A recent debate on life after death.

a reply to: FlySolo

Great post, though I would ask a few questions about a few of your statements.

Here's my point. The brain can't come up with something it hasn't already experienced. Sure, it can construct some abstract nonsense around a concept enveloping an experience and make it something else comparative to what we know, but that's as far as it can go.

As I vaguely recall in an intro to psychology class, I remember something similar being taught; how the brain develops solely based on the input that it receives. I think what you're getting at is that people are unable to describe the things they are experiencing and I can definitely relate to that. Though I'm not sure it suggests a source outside the usual realm of stimuli. I think that after a certain age, the complexity to what the mind can randomly generate under any number of conditions must be staggering. Even if for example, a person is convinced they've experienced a new dimension in which they are absolutely neutralized in their ability to describe it. I kind of feel as though it would sell the brain/mind short by suggesting it can't produce something for which you've no control of, or ability to describe.

You can't "imagine" a new color for instance. How can you use any language to describe a new color? You can't.

That is true, but the mind could create an abstract interpretation as you described within its recollection of the experience. It could be that a sensation was observed that an individual can only describe as color. That wouldn't make the experience empirically authentic. The other thing about a claim like seeing a new color is that it would imply that there are colors that have yet to have seen or discovered. In other words; we couldn't describe another color because there aren't any aside from complex color combinations and variations. I realize that humans only see a certain portion of the light spectrum but I don't know if that actually means there are "colors" that empirical science has not documented. I could be mistaken though, maybe you or someone else can shed more light on that subject.

Placing the "god" helmet on your head might induce some of these sensations ( feeling like you're not alone, higher power, uneasiness, love etc) but it won't recreate a fantastical land of light beings, palaces, traveling in a nth dimension, massive upload of information in an "alien language" for a lack of a better word. It won't recreate the actual experience. Just some byproduct of the experience.

I would be inclined to agree, but take into account how much more complex the mind as a whole is, compared to any process-capable machine. The God helmet stimulates the brain, but the brain is still the sole provider of the material its manipulating in addition to the qualia experienced (according to science of course). It could be that while the God helmet stimulates the necessary parts of the brain that trigger those sensations, it inadvertently also limits the scope or depth of said experience due to its mechanical limitations in comparison.

I'm only playing Devil's Advocate by the way, because it is true that for any measure I take to discredit or rationalize a mystical experience, the same tools can be used to discredit the experience of this very conversation, or the fact that I am "alive" or thinking at all.

a reply to: FlySolo

Well I can't really say much because everything I want to say and everything I want to answer is in that long read. If you have enough patience as I did then please read it. I like cant explain without pretty much telling you the whole interview lol. if you get what I mean.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Playing devil's advocate is what's needed anyway to hammer through these debatable points.

I kind of feel as though it would sell the brain/mind short by suggesting it can't produce something for which you've no control of, or ability to describe.

Then my friend, what you've inadvertently done is open a big can of scary worms with this suggestion and I'll tell you why.
Typically, when one just about falls into REM sleep, abstract images will begin to form. Meaningless pictures of nothing really. Until a memory occurs. As soon as that happens, the meaningless picture will begin to develop into your thought. If by chance, you slip out of REM and active beta waves happen again (usually when you recognize your dreaming, or sudden falling sensation) you can catch this and recognize how dreams are really formed; because it will only be a 'part' image of your thought and the other part is...just randomly weird, non-connected abstract image. In other words, there is no narrative. Dreams are not scripted. It's a 'what you see is what you get' type of experience jumping chaotically from one subject to another as your mind winds down from the day.

IF, what you say is correct, that we don't give our minds the 'credit' for coming up with fantastical imagery, then this suggests that there is a completely separate "intelligence" or sentient being locked within our own mind. A driving force capable of producing alien wolds impossible to see in our plane of existence. And to further add, each of these experiences are scripted which goes beyond any known scientific understanding of the human brain.

What your can of worms would revealed is, we are not in control of our minds. There is some other entity that resides within us which calls the shots. Some other driving force which enables us to have consciousness. There is no way our brain can 'construct' an experience with narratives, lessons, introspective peeks into ourselves, literally exposing you to your own deepest darkest fears of your own making. The 'brain' does not care about showing you your own weaknesses or sitting you down for a chat when dreaming. However, in NDE experiences it does. It takes you aside and shows you things and sends you back on your way with a life lesson.

So either in the middle of our brain lays an entire universe, or NDE experiences are non-local.

As for the god helmet, I don't think it's inducing sensations, but rather stimulating the areas of the brain that store the memory. Much the same Dr. Penfield's research into seizures.

a reply to: Cloud4300

yeah, I know what you mean. I already started reading about the labyrinth group. Quite the epic story

a reply to: Cloud4300

Although I certainly appreciate your demeanor in introducing the Wingmaker material, I have a certain gauntlet I run newly presented ideas through in order to determine if they resonate with me. Most of the time, no matter how different a set of ideas may be from my own, I am more than happy to play with them. The times I'm not however; is when that philosophy or idea seems more like a product. I'm not sure I can describe how I feel about it without being offensive, especially considering your seemingly authentic and genuine representation. I would be inclined to believe that from your posts and presentation in this thread, that you do likely have my best interests in mind and that goes a long way with me, and I appreciate it. I'm not sure that the source of these ideas as a whole, resonates with me.

It would certainly not deter me from engaging with you further on any topic though.

a reply to: FlySolo

Loved the video at the end, I was looking at the title trying to guess what it was going to be before hitting play.

Then my friend, what you've inadvertently done is open a big can of scary worms with this suggestion and I'll tell you why.
Typically, when one just about falls into REM sleep, abstract images will begin to form. Meaningless pictures of nothing really. Until a memory occurs.

For me, nothing is scarier than the idea that everything I am amounts to little more than random chemical processes, so that's progress. I must ask - does that memory require a conscious decision in order to be formed or can it form as a reflex to direct stimuli or a previous memory? The nature of memory is perplexing to me because it seems to require a point of observation no matter how you go about it. If an abstract image is formed into a memory, what determines which ones are left out and which ones are recorded, and why? I definitely understand why a memory is required before you have something that resembles a thought, but I feel like what we are kind of talking about is the subconscious, which could be the simple answer as to the boogeyman in question.

If by chance, you slip out of REM and active beta waves happen again (usually when you recognize your dreaming, or sudden falling sensation) you can catch this and recognize how dreams are really formed; because it will only be a 'part' image of your thought and the other part is...just randomly weird, non-connected abstract image. In other words, there is no narrative. Dreams are not scripted. It's a 'what you see is what you get' type of experience jumping chaotically from one subject to another as your mind winds down from the day.

Definitely with you so far. I never felt dreams were scripted, do you know offhand if Science or Psychology says that they are? You seem to be a bit more knowledgeable in this area than I.

IF, what you say is correct, that we don't give our minds the 'credit' for coming up with fantastical imagery, then this suggests that there is a completely separate "intelligence" or sentient being locked within our own mind. A driving force capable of producing alien wolds impossible to see in our plane of existence. And to further add, each of these experiences are scripted which goes beyond any known scientific understanding of the human brain.

This is what I was getting at though. Why should it be that an intelligence other than some facet of our own (which we simply can't consciously recall within our memory) is calling the shots in this area?. Our subconscious mind from what I've read helps (or manipulates) us all the time. It collects some sub-layer of all the stratified experience that makes up our conscience and then applies it when conditions call for dreams, hallucinations etc. Not to suggest they are the same thing but merely triggers, or conduits to spend that data on. Our subconscious is hidden from us to some extent, therefore so could be the inner architect of said alien worlds, no? Naturally this isn't a separate entity from our own, merely one that isn't regulated in a traditional, conscious way.

There is no way our brain can 'construct' an experience with narratives, lessons, introspective peeks into ourselves, literally exposing you to your own deepest darkest fears of your own making. The 'brain' does not care about showing you your own weaknesses or sitting you down for a chat when dreaming. However, in NDE experiences it does. It takes you aside and shows you things and sends you back on your way with a life lesson.

Would it be reasonable to presume that those narratives, lessons, introspective peaks come not during the experience itself but with the recollection of them? That the very first playback of the imagery our mind produces is when the actual construction of the experience occurs? In the end, our playback of anything we experience is all we really have, even down to a nanosecond after the fact.

So either in the middle of our brain lays an entire universe, or NDE experiences are non-local.

I'm not suggesting that NDEs are local, but even if they were non-local; you couldn't see all experience, memory, thoughts, observations, sensations, white noise, hopes, fears, wonders and everything in between as being the sum of your universe anyway? Ironically, I must give Cloud4300 a nod in concurring that in a way, with our brains/souls being the computers they seem to be, life in and of itself really is a sophisticated form of virtual reality.

As for the god helmet, I don't think it's inducing sensations, but rather stimulating the areas of the brain that store the memory. Much the same Dr. Penfield's research into seizures.

Very interesting... I wonder if there is a way to prove one way or the other whether or not what is being stimulated is a memory pocket, or if it is the source.

a reply to: FlySolo

yeah pretty intense stuff. at first I was like the heck is this, then as I progressed I started to see what it really meant y'know

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Hey man that's good enough for me. I respect your response and whatever feelings you may or may not get from reading. it truly is quite fascinating. I would love to continue sharing ideas and thoughts etc with you provided the evidence and credibility on any matter of such and so forth

Take it for what you will.

My cousins friend died rather young of cancer. Before she died (in hospital) she mentioned how she could see a door. Apparently she said it was beautiful and she is walking through it... then she passed away.

This didn't decide it for me, i've "known" for much of my life. But it was just another reassurance that we are more than just a body. Something happens when we leave this physical realm. What that thing is, is yet to be seen.

For those who don't believe - I want to question what you think death is? Personally, i can't perceive "nothing" after death. People often say "blackness" or "nothingness" well, i'd have to be concious on some level to comprehend blackness or be aware of nothing. It's an extremely tricky concept - but I can't comprehend or believe nothing after this life.

My beliefs are not lead out of fear. What is there to fear if there's nothing? I'm not scared of nothing after I die for 2 reasons.

1) I don't believe it
2) If it were to be the case - how can "nothing" be scary?

Peace.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

I must ask - does that memory require a conscious decision in order to be formed or can it form as a reflex to direct stimuli or a previous memory?

This is what I noticed when catching myself; the abstract image began to look like a bicycle, therefore I started dreaming about riding a bicycle. It would then take on another shape and because the brain is designed to recognize patterns, it would scan memories etc, to find something similar and recreate it. So I think it's just a reflex.

but I feel like what we are kind of talking about is the subconscious, which could be the simple answer as to the boogeyman in question.

Super subconscious.

do you know offhand if Science or Psychology says that they are?

I'm only a student of myself but I don't think science entertains the idea that our super subconscious can formulate independent thoughts.

This is what I was getting at though. Why should it be that an intelligence other than some facet of our own (which we simply can't consciously recall within our memory) is calling the shots in this area?. Our subconscious mind from what I've read helps (or manipulates) us all the time. It collects some sub-layer of all the stratified experience that makes up our conscience and then applies it when conditions call for dreams, hallucinations etc. Not to suggest they are the same thing but merely triggers, or conduits to spend that data on. Our subconscious is hidden from us to some extent, therefore so could be the inner architect of said alien worlds, no? Naturally this isn't a separate entity from our own, merely one that isn't regulated in a traditional, conscious way.

Our subconscious does manipulate our perception of the world, but it too can be manipulated. Again, the level of architecture I believe is much much deeper. I think all our subconscious is capable of is irrational (to the conscious mind) logic. Fear of stupid things, why you like blondes and not red heads, good food and bad etc. It imposes itself on our free will but I don't think it can be given credit for the construction of marvelous places when we die or take mind expanding substances. Besides, Dr, Alexander in the OP had most of his brain turned to puss from his meningitis. I don't think the functionality of his subconscious was working.

Would it be reasonable to presume that those narratives, lessons, introspective peaks come not during the experience itself but with the recollection of them? That the very first playback of the imagery our mind produces is when the actual construction of the experience occurs?

Here's the crux. When this happens, you are talking to yourself in the second person? If indeed it's really yourself constructing it. If it is just yourself, then we all have a form a schizophrenia or multiple personality disorder which makes this entire topic a loaded gun. NDE experiences, schizophrenia, out of body experiences...could all be connected. Which begs the question, are mentally ill people crazy or is something happening in the blood/brain barrier bypassing natural conscious defenses lifting the veil? Most are trapped in both worlds and that in itself could make anyone mad.

When people have these lessons, the entire focus is on them. Like a movie being played out and you're the only one in the theater. There is a clear and cohesive script and you're supposed to get it. I encourage you to read some people's stories about ayahuasca experiences. I've had a few, or rather a derivative of ayahuasca and I can say with a straight face, "If my mind is creating this, then we as human race are as dumb as stumps because we are limiting ourselves to what our true capabilities are" Something so powerful and intelligent is deep in our minds it really takes on a life of its own. Personally, I think it's non-local. Perhaps an extension of ourselves from another realm connected to our bodies with a thin strand of silk. Our "higher power" if I may. A duality of physical and spiritual. Here's a quote I love to repeat. "We are spiritual beings having a human experience". It's not the other way around. When we die, we're just going home. I forgot to mention the familiarity that place has once you go there. You remember being there. I did. Life just goes on and on and on...

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Very interesting... I wonder if there is a way to prove one way or the other whether or not what is being stimulated is a memory pocket, or if it is the source.

Ugh, sometimes things occur to me long after the fact. Hence this late response. Anyway, I think it must be areas of memory because sensations of burnt toast or cold water are not pre-programmed.

a reply to: FlySolo

No worries on response times, I sometimes can't get back to the PC until later or the next day. Like today for example lol. In my life I have had my fair share of either weird, or profoundly "spiritual" experiences. Some were the kind I hear other people describe in that nothing on earth could convince them that they were not real. In my particular situation, growing up experiencing out of body experiences on and off for years. To this day those experiences are about as close as I have ever come to truly abandoning any and all remnants of a materialistic view of the world.

At this stage, I am perpetually stuck on the fence because I am perfectly willing to ponder the idea that just because an experience feels out-worldly, profound or ethereal doesn't in and of itself provide a very good argument that it is non-local. I think spiritually minded people get frustrated with science (within a debate context) because often the first tactic used by skeptics is to search for a flaw within the reasoning, and I do understand why; because the human mind is notoriously unreliable. Plus the implications of any of it are profoundly important, so the depth of observation is important.

Personally, I find materialism cruel, distasteful and quite boring. Its the last version of reality I would ever want to be true, but finding even the tiniest, minuscule, shred of observable evidence to the contrary just doesn't seem to happen. There are countless religions, even more "new age" belief systems than we have ever had before, and they are all willing to sell you books, art, music CDs that claim to enhance your brainwaves somehow, and despite all of it; no conclusive, evidence to authenticate it. It wouldn't take much either believe it or not. It seems like the closest you ever get to proof is the anecdotal, and with civilization drowning in a sea of charlatans you can't blame anyone for not accepting anecdotes.

People cite cases all the time of telekinesis, telepathy, OBE experiments, but the documents are either unattainable, or there is some other flaw that prevents any kind of empirical analysis. They still can't get psychics to successfully guess the cards right, in a way that has any statistical relevance. You would think by now, after all this time there would be something, anything that could sway the scientific community. I think the closest we have is the weirdness of Quantum physics, but even within that community; spiritual blogs, enlightenment books and even religions take aspects of it out of context, often deliberately.

I'll never stop hoping though.

en.wikipedia.org...

Interesting, probably near impossible to find. I haven't read anyone's experience yet, but I am going to in a few minutes. I would ask you this though; don't you think there is a possibility that this substance is solely responsible? Various substances have been used to provoke spiritual experiences since the beginning of human civilization, but they're still seemingly local experiences. A chemical means by which to alter the processes of the brain. People undertake these experiences and come out of it virtually immovable in their spiritual stance, but again; does it truly amount to anything other than a profound sense of meaning? Is it in any way intertwined with a external reality?

a reply to: BS_Slayer

Then I'll leave you this to think about. In the amazon, there are 80,000 species of plants and only the Banisteriopsis caapi vine has the monoamine oxidase inhibitor. I read once the odds of finding the right combination of the vine and '___' plant is 1 in 6,000,000. The '___' active ingredient also passes through the blood brain barrier where there are already receptors in the brain for it. It is also produced in the brain during sleep and is believed to come from the pineal gland. Not to mention, as pointed out in the wiki, the '___' molecule resembles the serotonin molecule.

Now, I believe in evolution but I would like a scientist to explain just how does a PLANT contain the same biochemical properties produced in our brain to regulate mood when the two aren't even connected in the evolutionary chain? Chewing on a tree or a mouthful of hay wouldn't do a single thing to your brain. Never mind strip you of your ego and manage to chemically induce alternate realities. Scientifically, just how does a primitive plant even have the ability to evolve in such a way where it's chemical properties are allowed to pass through the blood brain barrier of a human being? I guess the same question could be asked about a plethora of species of plants used in homeopathic remedies. I just can't wrap my head around it being chance.

a reply to: BS_Slayer

oh man that drink is mind blowing/altering. Theres a reason why theres plants like that on earth. I used to think '___' stood for Dimensional Mind Transfer. lol.

a reply to: Cloud4300

You drank the brew? I'm trying to get down to Peru for a fun filled night of purging in a bucket surrounded by the crying and sounds of puking and repent in a tent full of strangers.

Good times.

/sarcasm off

a reply to: FlySolo

I think its because since all life is pretty much connected with one another. We are all one. To have receptors in the brain means we were like meant to eat it. Very much like how we have THC receptors in our brains for WEED. Which I love by the way. AHA.

a reply to: FlySolo

Nah I haven't drank it. Im Mentally not ready for that kind of experience. I feel as if I need to let go of everything around me first before I go down that road and maybe when im a little bit older.

a reply to: FlySolo

On a side note I couldn't help but notice your from Vancouver. Lol im up north Prince Rupert.

a reply to: NorEaster

Kudos for a postive view on death. It's funny you should mention about your recently deceased buddy getting used to "afterlife legs" about him before he attempts to contact you. I once heard, I forget where/whom, that it takes 3-4 days for a recently departed to get acclimated to the afterlife. I'm torn about this subject. Harry Houdini had told his wife that when he died, he would make every effort to contact her. She spent the next few years after he passed and never was contacted, despite various seances and mediums help, most of which were fraudulant, unfortunately. But, after my father had passed from cancer, my mother had to have a priest bless our house and say a prayer to send my father over to the other side. I wasn't living at home, but my mother and brother would hear walking down the stairs at 1:30 am in the weeks after he passed, as he did when he would leave for work. Also they would hear the recliner in our living room squeak as if someone would sit/get up, as he did when alive. She would say out loud "It's ok, you can go now, we'll be fine" but after a few weeks of these minor disturbances, she had the priest do his thing, then it stopped. My father never directly made contact to her though.