On 4/4/2013 11:02 AM, Craig Weinberg wrote:
On Thursday, April 4, 2013 12:11:36 PM UTC-4, Brent wrote:
On 4/4/2013 8:35 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote:
>
> On 04 Apr 2013, at 15:47, Craig Weinberg wrote:
>
>> http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-03-memories-death-real-reality.html
<http://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-03-memories-death-real-reality.html>
>>
>> "Working together, researchers at the Coma Science Group (Directed by
Steven
Laureys)
>> and the University of Li�ge's Cognitive Psychology Research (Professor
Serge
Br�dart
>> and Hedwige Dehon), have looked into the memories of NDE with the
hypothesis that if
>> the memories of NDE were pure products of the imagination, their
phenomenological
>> characteristics (e.g., sensorial, self referential, emotional, etc.
details)
should be
>> closer to those of imagined memories. Conversely, if the NDE are
experienced in a
way
>> similar to that of reality, their characteristics would be closer to the
memories of
>> real events.
>>
>> The researchers compared the responses provided by three groups of
patients, each of
>> which had survived (in a different manner) a coma, and a group of healthy
volunteers.
>> They studied the memories of NDE and the memories of real events and
imagined events
>> with the help of a questionnaire which evaluated the phenomenological
characteristics
>> of the memories. The results were surprising. From the perspective being
studied,
not
>> only were the NDEs not similar to the memories of imagined events, but
the
>> phenomenological characteristics inherent to the memories of real events
(e.g.
memories
>> of sensorial details) are even more numerous in the memories of NDE than
in the
>> memories of real events."
>>
>> These results fully support a sense based model of physics. It makes a
falsifiable
>> claim that if NDEs are dreams, then they should be like all other
dreams. While this
>> could still mean that being close to death gives you massively potent
dream for some
>> reason, it still points to a universe where realism, matter, and public
events are
>> derived from a universal foundation which is sensory rather than logical.
>
> With comp, we already know that the physical is a construct of the mind
(of the
> universal numbers), so your point here is precisely not valid. Indeed you
seem to
need
> some primary matter to distinguish the "sensory" based on carbon from the
one
which we
> could be based on silicon, or numbers.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> Reality is the dream of eternity made temporarily public, not a
collection of
objects
>> making temporary illusions.
>
> The self-referentially correct universal machine agrees with this. 100%.
It is not
> obvious at all, but that's what the UDA explains.
>
> On this you are more correct than many materialist, but you fit perfectly
well with
> comp. That is why I find a bit sad that you insist that comp is false.
Keep in mind
> that, unlike what many are thinking, comp is incompatible with even very
weak form of
> materialism. So much that physics should be entirely derivable from the
global FPI on
> arithmetic. The math confirms this up to now, if we agree with some
rather standard
> definition in the theory of knowledge.
>
> It would be interesting to see if some drug does not also produce more of
the
> phenomenological characteristics inherent to the memories of real events.
Now, I have
> not read those papers, and as you notice, it might only be more "potent
dream".
Dreams are not "pure products of imagination", and nobody has ever
suggested they were.
The researchers compared NDE reports to memories of real and imagined
events, not
dreams.
But what does "memory of an imagined event" mean? It means the researchers
asked the
subjects to imagine remembering something that didn't happen. They
discovered that this
did not have as much sensory detail as the memories of real events and
NDEs. Dog
bites man.
But the memories of the NDEs are clearer than the real events. Common sense tells us
that memories of imagined events or dreams would be less detailed.
Common sense tells us that events that have a lot of emotional content (like being near
death) are going to be remember in more detail. That's why the researchers asked the
subjects to remember real and imagined events that had emotional content. But how likely
are they to have had an emotional event comparable to nearly dying? And the real events
were further in the past than the NDE. And as John Clark and others have pointed out the
NDE stories never have any new information. All of this is easily explained by assuming
that experience is produced by the brain and NDEs are dreams that occur during trauma
and/or lack to oxygen. Sensory-motive theory would predict that experience is independent
of those merely physical brains.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
