Survival

Any topics primarily focused on metaphysics can be discussed here, in a generally casual way, where conversations may take unexpected turns.

Moderator: Soul_of_Shu

Mark Tetzner
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:10 am

Survival

Post by Mark Tetzner »

BK just posted this on his fb-page. Where and when did this win an award?
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/Winnin ... 8yUA8cIh7Y
User avatar
Martin_
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2021 5:54 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Martin_ »

I would like to know that too. And also: only in facebook? Not even on his own site? Really? maybe it's "coming soon".

2nd edit: it has the letterhead of Essentia Foundation. Can't find it on their site either, I am assuming that it will show up there soon enough.

3rd edit: here is the contest https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/contest_winners3.php

4th edit: I'm actually skipping his article for the moment, and reading the winner: Jeffrey Mishlove!! (His essay is worth 10x more than Bernardos, at least if you look at the award amount.)
"I don't understand." /Unknown
Jim Cross
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Jim Cross »

Mark Tetzner wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:24 am BK just posted this on his fb-page. Where and when did this win an award?
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/Winnin ... 8yUA8cIh7Y
Seems like just a reworking of old and familiar ideas.

He still seems to miss the fact that psychedelic experiences can seem intense and expansive while certain aspects of brain activity can appear reduced (while others may appear increased). This also overlooks the observations relating to meditators showing stronger and more synchronous activity.

No clear conception of what survives after disassociation ends that makes postmortem survival in any way meaningful.

The rest of it is just reworking of the usual critiques against physicalism. The ultimate problem is that even if you disprove physicalism that doesn't by itself prove anything else including survival after death.
Mark Tetzner
Posts: 112
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:10 am

Re: survivival

Post by Mark Tetzner »

Jim Cross wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:43 pm
Mark Tetzner wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:24 am BK just posted this on his fb-page. Where and when did this win an award?
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/Winnin ... 8yUA8cIh7Y
Seems like just a reworking of old and familiar ideas.

He still seems to miss the fact that psychedelic experiences can seem intense and expansive while certain aspects of brain activity can appear reduced (while others may appear increased). This also overlooks the observations relating to meditators showing stronger and more synchronous activity.

No clear conception of what survives after disassociation ends that makes postmortem survival in any way meaningful.

The rest of it is just reworking of the usual critiques against physicalism. The ultimate problem is that even if you disprove physicalism that doesn't by itself prove anything else including survival after death.
you are more than just a philosopher you are a real critic pointing at his shortcomings...
User avatar
Martin_
Posts: 188
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2021 5:54 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Martin_ »

Mishlove ( https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/docs/1st.pdf ) , p96:
We hide from our own deepest identity when
we postulate that consciousness is
extinguished with the death of the body –
resulting in a severe gap in our capacity for
self-knowledge.
"I don't understand." /Unknown
User avatar
Soul_of_Shu
Posts: 1606
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:48 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Soul_of_Shu »

Martin_ wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:53 am I would like to know that too. And also: only in facebook? Not even on his own site? Really? maybe it's "coming soon".

2nd edit: it has the letterhead of Essentia Foundation. Can't find it on their site either, I am assuming that it will show up there soon enough.

3rd edit: here is the contest https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/contest_winners3.php

4th edit: I'm actually skipping his article for the moment, and reading the winner: Jeffrey Mishlove!! (His essay is worth 10x more than Bernardos, at least if you look at the award amount.)
Yeah, BK's essay was awarded one of 11 'runner-up' prizes, aside from the top 3, Mishlove's getting top prize. Curiously, in the 'reading' section of the Essentia site, not one of the essays/papers published there was written by Bernardo. Presumably he's the curator who decides what gets published there, and so that may preclude publishing his own pieces—other than those attributed to 'The editors', which likely includes him.
Here out of instinct or grace we seek
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
User avatar
Eugene I
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:49 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Eugene I »

Martin_ wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:53 am I'm actually skipping his article for the moment, and reading the winner: Jeffrey Mishlove!! (His essay is worth 10x more than Bernardos, at least if you look at the award amount.)
me too
"Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kanzas anymore" Dorothy
Jim Cross
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Jim Cross »

Mark Tetzner wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:58 pm
Jim Cross wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 1:43 pm
Mark Tetzner wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 11:24 am BK just posted this on his fb-page. Where and when did this win an award?
https://www.bigelowinstitute.org/Winnin ... 8yUA8cIh7Y
Seems like just a reworking of old and familiar ideas.

He still seems to miss the fact that psychedelic experiences can seem intense and expansive while certain aspects of brain activity can appear reduced (while others may appear increased). This also overlooks the observations relating to meditators showing stronger and more synchronous activity.

No clear conception of what survives after disassociation ends that makes postmortem survival in any way meaningful.

The rest of it is just reworking of the usual critiques against physicalism. The ultimate problem is that even if you disprove physicalism that doesn't by itself prove anything else including survival after death.
you are more than just a philosopher you are a real critic pointing at his shortcomings...
Has BK run out of gas? Everything he writes seems to be reworkings of a few ideas he had five or ten years ago.

It also seems to be fundamentally misunderstanding what science does. Science establishes facts then develops models and descriptions that allow predictions. There is no established fact relating to life after death. There is a conjecture that is probably more wishful thinking than anything else. BK's evidence from science even at taken at face value and without criticism can't prove an unestablished fact. Science begins with facts. You don't start with an unproven conjecture and find facts to support it.
User avatar
Eugene I
Posts: 1484
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 9:49 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Eugene I »

Jim Cross wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 3:27 pm It also seems to be fundamentally misunderstanding what science does. Science establishes facts then develops models and descriptions that allow predictions. There is no established fact relating to life after death. There is a conjecture that is probably more wishful thinking than anything else. BK's evidence from science even at taken at face value and without criticism can't prove an unestablished fact. Science begins with facts. You don't start with an unproven conjecture and find facts to support it.
That's right.
It's just that not everything in life is reducible to science
"Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kanzas anymore" Dorothy
Jim Cross
Posts: 527
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:36 pm

Re: survivival

Post by Jim Cross »

Eugene I wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 3:30 pm
Jim Cross wrote: Thu Nov 25, 2021 3:27 pm It also seems to be fundamentally misunderstanding what science does. Science establishes facts then develops models and descriptions that allow predictions. There is no established fact relating to life after death. There is a conjecture that is probably more wishful thinking than anything else. BK's evidence from science even at taken at face value and without criticism can't prove an unestablished fact. Science begins with facts. You don't start with an unproven conjecture and find facts to support it.
That's right.
It's just that not everything in life is reducible to science
Right. I can agree with that but BK's title is: "A rational, empirical case for postmortem survival based solely on mainstream science"
Post Reply