Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Talk about anything Tolle-related here.

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Enlightened2B » Wed May 14, 2014 5:38 pm

Just read the article and sorry to say, but I disagree with you. It does not prove any of the such. It's the same thing again and again. The only thing it proves is that the brain and the sense of self are obviously correlated, which everyone already knew. This is nothing new. It provides nothing further than that.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Webwanderer » Wed May 14, 2014 7:17 pm

While brain science may be fairly good at studying brain function, it is ill equipped to study actual, essential consciousness. For a true understanding, a larger, more encompassing field of study must be employed. Science, by definition, is the study of the physical and material world. It does not look beyond physical evidence - but there is lots of other evidence that science refuses to recognize on the matter of consciousness. Science is simply too highly restricted to do a complete investigation.

It's somewhat like attempting to study light by studying a light bulb while starting with the assumption that the bulb is the origin of the light. It simply takes a greater perspective, using faculties of reason and philosophy, to explore all the evidence - not just that evidence that can be measured physically.

I would suggest that the brain does nothing at all to actually create consciousness. What it does do is perform a highly complex function in creating unique perspectives within consciousness.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Enlightened2B » Wed May 14, 2014 11:42 pm

Nice post WW. I would lean more towards this as well.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby ashley72 » Thu May 15, 2014 1:26 am

Webwanderer wrote:While brain science may be fairly good at studying brain function, it is ill equipped to study actual, essential consciousness. For a true understanding, a larger, more encompassing field of study must be employed.


This article wasn't about Consciousness per se, it was demonstrating that out "sense of self" (where we perceive our body to be located) can be manipulated "physically" by a well placed video camera, video goggles, and the construction of an optical illusion.

It was posted in this particular thread, because NDE proponents use "out of body experiences during Near Death" as evidence that our sense of self is a non-physical property and not a product of the physical body. In a larger context, NDE proponents further speculate that one can further deduce from this that our Conscious self or "Consciousness" must be primary essence.

This experiment directly challenges the theory that "out of body experiences" are non-physical in nature. The fact that we can "physically" manipulate our perception to have an outer body experiences means its has a physical mechanism.

Webwanderer wrote:It's somewhat like attempting to study light by studying a light bulb while starting with the assumption that the bulb is the origin of the light. It simply takes a greater perspective, using faculties of reason and philosophy, to explore all the evidence - not just that evidence that can be measured physically.

I would suggest that the brain does nothing at all to actually create consciousness. What it does do is perform a highly complex function in creating unique perspectives within consciousness.

WW


Evidence gathered in experiments and observations is a crucial aspect of proving the theory or modelling is correct.

As in example, in early Greece they use to debate Early Eye vision theories about whether the process of vision involved something being emitted from the eye or entering the eye.

Later they realised that light was correlated with vision, which lead to theories that light enters the eye and the pupil acts as a pin hole...The lens and other structures refract light to focus it on the rear surface of the eye, inverting the scene (image) on the back of the eye along a layer of special neurons called photoreceptors. These photons hitting the photoreceptors temporarily break a double bond in a photopigment molecule called rhodopsin, causing a change in the shape of rhodopsin. The effects of light on rhodopsin lead to: A negative change in the electrical potential in photoreceptors.

The process of vision is very complex indeed.... but still physical!

Trees also have photoreceptors for detecting light, but because they are on the surface of the tree, and not behind a pin hole (pupil)..... an image doesn't form. Therefore trees/plants can merely detect light, but not form images.
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby ashley72 » Thu May 15, 2014 1:36 am

Enlightened2B wrote:Just read the article and sorry to say, but I disagree with you. It does not prove any of the such. It's the same thing again and again. The only thing it proves is that the brain and the sense of self are obviously correlated, which everyone already knew. This is nothing new. It provides nothing further than that.


It provides physical evidence that "out of body experiences" can be produced from "physical manipulation" of our visual/body perception system using a well constructed optical illusion.
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby beginnersmind » Thu May 15, 2014 1:42 am

Is there an article on dreams coming true? Because I've had quite a few of those along with what I guess I would describe as OBE's.
beginnersmind
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Enlightened2B » Thu May 15, 2014 7:35 am

ashley72 wrote:It provides physical evidence that "out of body experiences" can be produced from "physical manipulation" of our visual/body perception system using a well constructed optical illusion.


To be honest, I don't know much about OBE's. What he's doing in the lab is setting up a second camera so that the subject can experience itself in another body. But, in cases of people who have had OBE's, there is no second camera, so it doesn't explain how they could possibly view themselves outside of the body. Just something I noticed.

However, personally, I've never believed in a soul as existing separately. Not saying it does or it doesn't. It's just not something that's ever really appealed to me, especially as someone who was a hardcore atheist for a long time before encountering spirituality. So, this argument doesn't do much for me in general. But, I think it's a cool study. Thanks for posting it. I actually checked out the video on youtube.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby ashley72 » Thu May 15, 2014 8:56 am

Enlightened2B wrote:To be honest, I don't know much about OBE's. What he's doing in the lab is setting up a second camera so that the subject can experience itself in another body. But, in cases of people who have had OBE's, there is no second camera, so it doesn't explain how they could possibly view themselves outside of the body. Just something I noticed.


This is good video for explaining the brain & nervous-system complexities of OBE's. => http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/2816872.htm
User avatar
ashley72
 
Posts: 2533
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby beginnersmind » Thu May 15, 2014 1:54 pm

It seems to me that your intent is to explain away all this phenomena as to nothing more than synapses and chemical reactions of the brain. But can it explain in my own experiences of OBE's seeing people ( Some of which I didn't know) :/ another room that was quite a distance from me, only to be verified when I went to that room after the experience? And what about similar stories of NDE's where people had OBE's and saw loved ones in another room like a waiting room and was able to describe in detail what they were saying and doing?


Also, what about dreams that come true. I've had quite a few come to fruition. Is this just an hallucination caused by synapses and chemical reactions in the brain?
beginnersmind
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Enlightened2B » Thu May 15, 2014 4:50 pm

beginnersmind wrote:It seems to me that your intent is to explain away all this phenomena as to nothing more than synapses and chemical reactions of the brain. But can it explain in my own experiences of OBE's seeing people ( Some of which I didn't know) :/ another room that was quite a distance from me, only to be verified when I went to that room after the experience? And what about similar stories of NDE's where people had OBE's and saw loved ones in another room like a waiting room and was able to describe in detail what they were saying and doing?


After hearing Eben Alexander's story about his NDE, I was kind of interested to learn more. I thought his story was really compelling. It's a very different concept though as compared to the sages of India in the Vedanta tradition who advocated that there was no soul and after death of the body, there's nothing. So, who knows.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Webwanderer » Thu May 15, 2014 9:18 pm

ashley72 wrote:This article wasn't about Consciousness per se, it was demonstrating that out "sense of self" (where we perceive our body to be located) can be manipulated


Manipulating the brain and its chemistry does have an effect on the perception of consciousness. That's rather obvious, but that says nothing about the origin of consciousness. I'm not sure why that's such an ah-ha moment unless your trying to claim that it somehow proves the brain is the origin. Why else would you post it? Such a conclusion seems to be quite a leap.

The brain may influence perspective as is part of its purpose, but it does not create consciousness no more that a radio receiver creates the radio waves that form music. A skilled technician however, can certainly manipulate the sound that comes through that radio. But what does it actually prove?

NDE proponents use "out of body experiences during Near Death" as evidence that our sense of self is a non-physical property and not a product of the physical body. In a larger context, NDE proponents further speculate that one can further deduce from this that our Conscious self or "Consciousness" must be primary essence.

This experiment directly challenges the theory that "out of body experiences" are non-physical in nature. The fact that we can "physically" manipulate our perception to have an outer body experiences means its has a physical mechanism.


It may challenge it in the minds of materialists who are religiously predisposed to explaining NDE's away rather than giving any honest consideration, but for those who think in larger contexts it simply means there is functional mechanism that can stimulate a sense of what is already familiar experience.

Again scientists that are blinded by a deeply held belief in materialism will only see what they want to see. Results of such experiments are routinely plugged into belief structures in a way that only supports those structures. This report is just one more example of such bias.

WW
User avatar
Webwanderer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 6278
Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 12:03 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby runstrails » Thu May 15, 2014 9:36 pm

E2B wrote: It's a very different concept though as compared to the sages of India in the Vedanta tradition who advocated that there was no soul and after death of the body, there's nothing.

Hi E2B,
Vedanta and Hinduism do have a concept of a soul. It's called Atman. Ultimately Jiva (person), Atman (soul) and Brahman (Self) are all one of course, since reality is non-dual.
runstrails
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Enlightened2B » Thu May 15, 2014 11:23 pm

runstrails wrote:Hi E2B,
Vedanta and Hinduism do have a concept of a soul. It's called Atman. Ultimately Jiva (person), Atman (soul) and Brahman (Self) are all one of course, since reality is non-dual.


Sorry, you're right. What I meant to say was that in Vedanta, when the body dies, the soul does not live on like other spiritual traditions believe. It's just Pure Consciousness. So, from their perspective, there could be no NDE's or OBE's.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby runstrails » Thu May 15, 2014 11:32 pm

Hi E2B,
From the perspective of Atman (soul) there is certainly reincarnation (or presumably NDE). But from the perspective of Brahman (Universal consciousness) rebirth or NDE does not really matter since it's all presumably non dual reality.

As for OBE's---I understand that apparently TMS stimulation of the temporal lobe can give you an OBE (no atman needed :wink:) Some epileptics report OBE's.
runstrails
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 2123
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Confessions of NDE'r - Dr Sue Blackmore

Postby Enlightened2B » Thu May 15, 2014 11:44 pm

runstrails wrote:Hi E2B,
From the perspective of Atman (soul) there is certainly reincarnation (or presumably NDE). But from the perspective of Brahman (Universal consciousness) rebirth or NDE does not really matter since it's all presumably non dual reality.


Ah, yes, I do remember reading about reincarnation in James's book. Guess I didn't retain too much heh. Thanks for clarifying.
Enlightened2B
 
Posts: 1885
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 10:51 pm
Location: New York

PreviousNext

Return to General Eckhart Tolle Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest