why denying the existence of The Light and The Tunnel among academia?

[tjssailor]

We all have a common physiology with similar brains. Most of the online reporters probably come from similar Judeo-Christian background. It isn't surprising people report similar experiences.

So why do we seem to be different people? Why aren't I staring out of your eyeballs as well as my own? If my brain is creating me then your brain should be creating me as well.

[ParadoxZone]

Jim,

When you say "similar Judeo-Christian backgrounds" what are you referring to? Is it exposure to some similar myths, etc?

[Jim Cross]

We all have a common physiology with similar brains. Most of the online reporters probably come from similar Judeo-Christian background. It isn't surprising people report similar experiences.

So why do we seem to be different people? Why aren't I staring out of your eyeballs as well as my own? If my brain is creating me then your brain should be creating me as well.

I don't know why the idea that we are similar but separate is difficult for you to understand. It would seem to be a non-controversial idea.

[Jim Cross]

Jim,

When you say "similar Judeo-Christian backgrounds" what are you referring to? Is it exposure to some similar myths, etc?

Yes. Many posting online would come from a background that believed in a soul, life after death, probably heaven and hell and angels, and possibly the idea of meeting loved ones who have passed in heaven.

In addition to that, we now have decades of books, accounts, and movies about NDEs. Many people have become familiar with the accounts.

This, along with our cultural background, sets up a narrative framework for understanding any experience one might have near death.

[Eugene I]

In addition to that, we now have decades of books, accounts, and movies about NDEs. Many people have become familiar with the accounts.
This, along with our cultural background, sets up a narrative framework for understanding any experience one might have near death.

Before Dr. Moody published his first book describing NDE accounts nobody knew about them, yet most of the accounts he described had the same features - the tunnel, the light, the deceased relatives etc. Also, if these experiences would be a result of Judeo-Christian background, people would be more likely to see the scenes we usually see in the church and religious paintings: winged angels, saints with halos etc (none of which ever had any "tunnels"), but that is not the case. From all NDE accounts I ever read none of them mentioned any "winged angels" or "saints with halos around their heads" whatsoever.

[Jim Cross]

In addition to that, we now have decades of books, accounts, and movies about NDEs. Many people have become familiar with the accounts.
This, along with our cultural background, sets up a narrative framework for understanding any experience one might have near death.

Before Dr. Moody published his first book describing NDE accounts nobody knew about them, yet most of the accounts he described had the same features - the tunnel, the light, the deceased relatives etc. Also, if these experiences would be a result of Judeo-Christian background, people would be more likely to see the scenes we usually see in the church and religious paintings: winged angels, saints with halos etc (none of which ever had any "tunnels"), but that is not the case. From all NDE accounts I ever read none of them mentioned any "winged angels" or "saints with halos around their heads" whatsoever.

To be clear, I am accounting for the similar content of the experience to two separate things that work together.

1- Similar biology, similar brains
2- Similar culture

However, the cultural variability could be significant:

.. the non-western NDEs vary in several ways, particularly in the presence of specific
cultural–religious figures and the distinct absence of certain core features
identified in the dominant NDE prototype. There were notable similarities
between the experiences of the Mapuche people and that of Hawaiians,
with both having dominant themes of landmarks such as volcanoes and no
evidence of any life review, or visions of light. There were also similarities
between the experiences reported in Thailand and India where there did
not appear to be any reports of tunnels, landmarks and visions of light. In
addition, there did not appear to be a meeting of deceased acquaintances;
however, a strong presence of religious figures was noted. In the studies and
narratives reviewed, OBE were documented only when a study clearly
described the experience as OBE.

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/d ... 1&type=pdf

[Papanca]

In addition to that, we now have decades of books, accounts, and movies about NDEs. Many people have become familiar with the accounts.
This, along with our cultural background, sets up a narrative framework for understanding any experience one might have near death.

Before Dr. Moody published his first book describing NDE accounts nobody knew about them, yet most of the accounts he described had the same features - the tunnel, the light, the deceased relatives etc. Also, if these experiences would be a result of Judeo-Christian background, people would be more likely to see the scenes we usually see in the church and religious paintings: winged angels, saints with halos etc (none of which ever had any "tunnels"), but that is not the case. From all NDE accounts I ever read none of them mentioned any "winged angels" or "saints with halos around their heads" whatsoever.

To be clear, I am accounting for the similar content of the experience to two separate things that work together.

1- Similar biology, similar brains
2- Similar culture

However, the cultural variability could be significant:

.. the non-western NDEs vary in several ways, particularly in the presence of specific
cultural–religious figures and the distinct absence of certain core features
identified in the dominant NDE prototype. There were notable similarities
between the experiences of the Mapuche people and that of Hawaiians,
with both having dominant themes of landmarks such as volcanoes and no
evidence of any life review, or visions of light. There were also similarities
between the experiences reported in Thailand and India where there did
not appear to be any reports of tunnels, landmarks and visions of light. In
addition, there did not appear to be a meeting of deceased acquaintances;
however, a strong presence of religious figures was noted. In the studies and
narratives reviewed, OBE were documented only when a study clearly
described the experience as OBE.

https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/d ... 1&type=pdf

Thank you Jim Cross for being a voice of healthy skepticism in this forum.

I love reading this forum, a lot of insightful comments and conversations, but without people like Jim Cross it often devolves into confirmation bias and circle jerking.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Thank you Jim Cross for being a voice of healthy skepticism in this forum.

I love reading this forum, a lot of insightful comments and conversations, but without people like Jim Cross it often devolves into confirmation bias and circle jerking.

Yeah well, comments suggestive of 'circle jerking' seem more to do with cynicism than skepticism. Out of curiosity, are you then suggesting that a researcher like Dr. Bruce Greyson, in the interview referenced above, did not enter into his decades of investigation with healthy skepticism, and is also engaged in gullible confirmation bias? I think that most of the points being made here are just agreeing with Greyson when he states that scientific academia, with its focus being primarily about what can be measured and quantified in some objective way, as it currently stands, has no definitive explanation for these events. And hence it opens up the possibility that explanations taking into account a counter-materialist premise may just be worth considering, until some definitive scientific explanation comes about, if indeed it ever does.

[Jim Cross]

Thank you Jim Cross for being a voice of healthy skepticism in this forum.

I love reading this forum, a lot of insightful comments and conversations, but without people like Jim Cross it often devolves into confirmation bias and circle jerking.

Yeah well, comments suggestive of 'circle jerking' seem more to do with cynicism than skepticism. Out of curiosity, are you then suggesting that a researcher like Dr. Bruce Greyson, in the interview referenced above, did not enter into his decades of investigation with healthy skepticism, and is also engaged in gullible confirmation bias? I think that most of the points being made here are just agreeing with Greyson when he states that scientific academia, with its focus being primarily about what can be measured and quantified in some objective way, as it currently stands, has no definitive explanation for these events. And hence it opens up the possibility that explanations taking into account a counter-materialist premise may just be worth considering, until some definitive scientific explanation comes about, if indeed it ever does.

As the voice healthy skepticism, I think Greyson is well-intentioned and believes he is doing an objective, scientific investigation.

However, what exactly are the "events" for which science has no explanation?

As even Parnia wrote, we still lack any definitive evidence of experience after blood flow is blocked to the brain. Retrospective studies have provided evidence that some people think it happened but then we have to deal with the possibilities of false or embellished memories (not from a deliberate intent to deceive but from the normal workings of human memory). Prospective studies, like Parnia's, have turned up nothing definitive.

That some people come back from near death with stories of various types isn't really in doubt and doesn't by itself break any conventional science. That the stories of different people have similar elements can be explained by similarities in brains, how the brain works when it shuts down, and similarities in cultural background that people use to interpret the experience. A native Hawaiian might tell us she entered a volcano while an evangelical from Indiana might report he saw Jesus.

Of course, there is still more science to do. Some of it may even be useful for saving more people who undergo cardiac address.

But there is nothing in the current evidence that shakes the foundations of materialistic science or requires a counter-materialist premise.

[Soul_of_Shu]

However, what exactly are the "events" for which science has no explanation?

For starters, how about that event which started him on his investigation, for which he has found no scientific explanation?