What happens when we die?
I have just watched this video Rethinking Death: Exploring What Happens When We Die which is making me rethink death. I am an agnostic about the existence of souls and gods and resurrection and reincarnation but this video has intrigued me. Has anyone on this forum experienced Recalled Experience of Death (RED)? If so, how was it for you?
This study called AWAreness during REsuscitation - II explores this topic and I would love to know more.
This study called AWAreness during REsuscitation - II explores this topic and I would love to know more.
Comments (73)
These are the 3 stages you will go through during and after death
Wakeful state
Dream state
Dreamless state
Then comes the unconditoned state, which isn't even a state, but it goes beyond all the 3 stages above
You will return to who you were before you were born, bare consciousness. This consciousness is present behind even rocks and trees
Not even in your dreams?
If you're sacrificing today for a reward later, don't. Sacrifice because you believe it creates a better world for today and the future.
If you're afraid of trying new things you really want to because it might make life uncomfortable, overcome that fear.
You only live once. No one will ever know what you experience but you. No one will know your story fully but you. The last thing you want in your last dying moments is regret at not having done enough with the time you had.
Love it. Appreciate it. Because eventually it will be gone.
How do you know that there is no consciousness after brain death? What about all the people who have Recalled Experience of Death (RED) and the stories they tell of visiting other places and the beings they meet there?
Isn't that a self-answering question? Brain>consciousness. Dead brain>no consciousness.
People tell all kinds of stories about things they saw and experienced while other people thought they were dead. My guess is that they were not dead, but hallucinating or dreaming - possibly during the seconds they were regaining consciousness. My reason for that guess is the number of times I've been unconscious due to anesthetic during which I experienced nothing and from which I recall nothing, until I was coming back to awareness. Some of my vivid and bizarre dreams take place just as I'm waking up. These are the dreams one is most likely to remember.
I have also met people who believe that souls pilot brains and are judged by God on Judgement Day which will occur sometime in the future. It is impossible to prove or disprove this claim, too.
So, is the brain real? Is the soul real? Are both brains and souls real? Are God or Gods real? Is resurrection real? Is reincarnation real? By the word "real" I mean that they actually exist as opposed to believed to exist.
I have experienced general anaesthesia 11 times so I can relate to what you experienced.
Very simply, there has never been a case of actual death in these scenarios. Coma or unconsciousness sure, but no one has had brain death, come back, and had an experience during that actual death. The brain is still hearing things around itself, and if the eyes are opened during surgery light is still streaming into the brain. Your ability to consciously realize it isn't fully there, but its still being processed.
Have you ever dreamt before? I've encountered giant gorillas, super natural horrors, and realms beyond normal experience. The brain when devoid of full consciousness still functions and sorts experiences. If it thinks its going to die, then its thoughts can become pre-occupied with that as it struggles to live. Ever had an emotional traumatic experience and dream about it in a way that ends well? Vividness of experience does not require full consciousness. So a vivid experience of an unconscious person is not evidence of an actual death experience.
Yes, I have had many dreams but the kind of experiences the people in the video spoke of are very different from dreams because they have factual information that was verified by others e.g. a patient told the doctor what the doctor did and even what the doctor was thinking!
"I have a lot of respect for Parnia and everyone else involved in this, but I find it extremely frustrating that there is data from AWARE II that shows EEG activity consistent with consciousness during CA and CPR after up to an hour (something he alluded to in the panel discussion), and yet they have never stated whether or not any of these EEG events were in patients who reported NDEs. They know, they have the data, so why not share that? I suspect that they have no EEG data at all in those patients as only a small percentage of the entire cohort had EEG data, and most of those sadly did not survive. Why not say that?"
Videos are generally not the best ways of learning about science. Stick to papers if you really want good solid answers. So far my above claim is true: There is no case (to my knowledge) of 100% brain death and people returning with REDs.
Alternative organs have been suggested, but they proved inadequate to the task.
Other explanations involve mysticism and magic, in which I'm not a believer.
Quoting Truth Seeker
It's not my job to disprove implausible claims.
Quoting Truth Seeker
Yup. Seen many; touched some; sliced a few.
Quoting Truth Seeker
I've no seen evidence of it.
Saaaayyy -- is it really truth you are seeking?
How do we demonstrate that certain psychological or mental states, which may happen during meditation or during drug use, are anything more than a subjective experience of brain states?
Quoting Vera Mont
I am not an expert on consciousness by any means, but couldn't there be at least 2 types: consciousness of the body and consciousness of the mind? If the person is near to death, let's say they had a cardiac arrest, then their brain has stopped functioning (I believe after about 20 seconds they lose (body) consciousness and pass out, as their brain cannot function without oxygen) If the person is seeing things at this stage, then I am guessing that must be due to mind consciousness, such as you describe here:
Quoting Vera Mont
This would point to evidence for mind consciousness being separate and not dependent on body consciousness because at that stage the brain would not be functioning.
However, there is a difference between brain death and the brain not functioning (body unconsciousness). Brain death is when the brain has died and the person cannot be brought back to life, therefore, of course, we cannot find out if the mind consciousness continues after brain death because we cannot bring them back to ask them.
Ooh, I like that :) Can you tell me more? How do rocks and trees have consciousness? I have had a thought about this, but I just wondered what else has been said about it/what you think.
Are you saying the brain is part of the body and the mind is not? If so, where does the mind reside? What thinks?
First of all, I am just playing with ideas here. I do not really know what I believe about this at the moment. I do have lots of ideas streaming in though. Regarding your question, do you think it possible that the mind 'resides' in the brain and grows/develops there, but can also exist outside the brain too when there is no longer a brain? I mean, when the brain has stopped functioning, if people are still seeing/hearing things etc we could say that it is not the brain that is making the 'person' see/hear etc those things, since the brain is no longer working. If it is the mind that is doing that, then the mind does not rely on the brain at that point. Where the mind might go after death, however, is a strange thought, but if we imagine that the mind is a form of energy, then this is perhaps easier to understand. After all, we accept that energy is all around us, and yet it does not seem to 'reside' anywhere specifically since it is not made of matter. These are just ideas though that have just popped into my head. There could be lots of reasons why they are wrong and don't make sense, but i think they kind of make sense... to me at the moment anyway. I am open to hearing other ideas though.
I have not watched the video so could not tell you. However, it appears the video is already circumspect and I would question the rigor of the studies. If the doctor was speaking his thoughts out loud and the patient heard when they were not at brain death, this is not remarkable. This field is rife with inaccurate reporting, stories, and unscientific claims, so extraordinary claims need very tight and clear evidence to be considered seriously.
:100:
:up: :up:
Resuscitation is not resurrection (or reincarnation). Death is irreversible brain decomposition. Unless 'dis-embodied subjectivity' (i.e. flat earth) is the case, "NDE" or "RED" cannot be anything but a false memory illusion. And yes, during my twenties while tripping on various hallucinogens, I had occasionally "recalled being dead" like the song says
:victory: :cool:
Quoting RogueAI
Or maybe, as Freddy suggests, you "keep coming back" unable to do anything else but watch ourselves make the same good and bad decisions again and again and again ... unless you learn while still alive here and now to be happy to affirm eternally reliving every moment of this life: the only life you will ever have.
Amor fati, no?! :death: :flower:
I'd suggest you're asking the wrong people by posting here.
Question for everyone: who among you watched the video and read the research paper in the first post in this thread?
Nope. Mind is not a separate entity. It is an emergent property of the brain - the result of all the activity and connectivity of all those billions of neurons - one of the two reasons those neurons exist, the other being to control the functions of the body. When they stop working, every other organ stops, waiting for instructions.
...Unless the mind has turned into a soul at some point and grown wings so it can go to heaven, or failed to grow wings, so it must plummet to hell. Or unless it becomes a free-floating ghost....
Quoting Beverley
Of course, billions of people do believe those stories, or claim to. You'd never be lonely if you chose that option.
Quoting Beverley
They can see and hear, if the liver or kidneys are not functioning and maybe while the heart is stopped, but can still be restarted. That's what generally happens in these near-death experiences.
In movies, the bystanders rush in, somebody holds a finger to the victim's throat for ten seconds and pronounces him "gone" . (They're sure, because it's in the script.) In reality, people can go four to six minutes of no heartbeat without serious brain injury and survive as long as ten or twelve in some condition. The rare exceptions I know were children who froze in extreme prairie temperatures, who have appeared dead for up to a reported two hours and been revived. In some cases, even the EEG fails to detect very faint brain activity.
If you don't find the head cut off, you can't always be sure someone's dead
Quoting Beverley
It emanates from the activities of matter. It comes from the burning of the sun's gases in the form of light and heat. But, although we measure units of heat for our own convenience, we cannot discern discrete packets of heat that have names and personalities. Without matter, what would form a barrier between minds? So, all right, if energy emanates from brain activity, it must radiate outward continuously, along with body heat, evaporated fluid and scent, to mingle with all the other energy.
Quoting Beverley
Ideas are free; people are always eager to share them. It's facts you have to work for.
I appreciate your point of view, however, when a person is in cardiac arrest, the brain is no longer functioning and hence, no signals are being sent. This means they cannot see. But of course, people could say many things to explain away near death experiences. As you may already know, I believe nothing is 100 percent certain.
That is not the case. The brain, as I mentioned just a few minutes ago, keeps functioning for minutes and in some very rare instances, even hours, when the blood supply is cut off. (This is the idea behind cryogenics.)
My 'point of view' is the evidence-based knowledge that makes medicine, transportation and communication possible. Believe what you like, but please, if you're sick, go to a doctor, rather than a priest.
I don't go to priests, so don't worry. I believe you are incorrect about the brain. During cardiac arrest, no signals are sent. The reason that the brain doesn't become brain dead is because it takes that time you mentioned, around 5 minutes, maybe slightly more, for the brain cells to die. This is why people can be resuscitated. However, the brain is not capable of sending signals for body function at this point as it is not receiving oxygen.
They may be absolutely correct. A whole lot of traffic victims and people suffering heart attacks could not have survived without medical intervention. Intervention is pretty much the whole point of medicine. When somebody's approaching death, they usually keep going unless somebody else stops them. For a while. Eventually, they and we will die anyway. Then we'll stop telling stories and wondering what to believe.
Is Van Lommel correct or incorrect?
I wonder where this free-floating consciousness gets its information. Do we each have one? How do 8 billion (assuming other species have none, which is a long stretch to accept) consciousnesses keep their identity separate and how do they each know to which receptor they're supposed to convey information? Or is it one big nebula of consciousness transmitting impersonally to the world? Is all the information in the universe available to the meta-consciousness? If so, why are some of us better informed than others? Is it down to the innate quality of our equipment, and is that equipment upgraded through education?
Quoting Truth Seeker
From that quote, confusing. When I have time to read the documentation for his research, I'll know whether he explains the mechanism.
....
Oh, seems I'd have to read his book. I did find one reference to the scientific paper - a 'prospective study' - what people did and said over a period of time - rather than a controlled experiment. But I didn't find the text even of that study.
I imagine the team collected a huge pile of information from these patients. All of it anecdotal, of a very subjective experience. You can't blame someone for trying to make sense of it. You can blame him for seriously touting made-up theories and using his degree to lend them credence. A whole lot of wishful thinkers would happily fork out for the book.
Nor do I. But I do blame people whose life is anything but harsh taking advantage.
Then you would be them. There is no point holding anyone responsible for any atrocity, since, if you were them, you'd rape and pillage, too, and I assume you would not take the blame either. But since I have only my genes, environment and experiences, I can't help feeling the way I feel about them.
Quoting Truth Seeker
Of course - you cannot be otherwise.
Well then, apparently, it's "inevitable" for me to "praise or blame" ... :mask:
If you see the air cello being played, you've died. Remember that, maybe even tattoo it to your arm so you can read it in your death and you'll know where you are.
This video explains it:
Calvinists, for instance, (seem to) believe that some are pre-determined to be "damned" or "saved".
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination
No.
Yes, of course (or at least not as relevant and sufficient "evidence"^^).
As I've already stated:
Quoting 180 Proof."Clinical death" indicates the limit of (available) medical interventions for reviving a patient and not [relevant and sufficient evidence^^ :point:] the terminal stage of a patient's morbidity.
I knew a man who woke up in the morgue. (and lived to egret it) This was in the 1950's, when medical science was less sophisticated. The man was a crane operator, hit by a cable whiplash. The majority of his bones were broken. It took many years and surgeries to reconstruct him, and he was never free of pain. But he didn't bring back any stories from Beyond.
That makes me skeptical. The standard post mortem begins with a Y incision: diagonal cuts from each shoulder to the tip of the sternum, then a straight line down to the pubis, or a modified Y, which starts under the ears. And it hast to be a deep incision, so that you can retract the skin flaps and underlying fat for access to the body cavity.
I've never known a pathologist start with the abdomen; bowels are the least valuable organ in determining cause of death. The only reason I can think for why one might is if it's a limited post, following unsuccessful abdominal surgery or a gun shot wound. Sometimes the next of kin refuse consent for a full autopsy, but we still need documentation of what happened, to learn from a mistake in technique or treatment and to preserve evidence for legal proceedings.
Sure, they didn't have the same equipment then to determine whether 'life is extinct'. The morgue is kept very cold, and that slows down all biological processes. But it doesn't explain the autopsy incision. Perhaps he actually started showing some signs of life, and they were using peritoneal irrigation to warm him up. They would also have to examine the effects of whatever first aid measures had been applied immediately after the accident.
In any case, such a narrow escape, whether you experienced a conversation with St. Peter or not, often prompts people of wavering conviction to renew their faith and show gratitude.