Where NDEs and out of body experiences come from

[_Quasimodo]

I'm sorry, I still don't find that terribly compelling. First of all, there's no way to independently verify the claim (and it could be a matter of inexact memory, not just falsification). It's possible the guy was still semi-concious enough to hear something of the goings on in the room. Belief here should scale with the evidence.

Oh ye of little faith :). No need to be sorry. It's understandable that you would have some doubts. You only have my word about someone else's word. I'd be skeptical, too.

This happened many years ago and truly there is no way to verify it independently.

However, if the surgeons were being honest (you only have my opinion about that), it's a compelling story.

Even in the extremely unlikely event that the patient was semi-conscious (the anesthesiologist should have lost his licence if he was), there is virtually nothing that a patient can see in the OR other than the anesthesiologist's upside down face and the ceiling. There is a sterile drape that separates the patients head from the operating field. Sort of like a tent that goes from the patient's neck to up above his head.

The patient was describing details about the actual procedure (instruments, his open heart, etc) and the various people that came and went from the room. He also described what the tech was doing while running the heart lung machine. Something that was beyond the foot of the operating table. Even if he was fully conscious, he would not have been able to see these things.

Assuming the story I heard was true, can you think of an explanation other than "out of body" that would resolve these conundrums?

[_Buffalo]

I'm sorry, I still don't find that terribly compelling. First of all, there's no way to independently verify the claim (and it could be a matter of inexact memory, not just falsification). It's possible the guy was still semi-concious enough to hear something of the goings on in the room. Belief here should scale with the evidence.

Oh ye of little faith :). No need to be sorry. It's understandable that you would have some doubts. You only have my word about someone else's word. I'd be skeptical, too.

This happened many years ago and truly there is no way to verify it independently.

However, if the surgeons were being honest (you only have my opinion about that), it's a compelling story.

Even in the extremely unlikely event that the patient was semi-conscious (the anesthesiologist should have lost his licence if he was), there is virtually nothing that a patient can see in the OR other than the anesthesiologist's upside down face and the ceiling. There is a sterile drape that separates the patients head from the operating field. Sort of like a tent that goes from the patient's neck to up above his head.

The patient was describing details about the actual procedure (instruments, his open heart, etc) and the various people that came and went from the room. He also described what the tech was doing while running the heart lung machine. Something that was beyond the foot of the operating table. Even if he was fully conscious, he would not have been able to see these things.

Assuming the story I heard was true, can you think of an explanation other than "out of body" that would resolve these conundrums?

It would be difficult to explain if indeed he got all those details (especially visual) right. But there's no way to verify that he did.

[_Quasimodo]

It would be difficult to explain if indeed he got all those details (especially visual) right. But there's no way to verify that he did.

Yep, that's true. I'm left with an unverifiable story. It was meaningful to me, though.

[_Simon Belmont]

Wow. Great stuff. All from near-death.com. Did you read any of the rest of the site?

I didn't say I agreed with everything on the site. There are a few interesting and well-researched articles, though. There is also a peer-reviewed Journal of Near-Death Studies.

[_Morley]

I didn't say I agreed with everything on the site. There are a few interesting and well-researched articles, though.

There are no "well-researched articles" there. It's sensationalized propaganda.

There is also a peer-reviewed Journal of Near-Death Studies.

The article, to which you linked, may not be trustworthy, as it has the following banner at the top:

The topic of this article may not meet the general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (February 2011)

[_Simon Belmont]

The article, to which you linked, may not be trustworthy, as it has the following banner at the top:

The topic of this article may not meet the general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (February 2011)

That's just that particular Wiki author's issue. She or he needs to clean up the article. If you'll look in the "references" section, there is a valid link to the Journal:

http://www.iands.org/publications/journ ... udies.html

And the official website states:

This is the only peer-reviewed scholarly journal (ISSN 0891-4494) devoted exclusively to the field of near-death studies. It is cross-disciplinary and published quarterly.

[_krose]

I will admit that -- like stories of visions, alien abductions, ghost sightings and premonitions -- NDEs are not all easily explained away. But I have some issues with the mechanics of it all.

I guess what I have the most difficulty accepting is how an out-of-body experience would work without eyes or ears (the organs we use to see and hear), which are still attached to the body on the bed, not to mention all the neural pathways and brain cells that transmit, carry and store the memories.

If these organs are not necessary for a spirit, have there been documented instances of blind patients accurately describing what their doctors and nurses looked liked, or of deaf patients recounting conversations they suddenly heard while "dead"?

It's the issue I have with the general idea of spirits or souls. How do they see, hear, remember, and process ideas without the physical organs that do those tasks? We know in detail how our sensory organs work, and what happens when they are damaged. We know how and where memories are stored In the physical brain, and that they can be lost through physical damage to the pertinent cells. We know that personalities and character traits are sometimes drastically changed after brain injuries.

It seems unlikely that a spirit could see, hear, think logically, store memories, or have a personality without the appropriate facilities.

[_Simon Belmont]

I guess what I have the most difficulty accepting is how an out-of-body experience would work without eyes or ears (the organs we use to see and hear), which are still attached to the body on the bed, not to mention all the neural pathways and brain cells that transmit, carry and store the memories.

There you go thinking about something not human with human terms. This is what I mean by what we don't know.

[_Chap]

[...]

I guess what I have the most difficulty accepting is how an out-of-body experience would work without eyes or ears (the organs we use to see and hear), which are still attached to the body on the bed, not to mention all the neural pathways and brain cells that transmit, carry and store the memories.

If these organs are not necessary for a spirit, have there been documented instances of blind patients accurately describing what their doctors and nurses looked liked, or of deaf patients recounting conversations they suddenly heard while "dead"?

[...]

Indeed. We have no reliable evidence of anyone seeing after their eyes have been removed, or hearing after their auditory organs have been destroyed.

Anybody is of course free to imagine that it might be possible (under some special circumstances not yet known to us) for this to happen, in the same way that they are free to imagine that it might be possible (under some special circumstances not yet known to us) for pigs to fly. After all, has anyone ever proved that pigs can't fly?

Imagination is a very wonderful thing. Those who have nothing better to do, can go ahead and enjoy the trip.

[_krose]

I guess what I have the most difficulty accepting is how an out-of-body experience would work without eyes or ears (the organs we use to see and hear), which are still attached to the body on the bed, not to mention all the neural pathways and brain cells that transmit, carry and store the memories.

There you go thinking about something not human with human terms. This is what I mean by what we don't know.

And why not? The accounts seem to all report the very human experiences of seeing and hearing.