LordReed:


That's a link to a blog. Here is the link to the actual study:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25301715/

That was an error on my part . It should have read a blog with a summary of the main study.

It doesn't say that it is definitely not a hallucination or entirely a subjective experience. In fact the author says:

I said those based on the snippets of reports from the second phase not yet fully released , and interviews granted by head of the research team . The study has entered its second phase and you should expect they must have made further observation to know better . I will share the link to the blog where it's currently being discussed and that of the interview .

While the low incidence (2%) of explicit recall of VA impaired our ability to use images to objectively examine the validity of specific claims associated with VA, nonetheless our verified case of VA suggests conscious awareness may occur beyond the first 20–30 s after CA (when some residual brain electrical activity may occur) while providing a quantifiable time
period of awareness after the brain ordinarily reaches an isolectric
state.

Only one verifiable incidence out of 2060. This is not indicative of any objective afterlife IMO.

You didn't read me very well . I did mentioned it's not indicative of any after life . Go back to what you have responded to . You will see where I said so.

In the second phase they now have explanations why only one person .. They said it's due to biological and physiological reasons . You know must people dream and wake up not remembering anything .

In the first phase, if you go back to read it again . It was actually two people who were willing to share their experience , but one was so sick he opted out from being interviewed .

Even if it's one ,I think it's hugely significant if we consider the nature of what is being researched . Nobody within the scientific community thinks it's ever possible for consciousness to separate from the human body .

If it is announced that scientist have finally created a single AI with sentience , I m sure you would have celebrated it and draw my attention to it, and not downplay it that it's just one out of thousands .

However nothing is conclusive yet so no need to jump into any conclusions. The reaserch is still at the elementary stage . They will continue to research untill we understand better .

triplechoice:
But Budatum is still posting his own theoretical understanding of NDE from another thread , without realising he is very far from it.

First, you have disparaged me by misspelling my name.

Second, buda has not posted "his own theoretical understanding of NDE". What buda has posted are the subjective reports so many many years after the fact of the subjective experiences that buda had that buda subjectively understands as buda's subjective NDE and OBE.

NDE and OBE are after all subjective experiences, as in, experiences had by specific subjects who claim to have had them so I don't understand why some other needs to tell me what my subjective experience is and nor do I expect my subjective experience to be objectively accepted by anyone. It's not as if I could provide you with any evidence except my say so 50 years after the experience since its a subjective personal experience with meaning and implications for the person who had it just as the atheist you describe above was experiencing a personal subjective Road to Damascus encounter with Jesus as opposed to the Jesus most think might be Jesus.

An atheist or anyone else who has denied Jesus while on earth is not expected to deserve such response from him , but the narrator was saved despite the kind of life he lived.....

Who expects this deserve, Triple? I seriously think we need to ask ourselves what Jesus would do instead of imposing our own subjective expectations on others' subjective experiences. Those who read Jesus know he paid the same wages regardless of work start time and not for "church and pray" but for love one another and feed the poor and live etc. etc. etc. Besides, can you imagine how many times a Jesus called God would have to forgive if mere mortal buda has to forgive like 70 times 70 times? I could falsely accuse Jesus and mock Jesus and stone Jesus and spit on Jesus and poison Jesus and stab Jesus and nail Jesus to a cross and the bloody Jesus will say, "Forgive buda. They are ignorant".

Though buda is an atheist, that Jesus Christ is Lord!

triplechoice:
Nobody within the scientific community thinks it's ever possible for consciousness to separate from the human body.

But this study does not show nor indicate that consciousness separates from the body, nor do I think it even attempts to.

Consciousness is subjective in that it belongs to a subject whom it belongs to. It is not something we share. I have my subjective consciousness and you have your subjective consciousness, and thankfully we have words with which we convey the subjective consciousness of our experiences and understandings and knowledge to one another.

So how do you separate subjective consciousness from the subjects body? That's not to say it's not possible. In fact, we in a sense already do when we record media and write out the products of our consciousness in books though we don't mind read the read yet.

Possible? Anything is possible till it's not.

LordReed:


You misunderstand my point with the sarcasm. The point is I think there is no discounting that these people have experiences, we all have experiences. These people see what is obviously familiar to them in waking life during bouts of unconsciousness and interpret those experiences as something important moreso than dreams. I on the other hand do not think their experiences carry any more weight than that of a dream.

Ok. I get you .

But there's something you are downplaying .

NDE for instance ,is very significant because if it's proven that the brain is not creating the experience, just like our dreams ,then it would mean only one thing : consciousness can separate from the physical body either at death or any other time .

Let me borrow your own expression to declare this clearly ; current evidences is pointing to the fact that consciousness may not have emerged from matter or the brain after all, and may continue to exist after the death of the physical body .

So why don't you think that's special?

triplechoice:


Ok. I get you .

But there's something you are downplaying .

NDE for instance ,is very significant because if it's proven that the brain is not creating the experience, just like our dreams ,then it would mean only one thing : consciousness can separate from the physical body either at death or any other time .

Let me borrow your own expression to declare this clearly ; current evidences is pointing to the fact that consciousness may not have emerged from matter or the brain after all, and may continue to exist after the death of the physical body .

So why don't you think that's special?

Because it is so far as we can tell a subjective experience. No one else is sharing that experience and no objective evidence is left in it's wake. Same as dreams.

budaatum:


But this study does not show nor indicate that consciousness separates from the body, nor do I think it even attempts to.

Consciousness is subjective in that it belongs to a subject whom it belongs to. It is not something we share. I have my subjective consciousness and you have your subjective consciousness, and thankfully we have words with which we convey the subjective consciousness of our experiences and understandings and knowledge to one another.

So how do you separate subjective consciousness from the subjects body? That's not to say it's not possible. In fact, we in a sense already do when we record media and write out the products of our consciousness in books though we don't mind read the read yet.

Possible? Anything is possible till it's not.

Consciousness is not wholly subjective . It's made up of both the subjective and objective parts . Not much is known about the former since it has not been localised to any part of the brain ,and its why there have been lots of speculations about it's origin .


Is it what people call the soul or subconscious mind ?

Most neuroscientist dismiss the existence of the subconscious mind . They say there's no evidence for it . That the brain is responsible for everything we perceive .

But the brain has its limitations.it cannot make you perceive anything .beyond a certain point , it's absolute threshold .


My own experiences ,some of it ,which I promise to share later will not make me accept that my brain is the cause . I'm not the only one in this kind of situation .


So what do you want a person like me to do then ?

To deny who I am and how my consciousness operates because scientist are currently
saying it's not possible for anybody to have a mind or brain that make one have those kind of experiences ?

Read this below and explain the cause .

You are on a call to a friend who resides in another country , and suddenly you start to perceive the perfume the person is wearing . You mention it to them , and they confirm you are correct .

As the call progresses you start to perceive the smell of what your friend is cooking in the kitchen . He also confirms it.

If you keep having this kind of experience each time you are on a call with anyone else , then tell me ,how can you explain it using your knowledge of how the human brain works .

Please don't mention you guessed it right each time . That's surely not possible .

Or coincidence. . No way .

What I describe above is a type of OBE that some persons experience all the time ,but won't open up to discuss it with others except you have some special relationship with them ..
OBE doesn't mean you must see yourself outside your physical body before you know you have experience it. Not everyone has the type where they see themselves outside their bodies

Some religious people who experience it assume it's a gift from God and quickly open a church to start prophesying to other people .

Yea, some people actually have this sort of experience ,but some pretend to have it when they don't .

It's not as if I could provide you with any evidence except my say so 50 years after the experience since its a subjective personal experience with meaning and implications for the person who had it just as the atheist you describe above was experiencing a personal subjective Road to Damascus encounter with Jesus as opposed to the Jesus most think might be Jesus.

According to it's telling, the "road to damascus" experience had by Paul was not a subjective experience in any light given that those around him experienced at least a part of it. Also, according to Scripture, the visions, dreams, and prophesying of the time were courtesy of God's prophecy through the prophet Joel in Joel 2 vs 28 - 33, a prophecy which was only to occur during the last days. The last days ended 1900 years ago meaning anyone pretending his or her own hallucinations/dreams connected in some way to the happenings of the last days is simply lying!

triplechoice:

Consciousness is not wholly subjective . It's made up of both the subjective and objective parts . Not much is known about the former since it has not been localised to any part of the brain ,and its why there have been lots of speculations about it's origin .

I doubt any neuroscientist is looking for where consciousness is localised in the brain since they understand it is the entire brain that is involved in producing the consciousness not some singular part.

triplechoice:

Consciousness is not wholly subjective . It's made up of both the subjective and objective parts . Not much is known about the former since it has not been localised to any part of the brain ,and it's why there have been lots of speculations about it's origin .

Triple, a person's consciousness, as in what a person is aware of and notices, is very wholly subjective to that person. What they are aware or conscious of is what the subject unconsciously or consciously chooses to be conscious or aware of, and they approach it with their own subjective ability to be conscious or aware of things, and their subjective ability to present their subjective consciousness for the consideration of subjective others. Can you see how subjective it is?

Let me go a step further. Even your own consciousness is very subjective to yourself and there's mostly no objectivity in it whatsoever. You are not even conscious of all that your mind is conscious of, and you can not know what a person is conscious of unless they tell you or you brainwashed them or you read minds.

triplechoice:
My own experiences ,some of it ,which I promise to share later will not make me accept that my brain is the cause . I'm not the only one in this kind of situation .

First, see how you've had almost a month of deriding someone else's subjective naration of their own subjective nde and obe and it turns out you have your own subjective experience that you promise to share but of course you can not accept that your subjective brain is the cause and must find some other cause not subject to you that you can subjectively claim is objective. Except we'd say, "show us if you dared".

That the rest? Beneath the level of things I consciously choose to consider.

triplechoice:

Please don't mention you guessed it right each time . That's surely not possible .

Or coincidence. . No way .

What I describe above is a type of OBE that some persons experience all the time ,but won't open up to discuss it with others except you have some special relationship with them ..

I so love how the unconscious and consciousness works. When I was much younger my mama will have headache and my head will be hurting. She broke her leg in Lagos and I was limping in Ibadan, and God help me when she was pregnant 5 times. That's special relationships for you.

Triple, It is not unusual to know the cooking or perfume worn by one one has "some special relationship with".

Kobojunkie:
According to it's telling, the "road to damascus" experience had by Paul was not a subjective experience in any light given that those around him experienced at least a part of it.

The entire "road to damascus" experience which includes the impression it made on Paul's mind and it's aftermath is wholly subjective to Paul and was experienced by no one else, and what we have from him and those around him is their own subjective interpretation of what they claim they saw and is an example of the subjective experience so anyone who has the same or similar subjective experience would know what they are having.

budaatum:
■ The entire "road to damascus" experience which includes the impression it made on Paul's mind and it's aftermath is wholly subjective to Paul and was experienced by no one else, and what we have from him and those around him is their own subjective interpretation of what they claim they saw and is an example of the subjective experience so anyone who has the same or similar subjective experience would know what they are having.

Then we might as well conclude by that that every experience is subjective. Is that what you are driving at here then? .

Again, some of what Paul's experienced was corroborated by those around him meaning it was not entirely subjective.

budaatum:


I so love how the unconscious and consciousness works. When I was much younger my mama will have headache and my head will be hurting. She broke her leg in Lagos and I was limping in Ibadan, and God help me when she was pregnant 5 times. That's special relationships for you.

Triple, It is not unusual to know the cooking or perfume worn by one one has "some special relationship with".

Are you sure you read what I explained and the explanation I ask you to give to it based on your knowledge of how the human brain works ?

I m saying ,even though not unusual , current mind theory says it's not possible to have that kind of experience .

What makes it possible then. ?

budaatum:


Triple, a person's consciousness, as in what a person is aware of and notices, is very wholly subjective to that person. What they are aware or conscious of is what the subject unconsciously or consciously chooses to be conscious or aware of, and they approach it with their own subjective ability to be conscious or aware of things, and their subjective ability to present their subjective consciousness for the consideration of subjective others. Can you see how subjective it is?

Let me go a step further. Even your own consciousness is very subjective to yourself and there's mostly no objectivity in it whatsoever. You are not even conscious of all that your mind is conscious of, and you can not know what a person is conscious of unless they tell you or you brainwashed them or you read minds.



First, see how you've had almost a month of deriding someone else's subjective naration of their own subjective nde and obe and it turns out you have your own subjective experience that you promise to share but of course you can not accept that your subjective brain is the cause and must find some other cause not subject to you that you can subjectively claim is objective. Except we'd say, "show us if you dared".

That the rest? Beneath the level of things I consciously choose to consider.

Don't jump into conclusion yet . NDE is not wholly subjective if you actually had it. I will explain that tomorrow . It's not my conclusion , but what scientist investigating the phenomenon have declared .

Other kind of OBE may be subjective ,

triplechoice:


Are you sure you read what I explained and the explanation I ask you to give to it based on your knowledge of how the human brain works ?

I m saying ,even though not unusual , current mind theory says it's not possible to have that kind of experience .

What makes it possible then. ?

Empathy, makes it possible.

The phrase "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" is to religiously cement it in humans. Below touches the surface, but it's been discovered to go a lot deeper than that.

triplechoice:


NDE is not wholly subjective....

Hear yourself, please. Does one drop little drop of subjectivity not deobjectify enough for you?

You are making me wonder if you know what the word means.

budaatum:


Hear yourself, please. Does one drop little drop of subjectivity not deobjectify enough for you?

You are making me wonder if you know what the word means.

You don't know what I want to explain . I even said is not my conclusion .

No two persons can have exactly the same subjective experience , ,not to talk of millions of people from different bsckgrounds .

Wait untill you see the evidence of what I present . It's not what you think .

budaatum:


Empathy, makes it possible.

The phrase "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" is to religiously cement it in humans. Below touches the surface, but it's been discovered to go a lot deeper than that.

You are one a different wave lentght What you talked of your mother is something other people have experienced .

And it has scientific explanation already . You search for it yourself

triplechoice:


You are one a different wave length.

Almost 30 years ago I read David Bohm's Creativity. At the time I wanted it to be part of my dna so I read it every year for the next five to cement it into my unconsciousness. I have ordered his Wholeness and the Implicate Order to subject my subjective consciousness and my subjective subconsciousness subjectively much higher.

The love of God for us


John 3:16
For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.


When Adam sinned, he lost the direct access he initially had with God. (Genesis 3) God decided to send his only begotten son (Jesus) to pay the price for our sins on the cross of calvary because of his love for us. When Christ resurrected, he restored all privileges that we once had and brought redemption to us all. All we need is to believe that he died for our sin and has once again granted us direct access with God. No longer through an intermediary! (Mathew 27:50-53).

Jeremiah 29:11
For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the Lord, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope.

If our earthly parents care so much for us, how much more our father in heaven! (Luke 11:11-13). God’s love for us is infinite. He has promised to supply all our needs according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus. (Philipians 4:19).


Prayer of Salvation

Lord Jesus, I accept and acknowledge you as my personal lord and savior. I sincerely ask that you forgive my sins. Come into my life and pour out your spirit on me. By faith, I receive the promise of the father, which is the holy spirit. (John 14:16) I thank you for the price that you paid for me on the cross of calvary. Thank you for my redemption. I pray that your power, grace and favor will abide with me now and forever more. Amen.

I’m having an OBE EVA UPS DHL experience. I am floating above a porcelain throne.

KnownUnknown:
I’m having an OBE EVA UPS DHL experience. I am floating above a porcelain throne.

What is the colour of the porcelain throne, I need to check something. And is it a subjective OBE EVA UPS DHL you are having, or an objective OBE EVA UPS DHL or "wholly" both, and why are you not having a NDE too?

budaatum:


I so love how the unconscious and consciousness works. When I was much younger my mama will have headache and my head will be hurting. She broke her leg in Lagos and I was limping in Ibadan, and God help me when she was pregnant 5 times. That's special relationships for you.

Triple, It is not unusual to know the cooking or perfume worn by one one has "some special relationship with".

I'm afraid you are projecting .

I'm not focused on the unusualness of the experience . I don't regard it as unusual as it's normal to me and some other people who have that kind of experience regularly .

I only ask you to provide a rational explanation for the experience . What is the actual cause ?

What you experienced with your mum and what I described are not the same .

You are comparing apples and oranges .

Both experiences are subjective ,but not the exactly the same kind of subjective experience.



Yours is called somatic empathy, and it's triggered in the brain . You were constantly affected by your mum's emotional state due to the strong affinity that exist between the two of you . This kind of experience is also common between siblings that are twins ,and not just anyone .

Distance is not a barrier because neural pathways in your brain , which connects you to your mum , and which also represents the kind of fondness you have for each other ,acts not only as a controller of your behaviour ,but also as a receiver of whatever signal her brain was emitting whenever she was in distress .

The signal that you receive is processed in your brain to activate physiological effects in your body that matches the exact emotional States of your mum, making you to experience it directly.

The one I described is not the same yours . It can happen between anybody ; a perfect strangers one is contacting on phone for the first time, the anonymous person one is chatting with on Nairaland ,Twiiter , Facebook etc ,,and not only those one has a close personal relationship with . I mentioned this breifly in my earlier description ,but you ignored it .

And again ,what is perceived subjectively in what I described are the activities going on in the other person's outer environment, and not what is occuring inside their mind ,

The natural laws controlling the workings of the human brain makes it impossible for anyone to perceive directly the smell of something beyond a certain range .

And when that happens ,what's the cause ?

That's what I want you to explain



I have taken my time to explain your own subjective experience scientifically.

So please reciprocate in kind and don't give me mumbo jumbo., or irrelevant links .Thank you

@ I invite Lordreed to be the moderator for this one

triplechoice:

I only ask you to provide a rational explanation for the experience . What is the actual cause ?

triplechoice:
And it has scientific explanation already . You search for it yourself

I'm very certain my Lord will tell you where to go for asking me to answer a question you can't answer as if you will pay me or I am your slave.

LordReed:


I doubt any neuroscientist is looking for where consciousness is localised in the brain since they understand it is the entire brain that is involved in producing the consciousness not some singular part.

What I actually wanted to say is that the operations of the subconscious is not ocalised in the visible human brain and not that they are trying to look for it there .

budaatum:




I'm very certain my Lord will tell you where to go for asking me to answer a question you can't answer as if you will pay me or I am your slave.

What are you doing ?

I can see you don't teke your time to read my replies .

The second statement is for you not me .

Your experience ,I said is scientifically explained . You look for it .

But I just did that for you .


You should thanking me instead of this misrepresentation

Kobojunkie:
Then we might as well conclude by that that every experience is subjective. Is that what you are driving at here then? .

Again, some of what Paul's experienced was corroborated by those around him meaning it was not entirely subjective.

Every experience that is experienced by a subject is subjective. I.e. Pain of hammer hitting thumb.

All reports of subject's experiences are subjective. I.e. subjects report of hammer hitting subject's thumb, since it is a subjective report of their subjective experience..

Corroboration by subjects (dem say), are subjective. I.e. reports by other subjects of hammer hitting subject's thumb since they did not subjectively experience the hammer subjectively hitting their thumb.

The first link below is on objectivity but I could not access it on my device hence the second link too. Understanding the difference helps understand both.

https://iep.utm.edu/objectiv/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/

@budatum
Below is the full statement . Why have you edited that way ?

triplechoice:


You are one a different wave lentght What you talked of your mother is something other people have experienced .

And it has scientific explanation already . You search for it yourself

budaatum:


Every experience that is experienced by a subject is subjective. I.e. Pain of hammer hitting thumb.

All reports of subject's experiences are subjective. I.e. subjects report of hammer hitting subject's thumb, since it is a subjective report of their subjective experience..

Corroboration by subjects (dem say), are subjective. I.e. reports by other subjects of hammer hitting subject's thumb since they did not subjectively experience the hammer subjectively hitting their thumb.

The first link below is on objectivity but I could not access it on my device hence the second link too. Understanding the difference helps understand both.

https://iep.utm.edu/objectiv/

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/

Is this an explanation for what asked for ?

If you cannot explain it ,why don't you just say so instead of wasting my time .

Modified.

You assume you know what I'm talking about ,but I can see you don't , if not ,you will not be asking me to know the difference between subjective and objective .

What I'm descriping is not what you have
directly experiencedd before so you are unable to make head nor tail of it.

Those who have extensive knowledge on the topic and have experienced it directly can make sense of it. .

The limitations of language is the problem .

I will look for simple descriprive words for easier understanding so you don't continue to misrepresent me each time .

Later

triplechoice:


Is this an explanation for what asked for ?

If you cannot explain it ,why don't you just say so instead of wasting my time .

I am not your student nor your slave. Go do your own homework!

https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/neuroscience-empathy#comment-8362341

budaatum:
■ Every experience that is experienced by a subject is subjective. I.e. Pain of hammer hitting thumb.
All reports of subject's experiences are subjective. I.e. subjects report of hammer hitting subject's thumb, since it is a subjective report of their subjective experience..
Corroboration by subjects (dem say), are subjective. I.e. reports by other subjects of hammer hitting subject's thumb since they did not subjectively experience the hammer subjectively hitting their thumb.
The first link below is on objectivity but I could not access it on my device hence the second link too. Understanding the difference helps understand both.
https://iep.utm.edu/objectiv/
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/

The account given in the book of Acts of the road to Damascus event reveals that the men traveling with Paul heard the voice and saw the light. That part of the experience was not subjective, was it? https://www.nairaland.com/3257717/st-paul-root-christian-missionary#123496234

triplechoice:


What I actually wanted to say is that the operations of the subconscious is not ocalised in the visible human brain and not that they are trying to look for it there .

Where is it localised?