NDEs are fascinating! I used to think it was as all bogus- nonsense as related by a dying brain. But the similarities are so striking and the experiences so vivid I can no longer dismiss them.
Even if NDEs are a function of a dying brain, they would still be fascinating. There do however seem to be some problems with the dying brain explanation.
1) These experiences seem to appear when the brain is clinically dead, as defined by the medical science community. No brain waves. No known functioning. So how does a non-functioning organ create such spectacular experiences??
2) Why would evolution create such a feature as NDEs? We can explain the human body in terms of features which assist survival and reproduction. Why would evolution create a spectacular feature for dead people???
Exactly. I've argued the same point about evolution. Especially considering that NDEs are so often transformative. What's the point of having a transformative experience if you're about to die?
Here's another angle that comes to mind. Not sure how useful it is. If NDEs are indeed a window upon some God-like phenomena of reality which is extremely love based... What about dying animals experience of the God-like phenomena?
Does the NDE concept suffer from the Judeo-Christian bias that all of reality is all about humans?
I personally don't have any problem with the notion of an atheistic afterlife. I think that if there is an afterlife, it's nothing "religious" or "supernatural" -- it's just the way the universe works but human science is so far too limited to understand it. There needn't even be any "meaning" behind it, any more than there's meaning to the behaviors of atoms or whatever. I don't have any problem with animals surviving death, either.
I hear you, and that's pretty much my way of looking at it too. Whatever NDE is, it's part of nature.
But to be fair and intellectually honest, if what the NDE experiencers are describing is generally real and accurate, and not a brain induced hallucination etc... Religions have generally pretty much nailed it. Not in every detail, but more broadly. As example, the NDE lines up pretty darn well with the Catholic concept of purgatory I was taught as a child. A life review, angel guides, a place to purify yourself for acceptance in to heaven etc. But as with NDE, we don't really know if the Catholic conception is describing extraordinary human brain experiences, or the nature of reality. I don't how that ever gets sorted out.
However, it does seem possible to nail down out of body experiences, and I'd be interested in what you know about research in that area. Many of these experiences seem to happen in operating rooms. How hard can it be to install message panels that only someone looking from the perspective of the ceiling can see? Is there some other factor here that I'm not understanding?
Yes, I think that's true, too. And the Catholic idea of purgatory has parallels in the Tibetan idea of bardos.
There have been studies of exactly the type you describe: symbols were placed on the tops of medical equipment and cabinets in cardiac wards in the hopes that someone having an OBE would see them. The problem was, the NDErs who had OBEs said that they were so overwhelmed by the experience of being outside their body, and seeing their own body from above, they didn't pay much attention to incidentals in the room. But in at least one study (Penny Sartori's) it was found that only those who claimed to have NDEs could accurately describe their own resuscitation. There are a lot of tantalizing bits of evidence out there....
I'm admittedly ignorant on the subject, but my first impression is that OBE could be an important key to unlocking the credibility of NDEs. And if OBEs are real, they seem provable.
It's just weird to me that such an important possibility is left dangling for years. What's happened to the curiosity of science? Is the OBE topic like the UFO topic, where all the scientists are terrified of being branded crackpots?
As example, in one of the Coming Home videos a patient reported an OBE upon recovery. When challenged she began recounting what had happened in the OR while she was out in considerable detail. Her proof was so inconvenient to the group think that the surgeon got mad and stormed out of the room.
And then.... And then..... Nothing, as best as I can tell. None of the medical staff were curious enough to interview the witnesses and make a record of their reports??
If OBEs are real that radically changes our understanding of consciousness. And science isn't interested? I don't know why I'm surprised by this though actually. For decades the science community looked down it's snooty condescending nose at UFOs reports, until the "UFO kooks" were proven right, and then the science community seems to have nothing to say about that. Same old thing happening here I guess.
Shushan writes, "While these estimates are significant, so is the fact that up to 90% of people who temporarily die or almost die do not report having had NDEs."
Is that the most relevant and potentially useful fact for the question of whether NDEs are universal? I'd be very interested to learn more about studies comparing the NDE experiencers to those who don't report NDEs.
Most people in the modern world remember little if any dreams. In ancient times, most people were very much aware of dreams.
Why would it be any different for NDEs? If we don't pay attention to something that occurs every single night of our lives - at least 90 to 120 minutes of dreams (not to mention a great deal of experience that occurs in non REM sleep, even Stage 3 delta wave sleep) why would it be surprising that we don't remember more obscure states of consciousness like NDEs?
Except that NDErs almost always talk about the experience as being completely real -- and sometimes "more real than real." And it's something that stays with them for the rest of their lives. It seems to be fundamentally different from dreams, so I feel llike it's less likely that someone would forget it if they'd had one. Especially considering the dramatic and emotional content combined with the near-death context.
"And it's something that stays with them for the rest of their lives."
I found that the most compelling aspect of the Coming Home videos I've seen so far. The personalities of the subjects varied widely, from the delicate Irish angel lady, to a macho commercial diver mechanical engineer, and more. But all the subjects projected the same emotional "vibe", if you'll forgive an imprecise term.
For me, it was almost that the NDE story and theologies were just a vehicle for presenting that "vibe". Sometimes I think we might work too hard at coming up with explanations for things, and that can interfere with the sharing of vibe.
I notice this with traditional religions as well. The person who is selling some theological belief system is typically less interesting and persuasive that the person who says little but has the right vibe.
If I understand correctly, DMT users also report experiences that seem "more real than real", and they sometimes encounter entities giving advice etc. My knowledge of this is minimal at best.
True, though interestingly they typically seem to change their minds over time. In his study of DMT users in the UK, Pascal Michael found that they're initially totally convinced of the reality of the experience, including the interdimensional entities they meet, but that conviction gradually wears off over time and they come to understand it was just the drug. That doesn't seem to happen with NDEs. Not that this makes NDEs necessarily "real", but they do seem to be an essentially different type of experience from drugs, dreams, or whatever.
That's a good point, though "universal" in relation the article referred to the content of NDEs rather than their occurrence. I don't think much research has been done on comparing the physical circumstances of patients who don't have NDEs vs those that do, but it's an interesting line of research.
This also makes me wonder why we'd necessarily expect survival after death to occur for everyone. Maybe the consciousness of someone who doesn't have an NDE would have just died had they not been resuscitated, while the consciousness of someone who did have an NDE would have survived.
Wow, that is a very comprehensive article, thank you.
I was interested to read that some NDEs seem to include negative hell-like experiences. I was wondering about that.
Shushan writes, “Mainstream” Western scholarship has completely failed to recognize the significance of NDEs to afterlife and other religious and “supernatural” beliefs."
This seems to be a pattern. I spent a couple of years trying to interest philosophers in nuclear weapons. No luck at all. The science community seems to be the last to understand that UFOs are real. So it doesn't surprise me if academics are slow to find interest in NDEs. I'm coming to this theory that experts of all types are very useful within the realm of what's considered "realistic and reasonable" but they typically aren't in a position to explore beyond that limited circle.
I'm a very analytical person, but in watching the Coming Home videos I've begun to question that process a bit in regards to NDEs. I'm now wondering if it will ever be possible to understand or prove anything about NDEs, and more to the point, am questioning whether that matters.
For me, the most persuasive part of the videos was not evidence of this or that, or the conclusions of the experiencers, but the emotional atmosphere that seemed to be shared by those making these reports. Anybody can have an opinion about even the largest of topics, but that emotional atmosphere seems more credible, and much harder to manufacture. All that said, I'm sure I'll continue trying to understand what's really going on, even though I'm unlikely to ever reach an end of that.
I appreciate this article very much. It’s full of fascinating fact and detail.
Thank you Coming Home!
NDEs are fascinating! I used to think it was as all bogus- nonsense as related by a dying brain. But the similarities are so striking and the experiences so vivid I can no longer dismiss them.
Even if NDEs are a function of a dying brain, they would still be fascinating. There do however seem to be some problems with the dying brain explanation.
1) These experiences seem to appear when the brain is clinically dead, as defined by the medical science community. No brain waves. No known functioning. So how does a non-functioning organ create such spectacular experiences??
2) Why would evolution create such a feature as NDEs? We can explain the human body in terms of features which assist survival and reproduction. Why would evolution create a spectacular feature for dead people???
Exactly. I've argued the same point about evolution. Especially considering that NDEs are so often transformative. What's the point of having a transformative experience if you're about to die?
Great points! Both things I have considered that helped sway my perception.
Beautiful insights. 🫶🏾
Here's another angle that comes to mind. Not sure how useful it is. If NDEs are indeed a window upon some God-like phenomena of reality which is extremely love based... What about dying animals experience of the God-like phenomena?
Does the NDE concept suffer from the Judeo-Christian bias that all of reality is all about humans?
I personally don't have any problem with the notion of an atheistic afterlife. I think that if there is an afterlife, it's nothing "religious" or "supernatural" -- it's just the way the universe works but human science is so far too limited to understand it. There needn't even be any "meaning" behind it, any more than there's meaning to the behaviors of atoms or whatever. I don't have any problem with animals surviving death, either.
I hear you, and that's pretty much my way of looking at it too. Whatever NDE is, it's part of nature.
But to be fair and intellectually honest, if what the NDE experiencers are describing is generally real and accurate, and not a brain induced hallucination etc... Religions have generally pretty much nailed it. Not in every detail, but more broadly. As example, the NDE lines up pretty darn well with the Catholic concept of purgatory I was taught as a child. A life review, angel guides, a place to purify yourself for acceptance in to heaven etc. But as with NDE, we don't really know if the Catholic conception is describing extraordinary human brain experiences, or the nature of reality. I don't how that ever gets sorted out.
However, it does seem possible to nail down out of body experiences, and I'd be interested in what you know about research in that area. Many of these experiences seem to happen in operating rooms. How hard can it be to install message panels that only someone looking from the perspective of the ceiling can see? Is there some other factor here that I'm not understanding?
Yes, I think that's true, too. And the Catholic idea of purgatory has parallels in the Tibetan idea of bardos.
There have been studies of exactly the type you describe: symbols were placed on the tops of medical equipment and cabinets in cardiac wards in the hopes that someone having an OBE would see them. The problem was, the NDErs who had OBEs said that they were so overwhelmed by the experience of being outside their body, and seeing their own body from above, they didn't pay much attention to incidentals in the room. But in at least one study (Penny Sartori's) it was found that only those who claimed to have NDEs could accurately describe their own resuscitation. There are a lot of tantalizing bits of evidence out there....
I'm admittedly ignorant on the subject, but my first impression is that OBE could be an important key to unlocking the credibility of NDEs. And if OBEs are real, they seem provable.
It's just weird to me that such an important possibility is left dangling for years. What's happened to the curiosity of science? Is the OBE topic like the UFO topic, where all the scientists are terrified of being branded crackpots?
As example, in one of the Coming Home videos a patient reported an OBE upon recovery. When challenged she began recounting what had happened in the OR while she was out in considerable detail. Her proof was so inconvenient to the group think that the surgeon got mad and stormed out of the room.
And then.... And then..... Nothing, as best as I can tell. None of the medical staff were curious enough to interview the witnesses and make a record of their reports??
If OBEs are real that radically changes our understanding of consciousness. And science isn't interested? I don't know why I'm surprised by this though actually. For decades the science community looked down it's snooty condescending nose at UFOs reports, until the "UFO kooks" were proven right, and then the science community seems to have nothing to say about that. Same old thing happening here I guess.
Shushan writes, "While these estimates are significant, so is the fact that up to 90% of people who temporarily die or almost die do not report having had NDEs."
Is that the most relevant and potentially useful fact for the question of whether NDEs are universal? I'd be very interested to learn more about studies comparing the NDE experiencers to those who don't report NDEs.
Most people in the modern world remember little if any dreams. In ancient times, most people were very much aware of dreams.
Why would it be any different for NDEs? If we don't pay attention to something that occurs every single night of our lives - at least 90 to 120 minutes of dreams (not to mention a great deal of experience that occurs in non REM sleep, even Stage 3 delta wave sleep) why would it be surprising that we don't remember more obscure states of consciousness like NDEs?
Except that NDErs almost always talk about the experience as being completely real -- and sometimes "more real than real." And it's something that stays with them for the rest of their lives. It seems to be fundamentally different from dreams, so I feel llike it's less likely that someone would forget it if they'd had one. Especially considering the dramatic and emotional content combined with the near-death context.
"And it's something that stays with them for the rest of their lives."
I found that the most compelling aspect of the Coming Home videos I've seen so far. The personalities of the subjects varied widely, from the delicate Irish angel lady, to a macho commercial diver mechanical engineer, and more. But all the subjects projected the same emotional "vibe", if you'll forgive an imprecise term.
For me, it was almost that the NDE story and theologies were just a vehicle for presenting that "vibe". Sometimes I think we might work too hard at coming up with explanations for things, and that can interfere with the sharing of vibe.
I notice this with traditional religions as well. The person who is selling some theological belief system is typically less interesting and persuasive that the person who says little but has the right vibe.
If I understand correctly, DMT users also report experiences that seem "more real than real", and they sometimes encounter entities giving advice etc. My knowledge of this is minimal at best.
True, though interestingly they typically seem to change their minds over time. In his study of DMT users in the UK, Pascal Michael found that they're initially totally convinced of the reality of the experience, including the interdimensional entities they meet, but that conviction gradually wears off over time and they come to understand it was just the drug. That doesn't seem to happen with NDEs. Not that this makes NDEs necessarily "real", but they do seem to be an essentially different type of experience from drugs, dreams, or whatever.
Here's a link to some of Pascal's articles. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Pascal-Michael
That's a good point, though "universal" in relation the article referred to the content of NDEs rather than their occurrence. I don't think much research has been done on comparing the physical circumstances of patients who don't have NDEs vs those that do, but it's an interesting line of research.
This also makes me wonder why we'd necessarily expect survival after death to occur for everyone. Maybe the consciousness of someone who doesn't have an NDE would have just died had they not been resuscitated, while the consciousness of someone who did have an NDE would have survived.
Wow, that is a very comprehensive article, thank you.
I was interested to read that some NDEs seem to include negative hell-like experiences. I was wondering about that.
Shushan writes, “Mainstream” Western scholarship has completely failed to recognize the significance of NDEs to afterlife and other religious and “supernatural” beliefs."
This seems to be a pattern. I spent a couple of years trying to interest philosophers in nuclear weapons. No luck at all. The science community seems to be the last to understand that UFOs are real. So it doesn't surprise me if academics are slow to find interest in NDEs. I'm coming to this theory that experts of all types are very useful within the realm of what's considered "realistic and reasonable" but they typically aren't in a position to explore beyond that limited circle.
I'm a very analytical person, but in watching the Coming Home videos I've begun to question that process a bit in regards to NDEs. I'm now wondering if it will ever be possible to understand or prove anything about NDEs, and more to the point, am questioning whether that matters.
For me, the most persuasive part of the videos was not evidence of this or that, or the conclusions of the experiencers, but the emotional atmosphere that seemed to be shared by those making these reports. Anybody can have an opinion about even the largest of topics, but that emotional atmosphere seems more credible, and much harder to manufacture. All that said, I'm sure I'll continue trying to understand what's really going on, even though I'm unlikely to ever reach an end of that.