Dr. Bruce Greyson at the UN on Near Death Experiences – Beyond the Mind-Body Problem
Posted by "The Librarian"Sep 1
An excerpt of Bruce Greyson, MD, PhD speaking about near death experiences and the mind-body connection. Part of a Nour Foundation panel discussion at the September 11, 2008 United Nations symposium, “Beyond the Mind-Body Problem: New Paradigms in the Science of Consciousness,” inspired by the philosophy of Ostad Elahi. www.mindbodysymposium.com
25 comments
Comment by envelope555 on September 1, 2010 at 3:39 am
Wrong. You took his words out of context; he expressed that ordinary standards of science have “proven” remote viewing (he should have used quotes around the word proven, given the point he was trying to make) but thinks the bar should be raised for all such outlandish/extraordinary claims, that such studies should be scientifically rigorous. He conducted his own remote viewing study in 2009 and found no such abilities even among people who claim psychic power. Google it.
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 4:39 am
@envelope555 well thats because thats not what i said,what i meant was that he changed his mind about remote viewing even skeptics such as himself belive remote viewing to be true now.its proven,i didnt say he was beliver of all things paranormal.
Comment by envelope555 on September 1, 2010 at 4:55 am
@jamiacanprincess What are you reading on Wiseman? I don’t see anything that says he changed from skeptic to paranormal believer.
Comment by charliechopstick on September 1, 2010 at 5:55 am
@LooksAeterna What?
Comment by charliechopstick on September 1, 2010 at 6:36 am
How can scientist say that you need the full brain for conciousness when there are cases of people living normal lives with only half a brain?
Comment by LooksAeterna on September 1, 2010 at 7:33 am
@jamiacanprincess Well, I am afraid that is not possible. Also, if you project something into what I say, then it had already been you who was getting off the subject, all I did was try to clean it up.
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 7:36 am
@LooksAeterna its also quite possible that u speak alot of mumbo jumbo but try to make it sound good then completely get away from the subject at hand,lol.i think u should do the relaxing,read your comments agin.lol
Comment by LooksAeterna on September 1, 2010 at 8:16 am
@jamiacanprincess It is quite possible that you understand nothing =:) But please don’t react to your projections. Relax and have a good weekend.
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 8:52 am
@LooksAeterna with so many words you’ve said nothing at all.lmao
Comment by LooksAeterna on September 1, 2010 at 9:32 am
@jamiacanprincess It is generally the case that to claim “If A then B” does not imply claiming A. I can’t see what ultimacy would have to do with it, and also I did not point this fact out because I want you to accept anything. It is just a logical fallacy to read into anyone claiming an implication that he be claiming the premise.
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 10:02 am
@LooksAeterna well as long as you said if and you didnt claim anything as if it were the ultimate truth then i can accept it
Comment by LooksAeterna on September 1, 2010 at 10:57 am
@jamiacanprincess
1. That’s adifferent subject since I only said “If A then B”, I didn’t claim A.
2. Extreme dualism must be rejected. If mind and matter were two separate substantially existing entities then mind could never be in touch with, influenced by or even fathom matter’s existence.
3. Having said 2. it is still possible that there is a spectrum of mind-form of which matter is towards the “denser” form end and other forms of mind are further away from it.
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 11:14 am
@envelope555 not true did u know remote veiwing was considered paranormal and now its considered scientific and proven just ask the hardcore skeptic richard wiseman,its not pseudoscience anymore and ndes will soon be next
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 12:01 pm
@LooksAeterna but the point here is that matter may not condition mind.mind and matter may be two seperate entities comming together giving us the qualities we posses.even remote veiwing is accepted as science nowadays and even hardore skeptics agree
Comment by jamiacanprincess on September 1, 2010 at 12:47 pm
@dmustard11 i dont think these are tricks of the brain,if you listened to the evidence given.there are phenomane occuring where it just isnt possible unless we are now saying that the mind and body can seperate,quantum physiscit know these things as well.i woudnt be so quick to give up.look at remote viewing,it took science FORVEVER to accept that it wasnt a trick of the mind and now its considered proven and scientific,even richard wiseman a hardcore skeptic belives it.science is just catchinup
Comment by ritter89 on September 1, 2010 at 1:45 pm
@envelope555 Not true. Dr Persinger, a neuroscience researcher out of Canada, Laurentian U. has published several peer reviewed papers on the reality of PSI (ESP), despite the fact that he’s an atheist. He theorizes that PSI is somehow a byproduct of quantum entanglement (hate using that term). I’m extremely skeptical myself but am not going to sweep everything under the rug that doesn’t fit neatly into my preconceptions.
Comment by ritter89 on September 1, 2010 at 2:15 pm
@ASilvershade I’m a male and am skeptical myself of most religious and paranormal claims but I do find that in the US, at least, the debate is just too narrow and unimaginative, with hard core skeptical materialists on one side and naive and shallow “believers on the other. About 90 percent of the atheist channels on this site are run by males, same goes for the comments. The religion they’re railing against is mainly western Christianity and the god is an alpha male/paternal figure.
Comment by crackercookies on September 1, 2010 at 3:03 pm
@dmustard11 By the way, all that paranormal stuff and medium stuff I do not believe. I will keep an open mind but I am VERY skeptical about mediums. They just want cash. A real medium would not do it for cash and it’s usually a curse for them.
Comment by crackercookies on September 1, 2010 at 3:43 pm
@dmustard11 I completely understand and I too am not as dense to disregard science. However I have been reading on the subject, spirituality, science, and all other type of information on death and afterlife, etc. Some experiments simply have no explanation yet scientist try to find an answer. I have learned that we believe and see what we want. Look up “The day I died.” It’s a BBC documentary on NDE.
Comment by dmustard11 on September 1, 2010 at 4:04 pm
@crackercookies I’m spiritualist too yet something deep inside me is causing me to disbelieve. I just have a very strong feeling that science will discover the nde and obe are nothing but illusions. Where then does that leave spirituality? Mediums talk about a higher level of consciousness which survives physical death YET if the obe and nde are discovered to be mere tricks of the dying brain, then mediums are wrong and are liars.
Comment by crackercookies on September 1, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Its about time that scientist say “Hey, there might be something to these spiritual beliefs.”
Please lets not confuse spirituality with religion. I am not religious but I do believe there is a spiritual element or “energy” or whatever you want to call it to life. Some shit is beyond the comprehension of science. But its good to see a parallel .
Instead of being skeptical, lets just have a peek. We might find something new.
I mean, WHY NOT?
Comment by ASilvershade on September 1, 2010 at 4:34 pm
I find this testimony by Bruse Greyson interesting. I have no view on NDE’s really, but I do find an interesting difference between male and female reactions to such possibilities. Some men generally say its all hogwash, refer to science, and link it to their own knowledge and/or status. Like an ape banging a drum. It seems to me that women are more open minded on this subject and have a wider field of vision on this one. Just a observation
Comment by PoitinCZ on September 1, 2010 at 5:03 pm
absolutely.
Comment by MetaphysicsAddict on September 1, 2010 at 5:59 pm
@envelope555 Have you read papers/ studies/ analyses by Radin, Bem, Broughton, Sheldrake, Bierman, Braude etc.? If not, then I think you should.
Comment by LooksAeterna on September 1, 2010 at 6:08 pm
@ LachlanBerry05099:
Friend, my comments were directed towards the latest of envelope555′s comments below from around the beginning of this year.
I said: “Perhaps first you read “Irreducible Mind” of which the speaker is co-author and seriously deal with the data before regurgitating prejudice and passing it on as “scientific”. ”
I don’t know how to be more explicit than that. I also said “We are flooded with scientific data to the contrary [to envelope555's opinion]“.