Near Death experiences and the scientific method.

[Dan From Smithville]

Making claims aren’t explanations.

Making claims aren’t evidence.

Sadly, Ben don’t understand either. And we both know that he didn’t answer your questions, because he confused claims with explanations.

I think we are in the position of being up against omniscience. Clearly we cannot overcome someone with complete knowledge of everything. Poor, mere us.

I agree with you over that confusion. But I also think my questions were unanswered, because it was clear to everyone that they could not be answered. I got responses, but those responses were not answers. Although, they were telling information regarding claims and claimants.

Without evidence and really knowing, responses are just rabbit holes and gap fluff.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Thinking involves volition and discretion and consideration on the part of the waking state ego self, this thinking mind's reality is represented by the concept' thinking' and it is not the same reality as represented by the concept 'dreaming.'. I know what you are thinking wrt the imaginary reality of the dream state and the mind's reactions to it, but it not thinking per se, it is the reality represented by the concept 'dream'.

Now if you respond to this post with another 'oh well I'm not saying they are the same', we will leave it at that as we are in complete agreement. But if you insist that you are thinking in your dreams in the same way as when you are awake, then there is no agreement.

I'm sorry but this is gibberish.

I am someone who studies psychology and the brain - I'm sorry, but you sound like someone who doesn't understand how the brain works. We don't talk about "waking state ego self" when discussing thought processes in the brain. That sounds like a lot of woo-woo.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Even when we are awake, our mind is not always in the thinking state, our mind can be in the reverie state, it can be in the intuitive mode, an EEG would 'see' brainwaves alter depending on what was going on in the mind. So when we dream in the sleep state, it is different again, but the EEG can't tell us precisely what the mind is involved with.

One doesn't have to raise 'spiritual realms' to understand the more spooky aspects of dreams, such as prescience, etc.. There is such a thing as a collective consciousness, egregores, etc., that our minds are involved with at all times, and from which our minds register input when and if the input is seen as sufficiently important to process. I must say here that like intelligence, some people are smart, others are dumb, so to with so called psychic phenomena, inputs from the collective consciousness, etc., some people minds and hearts are less sensitive than others.

Dreaming is not thinking, the EEG does not lie, the mind is processing data, sometimes even the same data, differently in the sleep state then when awake.

But here you are positing spiritual realms in an attempt to explain something that you can't otherwise explain. So if you "don't have to raise 'spiritual realms' to understand the more spooky aspects of dreams," then why are you doing just that?

 

[SkepticThinker]

There is a spiritual realm,

This is a claim that is not in evidence.

but I do not need to raise that in order to understand how some dreams can be prescient, etc..

And yet you have, without actually offering any explanation.

As I mentioned above, there is a collective consciousness of humanity. Even a football club has a collective consciousness of sorts, the Catholics, etc., Such collectives may be called egregores, and they act as a sort of group soul, All members are subconsciously inputting data from the collective. Given the more immediate real time processing of priority data in the awake state, the collective priorities are more likely to be processed in the dream state.

I will add that yes, a truly religious soul whose mind is quite centered and at peace with itself, may have input from the spiritual realms.

When you can demonstrate the veracity of your claims, please let me know.
I want to believe as many true things as possible.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I'm sorry but this is gibberish.

I am someone who studies psychology and the brain - I'm sorry, but you sound like someone who doesn't understand how the brain works. We don't talk about "waking state ego self" when discussing thought processes in the brain. That sounds like a lot of woo-woo.

So you are telling readers that the concept of 'waking state ego self' is not understandable to you...OMG!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But here you are positing spiritual realms in an attempt to explain something that you can't otherwise explain. So if you "don't have to raise 'spiritual realms' to understand the more spooky aspects of dreams," then why are you doing just that?

Haha, because I, unlike an atheist, has a mind that operates outside the box. the box that excludes spiritual realms as a possible reality.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

This is a claim that is not in evidence.
And yet you have, without actually offering any explanation.
When you can demonstrate the veracity of your claims, please let me know.
I want to believe as many true things as possible.

True things do not depend on your wants one way or the other, the atheist who has their mind boxed off from the wholeness of reality does not want the truth.

[/QUOTE]

 

[SkepticThinker]

So you are telling readers that the concept of 'waking state ego self' is not understandable to you...OMG!

What I'm saying is that it's not a term used in the study of the brain.

It's some kind of mystical stuff, asserted without evidence, as you've demonstrated here.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Haha, because I, unlike an atheist, has a mind that operates outside the box. the box that excludes spiritual realms as a possible reality.

Um okay.

Perhaps you could actually address the content of the question ...
But here you are positing spiritual realms in an attempt to explain something that you can't otherwise explain. So if you "don't have to raise 'spiritual realms' to understand the more spooky aspects of dreams," then why are you doing just that?

Your ability to demonstrate your claims has absolutely nothing to do with atheists, and everything to do with you.
If you can't show it, then you don't know it. Can you show it, or not?

 

[SkepticThinker]

True things do not depend on your wants one way or the other, the atheist who has their mind boxed off from the wholeness of reality does not want the truth.

[/QUOTE]
You can't demonstrate a single one of your claims.
Thanks for the attempted insult though, it demonstrates the vapidity of your position.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What I'm saying is that it's not a term used in the study of the brain.

It's some kind of mystical stuff, asserted without evidence, as you've demonstrated here.

What pray tell is mystical about "waking state ego self", please explain why?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Um okay.

Perhaps you could actually address the content of the question ...
But here you are positing spiritual realms in an attempt to explain something that you can't otherwise explain. So if you "don't have to raise 'spiritual realms' to understand the more spooky aspects of dreams," then why are you doing just that?

Your ability to demonstrate your claims has absolutely nothing to do with atheists, and everything to do with you.
If you can't show it, then you don't know it. Can you show it, or not?

Haha...an atheist does not accept the concept of 'spiritual realms' as valid in a discussion that involves spiritual realms. If you weren't an atheist, you could validate it for yourself with appropriate religious practice, so you have no excuse for not accepting the reality represented by the concept of spiritual realms except a baseless belief in its non-existence.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You can't demonstrate a single one of your claims.
Thanks for the attempted insult though, it demonstrates the vapidity of your position.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I understand that some ghosts are ghosts because they do not understand they are dead and thus remain attached to their astral forms. So I wonder if some atheists are so attached to this form world (the 5%), that when their physical body dies, they will refuse to accept the spiritual kingdom and carry on as a ghost in limbo. Sad if they are still demanding proof of a spiritual realm before they will accept it when they are already it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

So this shows that 100% of all existence is an undivided one, ie, it is non-dual. All apparent aspects of the one universal field are relative due to a narrowed observation, this is what I refer to as duality.

I might add for those who may want to try, the religious practice of stilling the mind so that there is not dualistic conceptualizations going on, brings about pure awareness of the underlying unity of the universal field that some practitioners may call God, Brahman, Nirvana, Tao, etc..

Suck it and see is the Way, not the never ending dualistic conceptualization about it.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Remember, the NDE reality is naturally experienced consistent within the scope of understanding of existence of the soul. Note that James was a pilot and lapsed Christian in life and this naturally factors into the NDE experience. A Muslim would experience an NDE differently though the parts pertaining to loved ones back on Earth would be much the same. An atheist say who had learnt some elementary religion as a child could conceivably have an experience like James if their soul felt genuine remorse and humility before the Lord of existence.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Haha...an atheist does not accept the concept of 'spiritual realms' as valid in a discussion that involves spiritual realms. If you weren't an atheist, you could validate it for yourself with appropriate religious practice, so you have no excuse for not accepting the reality represented by the concept of spiritual realms except a baseless belief in its non-existence.

Anybody should be able to validate it, if it is true. Whether it be an atheist, theist, believer, communist, anarchist, dog lover, wine afficionada, hairdresser, etc., etc., etc.

That. Is. The. Point.
Why you don't get it, I don't know at this point.

 

[SkepticThinker]

What pray tell is mystical about "waking state ego self", please explain why?

It's not something I've ever come across in my studies of the brain.

What's your definition of it?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Look at what you've reduced yourself to.
This is just getting sad at this point.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It's not something I've ever come across in my studies of the brain.

What's your definition of it?

Ok, bear with me this is pretty deep.

First "waking state" means being awake, not asleep. To not be asleep is to be awake and thus to be in the waking state. Do you understand?

Second, "ego self" refers to the cognitive mind self, not the physical body self. Do you understand?