Hi Mark: Modern science is always going to get this wrong because they assume the brain, the body, the physical world is absolute... it's like studying the little finger to figure out what the hand is... that case is probably very unique... there is potential that the etheric double can move the physical body... if the automatic disconnect function of the separation sequence malfunctions... this is where you need to study the phenomenon if you want to understand it... you need to go from the 90 percent to the 10 percent... not the other way around... the case where the etheric double moves the body is a failure of the sleep paralysis mechanism which is designed to disconnect the active dream mind from the physical body preventing it from acting out the dream... the anxiety of the individual probably caused a partial disengagement of the paralysis mechanism thus the body responded to the dream minds activity... 

In a way, the brain is like a radio receiver. No matter what theory somebody comes up with for a radio, radio waves and the stations that broadcast them won't go away.

Because of experiences I've had, I can see why some NDE people are certain about what they experience.

The thing is, when you understand something in a spiritual manner it is different than when you understand something physically. Consider Out of Body Dude' recent experience as posted on his thread.  Because I've experienced something similar, albeit in a different manner, I'm able to understand what he was getting at.

If Dude considers what he experienced with his old way of thinking he might doubt what he experienced. If he tunes into the feeling that enabled him to be certain as he had his experience, he won't doubt what he understood.

Unless a scientist has experienced in a similar way, I don't see how he or she can conclude that NDEs aren't valid proof of the existence of the before/now/afterlife. To conclude in such a way is very unscientific.

I'd build on that as i think some of you already suggest - that just because you find a section of brain correlates with a particular experience or function does not mean that it all originates in the brain.

One classic argument in that respect often is about whether the brain as your personal computer is the seat of all consciousness and more besides, or instead is just an interfacing the device to a variety of data/knowledge sources outside of the physical.

Viewed from the latter perspective the fact that particular experience tends to be correlated with activity in certain parts of the brain means relatively little.

It's an issue that arises frequently in academic research. It's one thing to find a statistical correlation between different events (i.e. one is usually found with the other), but it proves nothing in respect of their linkage in terms of cause and effect.

The tendency is to apply the theoretical preference that fits and is preferred, and to quickly move on to assuming a cause and effect linkage that validates the theory.

A classic case of this is 'end justifies the means' thinking - of the sort that leads to 'just wars', 'good wars', or whatever.

That said one of the imponderables of this territory is that while OOB and similar experience can be very convincing, you can never (in the rational, linear and scientific sense) be sure it's what you think it is either. We in the end must go with our intuition...

Dave,
"Things change slowly..."

'We don't have to', 'we can'. Groups are like a bunch of turtles walking through fields of peanut butter. I think the brain is a receiver for a spirit, which is a thread of a greater self. I could spend ages trying to prove it/"change the world" to suit my views. And I can get on with it, regardless of group consensus. Interesting though to talk about spiritual matters, as a social aspect and a personal broadening of horizons if that's the case, but each to his or her own.

Mark Andrew wrote on Oct 14^th, 2009 at 11:30pm:


When 'theories' about OBE become a personal experience then to you they are no longer a theory. When articles try to explain things they themselves are only theorizing about don't carry much weight