Ghosts?

[_Buffalo]

The quotes within quotes are getting difficult to manage. Hopefully this will be clear:

Wait a second. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with what we mean when we say "consciousness." We do not simply mean being awake, we mean being aware of ourselves and our surroundings, having thought, and experiencing external stimuli.

So, yes, we can measure whether someone is awake or not, but we cannot measure consciousness.

You cannot have consciousness without being conscious. I'm aware of the differences in the two concepts, but for the purposes of measurement and detection, they amount to the same thing.

There is no way to know that as an observer, unless you've invented a device that allows you to become someone else for a time.

Yes, we do know it. We observe the brain patterns of conscious people. We know what conscious thought looks like. We can even detect changes in the brain due to different thoughts and emotions.


No, it can't. Sorry.

Yes it can, sorry. If you doubt it, try giving an IQ test to a rock, and then try it with a person.


You've been trying in a sort of amateurish way on this thread. If you have the proof, then the leading neurological research institutions want it! I want it too!


So far I'm the only one offering anything in the way of evidence. Before you accuse me of being amateurish, provide some evidence of your own - credible evidence!


I give you the NDE of Pam Reynolds, who had a vivid near death experience while brain dead.

That points to hallucinations associated with the natural processes involved in dying. Please post credible evidence.

The case is stacking up against you, Buffalo.

Sorry, you have no empirical evidence. Your sources are not scientific, and magical thinking does not replace a clear headed look at the actual processes at work in dying.


You're confusing thought with consciousness again.

There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that they can be separated.

The burden of proof is on you, my friend. I have demonstrated my position.

Two links from a site that has as much credibility as an "Alien Abductees Testify!" site is not sufficient. Please provide credible evidence to demonstrate your extraordinary claims.

NDEs are just one of the evidences for consciousness not existing merely within the confines of the brain. The Law of Consecration of Energy is another. That you think this law is a Joseph Smith thing is very telling about your knowledge on this subject.


I've tried to politely help you out here - you keep conflating the The Law of Consecration with conservation of energy. They're two different things, and neither has anything to do with the so-called soul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_consecration
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy

The fact that you don't know the difference between conservation and consecration is very telling about your knowledge on this subject.

[_Simon Belmont]

Simon is stuck with a very naïve dualitistic notion of consciousness that ignores all the debunking done by guys like Daniel Dennett, Paul Churchland, António Damásio etc.

Simon also seems unaware of how our perceptual and conscious world depends on myriad specifics about the physical world and the physical structure of our bodies. None of it makes sense for a ghosts or in the context of an OBE.

You're right, it doesn't make sense given our limited understanding. Do you believe that we are the end-all say-all when it comes to the cosmos? Do we humans know and understanding everything there is to know and understand?

Tell me this Simon, can a ghost see the blue sky and the green grass? How is this possible when our expereince of these things depends on everything from the nature of our retina to the temperature of the sun to the mass of an electron. Are there spirit electrons and spirit photons and spirit retinas that all parallel the physical?

Again, you're viewing this from your (our) own very limited human understanding. I do not believe man is the measure of all things, Tarski.

Also, how the heck does conservation of energy say anything about this? I challenge you to make the slightest defense of that idea. Do you even know what energy is?

If consciousness is energy (electrical impulses or something) then it is neither destroyed or created. It transcends our bodies.

[_Simon Belmont]

You cannot have consciousness without being conscious. I'm aware of the differences in the two concepts, but for the purposes of measurement and detection, they amount to the same thing.

Again, you don't know that. We have no way to measure that. All we can measure are the effects of consciousness, not consciousness itself.

Yes, we do know it. We observe the brain patterns of conscious people. We know what conscious thought looks like. We can even detect changes in the brain due to different thoughts and emotions.

We know what an active brain looks like, yes. We do not know what consciousness looks like. We can see its effects on the brain, but not consciousness itself. Again, if you are asserting that electrical impulses means consciousness, then my toaster is aware of itself and its place in the universe.

Yes it can, sorry. If you doubt it, try giving an IQ test to a rock, and then try it with a person.

Measuring something that isn't alive according to human standards is no test for consciousness.

So far I'm the only one offering anything in the way of evidence. Before you accuse me of being amateurish, provide some evidence of your own - credible evidence!

Where is your evidence? You've shown a device to measure electrical impulses, and the effects of a supposed headache on the brain. These aren't evidences.

That points to hallucinations associated with the natural processes involved in dying. Please post credible evidence.

Simply dismissing it does not make it incorrect, Buffalo.

Sorry, you have no empirical evidence. Your sources are not scientific, and magical thinking does not replace a clear headed look at the actual processes at work in dying.

So you've died before? You know the actual processes at work?

There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that they can be separated.

Consciousness, as I have said repeatedly, is the combination of awareness, thought, knowing yourself and your place in the universe, and experiencing external stimuli and emotion.

I've tried to politely help you out here - you keep conflating the The Law of Consecration with conservation of energy. They're two different things, and neither has anything to do with the so-called soul.

You're right, I meant Law of Conservation of energy.

That still doesn't explain why you consider that law a joke.

[_Buffalo]

You cannot have consciousness without being conscious. I'm aware of the differences in the two concepts, but for the purposes of measurement and detection, they amount to the same thing.

Again, you don't know that. We have no way to measure that. All we can measure are the effects of consciousness, not consciousness itself.

There is nothing to indicate that consciousness can be separated from the brain, not in all the history of medical science. Since you are making incredible claims, it is up to you to post credible evidence.

[_Buffalo]

We know what an active brain looks like, yes. We do not know what consciousness looks like. We can see its effects on the brain, but not consciousness itself. Again, if you are asserting that electrical impulses means consciousness, then my toaster is aware of itself and its place in the universe.

Yes, we do know what it looks like - consciousness looks like an active brain. Your toaster does not have the neural networks needed to be aware of itself. Try not to make dishonest arguments.

[Guest]

Measuring something that isn't alive according to human standards is no test for consciousness.

So you admit that non-living things don’t have consciousness? :)

[_Buffalo]

Where is your evidence? You've shown a device to measure electrical impulses, and the effects of a supposed headache on the brain. These aren't evidences.

That IS evidence. Your idea of evidence is what amounts to alien abduction tales. I'm talking about scientific evidence. Clearly you're not interested in that and prefer testimonies.

[_Buffalo]

That points to hallucinations associated with the natural processes involved in dying. Please post credible evidence.

Simply dismissing it does not make it incorrect, Buffalo.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_death_experience

If history has taught us anything, it is not to assume a magical explanation for phenomena that are not well understood. Doing so stops the progress of humans every time.

There are much better explanation for these hallucinations than "I traveled to a magical place without my body."

In the 1990s, Dr. Rick Strassman conducted research on the psychedelic drug Dimethyltryptamine (DMT) at the University of New Mexico.[43][44][45] Strassman advanced the theory that a massive release of DMT from the pineal gland prior to death or near-death was the cause of the near-death experience phenomenon. Only two of his test subjects reported NDE-like aural or visual hallucinations, although many reported feeling as though they had entered a state similar to the classical NDE. His explanation for this was the possible lack of panic involved in the clinical setting and possible dosage differences between those administered and those encountered in actual NDE cases. All subjects in the study were also very experienced users of DMT and/or other psychedelic/entheogenic agents. Some speculators consider that if subjects without prior knowledge on the effects of DMT had been used during the experiment, it is possible more volunteers would have reported feeling as though they had experienced an NDE.

Dr. Karl Jansen, a New Zealand-born psychiatrist, have falsely claimed to have reproduced the effects of NDEs through the use of ketamine.[46] Ketamine is regularly administered for medical reasons, which casts doubt on the findings.

Critics have argued that neurobiological models often fail to explain NDEs that result from close brushes with death, where the brain does not actually suffer physical trauma, such as a near-miss automobile accident. Such events may however have neurobiological effects caused by stress.

In a new theory devised by Richard Kinseher in 2006, the knowledge of the Sensory Autonomic System is applied in the NDE phenomenon. His theory states that the experience of looming death is an extremely strange paradox to a living organism—and therefore it will start the NDE: during the NDE, the individual becomes capable of "seeing" the brain performing a scan of the whole episodic memory (even prenatal experiences), in order to find a stored experience which is comparable to the input information of death. All these scanned and retrieved bits of information are permanently evaluated by the actual mind, as it is searching for a coping mechanism out of the potentially fatal situation. Kinseher feels this is the reason why a near-death experience is so unusual. Because people who experience NDEs report the experience of memories long considered lost, this theory necessarily depends upon a theory of memory in which all memories are indefinitely retained. Such a stance would be at odds with current scientific findings.

The theory also states that out-of-body experiences, accompanied by NDEs, are an attempt by the brain to create a mental overview of the situation and the surrounding world. The brain then transforms the input from sense organs and stored experience (knowledge) into a dream-like idea about oneself and the surrounding area.

Whether or not these experiences are hallucinatory, they do have a profound impact on the observer. Many psychologists not necessarily pursuing the paranormal, such as Susan Blackmore, have recognized this. These scientists are not trying to debunk the experience, but are instead searching for biological causes of NDEs.[47]

According to Engmann,[48] near-death experiences of people who are clinically dead are psychopathological symptoms caused by a severe malfunction of the brain resulting from the cessation of cerebral blood circulation. An important question is whether it is possible to "translate" the bloomy experiences of the reanimated survivors into psychopathologically basic phenomena, e.g. acoasms, central narrowing of the visual field, autoscopia, visual hallucinations, activation of limbic and memory structures according to Moody's stages. The symptoms suppose a primary affliction of the occipital and temporal cortices under clinical death. This basis could be congruent with the thesis of pathoclisis—the inclination of special parts of the brain to be the first to be damaged in case of disease, lack of oxygen, or malnutrition—established eighty years ago by C. and O. Vogt.[49] According to that thesis, the basic phenomena should be similar in all patients with near-death experiences. But a crucial problem is to distinguish these basic psychopathological symptoms from the secondary mental associated experiences which may result from a reprocessing of the basic symptoms under the influence of the person's cultural and religious views.

An article by Netherlands researchers Pim van Lommel et al., argues, "With a purely physiological explanation such as cerebral anoxia for the experience, most patients who have been clinically dead should report one."[16] Accordingly, a lack of predictable experiences should cast doubt on wholesale explanations of NDEs.
[edit] REM state

It is suggested that the extreme stress caused by a life threatening situation triggers brain states similar to REM sleep and that part of the near death experience is a state similar to dreaming while awake. People who have experienced times when their brains behaved as if they were dreaming while awake are more likely to develop the near death experience. Further stimulation of the Vagus nerve during the physical and/or psychological stress of a life threatening situation may trigger brain conditions where the person is in a dream-like state while awake.[50][51]
[edit] Lucid dreaming

Some sleep researchers, such as Timothy J. Green, Lynne Levitan and Stephen LaBerge, have noted that NDE experiences are similar to many of the experiences reported during lucid dreaming. Lucid dreaming occurs when the individual becomes lucid and realizes they are in a dream. Often these states are so realistic as to be barely distinguishable from reality, even including the ability to feel very realistic textures.

In a study of fourteen lucid dreamers performed in 1991, people who perform wake-initiated lucid dreams operation (WILD) reported experiences consistent with aspects of out-of-body experiences such as floating above their beds and the feeling of leaving their bodies.[52] Due to the phenomenological overlap between lucid dreams, near death experiences, and out-of-body experiences, researchers say they believe a protocol could be developed to induce a lucid dream similar to a near-death experience in the laboratory.[53]

Other similarities include seeing oneself from the outside (an out of body experience), floating or flying, heightened awareness, and feelings of joy or peace. Some researchers believe this is caused when the mind is deprived of the majority of its main five senses and relies on the expectational processing. In this regard one experiences what one would expect to happen in their current circumstance. This could explain experiences caused by mental trauma such as a near miss accident in which the mind may close itself off at least partially to the senses and ones caused by physical trauma in which again the mind closes itself off to the world.[citation needed] At present, there exists no clear physiological or psychological basis for any relationship between lucid dreaming and NDEs.
[edit] Computational psychology

Modeling of NDEs using artificial neural networks has shown that some aspects of the core near death experience can be achieved through simulated neuron death.[54][55][56][57] In the course of such simulations, the essential features of the NDE, life review, novel scenarios (i.e., heaven or hell), and OBE are observed through the generation of confabulations or false memories, as discussed in Confabulation (neural networks). The key feature contributing to the generation of such confabulatory states are a neural network's inability to differentiate dead from silent neurons.[58] Memories, whether related to direct experience, or not, can be seeded upon arrays of such inactive brain cells. To date, no extant computer has reported a near-death experience. Furthermore, the total operations performed by the human brain cannot even be closely approximated by current computer systems.

[Guest]

So you've died before? You know the actual processes at work?

I haven't died. I haven't been up to space, but I believe the evidence that the earth is spherical. Don't imagine that science is ignorant about death.

[_Tarski]

You're right, it doesn't make sense given our limited understanding. Do you believe that we are the end-all say-all when it comes to the cosmos? Do we humans know and understanding everything there is to know and understand?
Again, you're viewing this from your (our) own very limited human understanding. I do not believe man is the measure of all things, Tarski.

It is amazing how often you use this all-purpose get out of jail card.
How in the world are we to recognize nonsense if we can't trust our rational judgement in the least. What a world you live in.

If consciousness is energy (electrical impulses or something) then it is neither destroyed or created. It transcends our bodies.

LOL

There is electricity in my computer too. Does this mean that if I smash it to bits there will still be computation floating around in the room?

The fact that heat and electrical energy drain into the environment when a person dies says nothing about consciousness. Consciouness isn't a magical fluid or gas and it is not energy either (it needs energy just like computation does). It is a description of a certain family complex abilities of organisms with sufficiently complex brains. These include the ability to form internal symbolic representations of the environment, manipulation of language or language-like strucutres, concepts etc. even the most seemingly passive aspects of consciousness are really activities of a brain. Humans have numerous primative animistic and magical intutions about consciousness --some of them quite strong. Unfortuantely they make little sense on close inspection. You are mistaken about the very nature of consciousness. It is more like self-representing high level computation than something simple and homogeneous like heat or electric current. It is no more able to float free of physical structure than other abstract notions such as information. No brains--> no consciousness for the same reason as no legs--> no walking,...... or no guitar---> no soaring clever guitar solo.