Previous
studies had indicated that between 4% to 8% of the population have
had near-death experiences. But the Kondziella, Dreier and Olsen
study found that 289 out of 1034 subjects claimed to have had something like a
near-death experience. The scientists applied something called the
Greyson scale to quantify the strength of the reported experiences.
106 of the participants reported experiences that were scored 7 or
higher on the Greyson scale, which is generally regarded as the
cutoff level for a “full-blown” or “classic” near-death
experience. So about 10% of the subjects reported a “full-blown”
or “classic” near-death experience, and some 28% reported some type of near-death experience.
This
is an astonishingly high number when we consider that the great
majority of people never have any close brushes with death. A
reasonable guess about what percentage of people have had a close
brush with death would be something like 10% or 15%. So if you get
10% of about 1000 subjects reporting a full-blown near-death
experience, that may suggest that most people who have close brushes with
death have a full-blown near-death experience.
Making
a questionable use of the word “symptoms,” the authors report
the following:
“The
most often reported symptoms were abnormal time perception (faster or
slower than normal; reported by 252 participants; 87%); exceptional
speed of thoughts (n=189;
65%); exceptional vivid senses (n=182;
63%); and feeling separated from one’s body, including out-of-body
experiences (n
=152;
53%).” These are extraordinarily high numbers, involving about 20%
of the random sample of 1034 subjects. These numbers suggest that
the actual level of near-death experiences may be as high as about
20% of the population. There seems to be no obvious reason why we
should not say that anyone who reports either “exceptional speed of
thoughts” or “exceptional vivid senses” or “feeling separated
from one's body” (during a health emergency or close brush with
death) as a person who has had a near-death experience.
We
should ponder the extraordinary significance of such numbers.
Our neuroscientists dogmatically maintain that the brain is the sole
source of our thoughts and mind. Yet judging from the numbers above,
a full 15% of the population have had experiences in which their mind
was separated from their body. Such a result is entirely incompatible
with the “brain makes your mind” dogma, and strongly suggest that
your mind and consciousness do not at all come from your brain, and
can exist apart from your brain. When we get into the specific
accounts given by near-death experiences, we often find those who
have such experiences claim to have observed their bodies from
above their bodies, just as if their soul was floating above their
bodies. Why do our neuroscientists ignore such massively occurring observational
reports, which argue so strongly that the dogmas neuroscientists are
teaching are dead wrong?
An
interesting idea is that your mind is something that comes from some
external metaphysical reality beyond the human body, and that far
from being the source of your mind, the brain is mainly a kind of
valve that restricts your mind. It may be that each of us has a mind
that is something far beyond what we experience in day-to-day living,
and that the only reason we seem to have minds so limited is that our
brains limit our minds. We can imagine a reason why there might need
to be such a valve effect or limiting effect. So we can concentrate on all the measly little
challenges of day-to-living (such as staying warm, getting enough
food, and avoiding various types of physical harm), it might be
necessary for consciousness to be reduced and restricted, so that we
can focus our thoughts on the crummy little details of the here and now, rather than being
absorbed in the grand thoughts of a philosopher.
A possible relation of the brain and mind
Under
such a theory, what would we expect if a mind or soul somehow moves
temporarily beyond the body, such as in the out-of-body experiences
often reported during near-death experiences? We might expect that
the mind or thinking might be enhanced, for in such a case the “valve” effect
of the brain might no longer be limiting our minds. It is just such
a thing that is often reported during near-death experiences. The
study by Kondziella, Dreier and Olsen found that 65% of 252 people
reporting near-death experiences reported “exceptional speed of
thoughts.” There is no way to account for such a thing under a
“brain makes the mind” theory. But if the brain is like a valve
that restricts and limits the human mind, we might expect that people
might report much faster thinking when their brains shut down because
of a close brush with death.
What we know about the brain is consistent with the idea of a brain mainly being a kind of valve. No one has ever discovered any effect by which neurons can produce a thought or an idea or an understanding of something, and no one has any coherent explanation of how such things can be produced by neurons. But we do know of a variety of signal-slowing factors in the brain (things such as synaptic delay, neural noise, synaptic fatigue and what is called tortuosity) which should have a very strong cumulative signal slowing effect.
What we know about the brain is consistent with the idea of a brain mainly being a kind of valve. No one has ever discovered any effect by which neurons can produce a thought or an idea or an understanding of something, and no one has any coherent explanation of how such things can be produced by neurons. But we do know of a variety of signal-slowing factors in the brain (things such as synaptic delay, neural noise, synaptic fatigue and what is called tortuosity) which should have a very strong cumulative signal slowing effect.
The
study by Kondziella, Dreier and Olsen was trying to establish some
kind of association between near-death experiences and something called “REM intrusion,” but it failed to convincingly
find any causal link between the two. “REM intrusion” is
a kind of “dream a bit while you're awake” effect that people can
experience either when they're on the verge of falling asleep, or
have just woken up but are sleepy. The study asked five questions
designed to search for signs of “REM intrusion” in people. The
questions were worded in such as to get the maximum number of people
who could be claimed as people who experienced “REM intrusion.”
People were asked “have you ever” questions such as “Just
before falling asleep or just after awakening, have you ever seen
things, objects or people that others cannot see?” or “Just
before falling asleep or just after awakening, have you ever heard
sounds, music or voices that other people cannot hear?” Asking
such “have you ever” questions is not a reliable way to judge
whether people experience “REM intrusion” to a significant
degree, just as asking, “Have you ever felt an unexplained pain in
your stomach?” is not a reliable to test for whether people have a
stomach disease. A sound way to judge the degree of “REM
intrusion” experienced by people would be to have a question like
the following:
Just
before falling asleep or just after awakening, how often have you seen things, objects or people that others cannot see?
Choice
1: Never.
Choice
2: Once or twice in my life
Choice
3: Three to ten times in my life
Choice
4: Between ten and twenty times in my life
Choice
5: More than twenty times in my life
Of
the people who claimed to have a near-death experience, 34% answered
“yes” to three of more of the five questions related to “REM
intrusion.” Of the people who did not claim to have had a
near-death experience, 14% answered “yes” to three of more of the
five questions related to “REM intrusion.” There's a reason why
such a difference does not actually establish that those reporting
near-death experiences more often experience such “REM intrusion.”
The reason is that those who reported a near-death experience may
simply have a higher degree of candor and openness about reporting
out-of-the-ordinary experiences. Once someone has reported one type
of out-of-the-ordinary experience, there may be a kind of “breaking
the ice” effect that may make him 20% or 30% or 40% more likely to
report a second out-of-the-ordinary experience that he might have
otherwise never discussed. Such a thing can easily account for the
difference in the percentage of people who answered “yes” to
three or more of the questions about “REM intrusion.” Since people don't report things like near-death experiences when they are on the boundary of normal sleep, "REM intrusion" makes no sense as an explanation for near-death experiences.
A
second crowdsourced study was done by Kondziella,
Dreier, Lemale and Olsen, using the same online survey platform of Prolific
Academy, but using a different group of subjects. The results were
almost the same as in the first survey. The differences are shown
below:
Survey 1 | Survey 2 | |
Number of subjects | 1034 | 1037 |
Number claiming a near-death experience | 289 | 286 |
Number with a “full-blown” near-death experience (Greyson score >= 7) | 106 | 81 |
Number reporting time moving slower or faster than normal | 252 | 257 |
Number reporting extraordinary speed of thought | 189 | 169 |
Number reporting exceptional vivid senses | 182 | 165 |
Number reporting feeling separated from one's body, including out-of-body experiences | 152 | 113 |
The
second of these studies tries to draw a link between near-death
experiences and “migraine aura” headaches, based on the claim
that “Forty-eight (6.1%) of 783 subjects without migraine aura and
33 (13.0%) of 254 subjects with migraine aura had experienced” a
near-death experience. Here the attempt at an explanation is even
less convincing than in the previous survey, for we have a mere 13%
of those reporting these “migraine aura” headaches reporting
near-death experiences. X is not likely to be the cause of Y if only
13% of the people reporting Y also report X. Moreover, there has
never been a tendency for people to report head pain during
near-death experiences, making migraine headaches a particularly
unlikely explanation. And people don't report they have near-death
experiences after they merely had a bad headache.
The
important takeaways from these two studies are:
- A significant fraction of people report near-death experiences, with about 25% of people reporting such experiences, and about 8% or 10% of people reporting “full blown” near-death experiences with 7 or more of the classic characteristics of near-death experiences.
- Most of those reporting near-death experiences report their mind operated exceptionally fast, with some 16% to 18% of the total population reporting such an effect.
- Most of those reporting near-death experiences report having had extraordinary experiences in which they were separated from their body, with some 10% to 15% of the total population reporting such an effect.
So what
we have is a massive empirical reality that is very much inconsistent
with prevailing dogmas about the brain and mind, that the brain is
the source of the mind. But such an empirical reality is consistent
with the idea that your mind is not the product of your brain or
body, and that your brain is like a valve that serves mainly to limit
your mind, rather than something that gives rise to your mind.
Postscript: At the link here we have a survey of survivors of the 1976 Tangshan earthquake which killed some 240,000 people. 81 survivors were interviewed, by talking to patients at a convalescent hospital, patients who had been admitted because of injuries suffered in the earthquake. 40 out of 81 reported "full blown" near-death experiences (7 or greater on the Greyson scale). 51% (41 out of 81) reported "thinking unusually fast," 28% (23 out of 81) reported "sudden understanding," 43% (35 out of 81) reported "an out-of-body experience," and 65% (53 out of 81) reported "unusually vivid thoughts."
Postscript: At the link here we have a survey of survivors of the 1976 Tangshan earthquake which killed some 240,000 people. 81 survivors were interviewed, by talking to patients at a convalescent hospital, patients who had been admitted because of injuries suffered in the earthquake. 40 out of 81 reported "full blown" near-death experiences (7 or greater on the Greyson scale). 51% (41 out of 81) reported "thinking unusually fast," 28% (23 out of 81) reported "sudden understanding," 43% (35 out of 81) reported "an out-of-body experience," and 65% (53 out of 81) reported "unusually vivid thoughts."
No comments:
Post a Comment