can you not think of things that are similar but not in a way you have the language to describe? Can you not identify sensations without having appropriate vocabulary? I don't disagree with the importance of language, but I think you can perceive and associate without requiring terminology.

[mrtourette]

the secular scientific case for life after death

?

[bucko]

?

the website basically bashes religion and the mainstream scientific folk for not making it public that life after death happens.

[feral chile]

Can you not think of things that are similar but not in a way you have the language to describe? Can you not identify sensations without having appropriate vocabulary? I don't disagree with the importance of language, but I think you can perceive and associate without requiring terminology.

I don't know, you wouldn't have words like 'same' 'similar' different' so you might not have the ability to classify.

It does focus you - I remember growing up a tomboy, and wanting to build campfires instead of playing with dolls, I'd never heard of feminism or penis envy, I didn't have words to describe what I felt, and I think putting a label on it helped. (on the feeling, not the penis).

Edited September 22, 2014 by feral chile

[salvador wali]

Sunday's the best day for 'deep'

Just what the wife said to me yesterday

[Guest]

I don't know, you wouldn't have words like 'same' 'similar' different' so you might not have the ability to classify.

It does focus you - I remember growing up a tomboy, and wanting to build campfires instead of playing with dolls, I'd never heard of feminism or penis envy, I didn't have words to describe what I felt, and I think putting a label on it helped. (on the feeling, not the penis).

some things you can't describe though, especially feelings and emotions. Not being able to say 'same' or 'similar' is relatively meaningless, and totally bound by our own pre-conceptions of how we do communicate.

[Guest]

Just what the wife said to me yesterday

very good Edited September 22, 2014 by tonyblair

[feral chile]

some things you can't describe though, especially feelings and emotions. Not being able to say 'same' or 'similar' is relatively meaningless, and totally bound by our own pre-conceptions of how we do communicate.

They're more difficult to communicate and learn the language for, granted. But language makes us aware of them.

I don't think I've ever felt jealousy, but maybe I call it something else...it doesn't sound like anything I've felt, it's not the same as being upset. But I wouldn't know about it if not for language.

[feral chile]

When I had my 'near death' experience, I had a horrible sensation that something significant had happened, but the more I tried to hold on to it, the more I tried to constrain it with language, to make sense of it, the more it slipped away.

Edited September 22, 2014 by feral chile

[Guest]

When I had my 'near death' experience, I had a horrible sensation that something significant had happened, but the more I tried to hold on to it, the more I tried to constrain it with language, to make sense of it, the more it slipped away.

That's a great analogy (is that the right word?) for how language could be more of an inhibitor than an enabler

[ThomThomDrum]

Language just gives an impression of what someone thinks/feels. The same can be said of movement, music, touch, art etc etc....................