Life after Life

Life after LifeIn Life After Life Raymond Moody investigates case studies of people who experienced clinical death and were subsequently revived.

This classic exploration of life after death started a revolution in popular attitudes about the afterlife and established Dr. Moody as the world's leading authority in the field of near-death experiences.

The extraordinary stories presented here provide evidence that there is life after physical death, as Moody recounts the testimonies of those who have been to the other side and back - all bearing striking similarities of an overwhelming positive nature.

These moving and inspiring accounts give us a glimpse of the peace and unconditional love that await us all.

Watch the full documentary now

1.7k
7.79
12345678910
Ratings: 7.79/10 from 43 users.

More great documentaries

Comments and User Reviews

  • Tyler Ship

    I also had a near death experience after a serious car accident, I've watched documentaries like this before and I thought these peoples experiences were just something in their head. but after my experience,, i just dont know what to say about it anymore.. i dont think we have the language to describe it....

  • NoName

    crazy people .... speaking about dreams

  • John Seals

    @ Tyler

    Would you mind laying out your experience for us? I know it is personal but to me it is facinating. Also, did you have any religiouse beliefs or preconcieved ideas of what to expect? You said you had seen documentaries about it before. Is it possible you saw what you expected? I am not criticizing or judging, just asking. Did you infact know you where dieing? I understand if you would rather not speak about it. I am trying to do some research for a paper and this would be a great source. Thanks for sharing what you have- even if you don't want to say more.

  • Achems Razor

    Will watch, read most books on this subject over the years.

    Of course the religee's will attack everything about this doc.
    But what the hay! Probably would be boring without them, right?

    Will wait for Allan and his one liners also. (LOL)

  • Collette

    It all dependes how much velue you give to reason and the brain as an organ. Once I heard the explenation that says the ''overvelming love'' comes from the protective responce to the brain making the dying person physically experience beauctiful rather thanpainfull feelings. I give value to the brain. I believe that is quitepossible. In that case all the death experiences no matter how beautifully convinsing they seem to the ''wictims'' are simply a way of dying and not a way of waking up after death.
    Also, the KGB person amde me laugh... I don't say however that he didn't have a dream of babies comunicating with him.

  • john

    corny but great

  • Preacher

    They i think of it as the whole seeing near deaf experience is how we cross over from are vessel back to spirit. And yet most minds cant comprehend what's actually taking place in a quantum/meta physical sense. open your mind experience the universe !!!

  • John Seals

    @ Preacher

    What? The first sentence of your post makes no sence to me what so ever. I'm sure it was a typo and maybe I am so stupid I can 't read between the lines- but still I can't figure it out. Could you explain please?

    @ Achem
    No Allan and his bunch should love this one. Watch and you'll see what I mean. What's your theory on what is happening to these people? I have mine but I am interested in others as well. I am writing a paper and would like to get some statistics on how many people think this is real and proves God exists even if not in the christian sence (god with no capitol G). If I could get one hundred posts that say yea or nay it would simplify things. People do not have to explain what god or thier take on god, just wether they think this proves the existance of a god-yea or nea. I hope the moderators don't mind me mining for data here. Stats would be some what misleading though as everyone asked is on this site and thierfore of a certain "ilk" I suppose-in a way. What I mean is, thier should be no common links between a true cross section of subjects.

  • Achems Razor

    @ John Seals:

    I can offer a "what if", but no theories, no facts. have studied all this stuff for years, supernatural, spiritualism, esoteric, and so on.

    Will get back to you later with my "what if's". need a couple of days.

  • 420 Vision

    Those who deny themselves death, deny themselves half the voyage. It is twice as hard to come back from death as it is to go into death, to accomplish this one must fool their own event horizon.

  • Linda McGuigan

    What a lovely feelgood documentary. I know there are sceptic's out there who dont belive this can happen but in my work I have heard people who are on the brink of death saying nurse can you put the lights off when no lights are on ans some who die sit up and put thier arms out and say I am comming. If this is true we all will find out someday as we all have this one thing in commen we are all going to die at some point. these view's are my own.

    Linda ;-*

  • James S. B.

    This is a pretty concise, (in my observation) of the death experience. At 52 years of age, I have experienced much in my life. Therefore without any doubt in my mind this is as simple as it gets in explaining the afterlife experience. Considering there limited exposure to it, and the lack of words inwhich to explain it, I am convinced that their experience is much more than a creation coming from their mind due to lack of oxygen,  etc.  I have personally experienced the other side along with a list of other supernatural things in my life. Many of which can not be explained from a mental stand point, but of a spiritual one. When I experienced this out-of-body thing, it became apparent there was something very familar about it; a kindred feeling that is very much beyond the imformation I would have stored in my brain over the years of living in my body. The experience was very much outside of my physical body. I can tell you from my experience, that this is something that is very real; and once felt...something very familar! Not something created out of a desperate need to explain life's meaning; a singularity for it's purpose, and completeness. It is a 'very' unselfish thing. In my opinion, words alone can not do this subject any justice. It has to be experienced! Life is too short and precious to be angry, closed minded and judgemental towards others outside our "little" circle. Every day we have here is a gift. In the end, it is 'Love' that really counts, and how much of it we give away that matters.  Love and Peace!  Jim  

  • Sarp Kaya

    One day the whole population of homo sapiens on this little planet is going to understand that you live and you die and that's it. Just like all the other animate reproductive organic matter that ever "lived" or ever shall live. The 70 % water that comprises your body will evaporate and the rest of the chemicals, minerals and other elements that are left will mix back in to the ground from whence they came. Alternatively you could request cremation and that would leave a whole lot more carbon than otherwise. Refuting, denying and fearing death are not only the biggest conceits ever suffered by our species but they are also the source of the greatest mass delusions we ever contrived, (i.e religion). No you are not special, no "god" created you and no "god" waits for you to die so that he can either save your "soul" or torture you for eternity. The ego that can not grasp the very essence of life and its final demise = death, is a sick ego indeed. You are a sub branch of the primates with a statistical life expectancy of between 65-95 years so make the most of it while you can.
    (Note: I defer to posters who spell "death" as deaf and "our" as are.)

  • Achems Razor

    @ Sarpa Kaya:

    Okay, empiricist Tabula Rasa, Am not saying you are right or wrong, but then explain to me why Quantum Mechanics begs to differ with you.

    And I am not talking about any Gods, just science.

  • Phil

    @Achems Razor:

    Science is just the manifestation of God.

    Just like moving vocal chords produce sound.

  • Achems Razor

    @ Phil:

    You are entitled to your opinion, of course, which god out of the 28,000,000 man made gods in recorded history though?
    And how do you know your man made god is the right one?

  • Sarp Kaya

    Quantum mechanics, or quantum theory for that matter, have been taken by clever men and turned into mystical stories that are best sellers in the millions.
    If you really want you can find spiritual and mystical elements in string theory too.
    This is the new feeding frenzy for the masses who need a never ending stream of spiritual / mystical icons to keep their miserable lives afloat.
    There are plenty of web sites and books on quantum theory that have absolutely nothing to do with science. They are just using the new fashionable lingo to lead you to more junk (Atlantis, chakras, indigo, sirius are now "out", anything with "quantum" is "in".
    If you want an easy way to follow current scientific trends in this area without a degree in physics watch some documentaries by Micihio Kaku.
    @ Achems Razor : do you also have a spelling problem or what ?

  • Mike Thoughts

    The human body contains a natural chemical called DMT, a powerful hallucinagin. There is a theory that says at the moment of death, the body releases its DMT which is responsible for the euphoric, out of body experience many of these people describe. I've seen people ingest DMT and describe in detail, events that defied logic upon returning to their consciousness. This is only a theory and in no means do I doubt the existence of any gods, I mean, DMT had to get our brains somehow.

  • ZenProtocol

    This the worst documentary I've seen on the subject. Suicide girl states that we will have to repeat our lives over again if we kill ourselves, but not otherwise. This is total BS. Reincarnation, sure I can understand that; but the idea that one breaks rules of time and is forced to repeat their lives up to that point just seems ridiculous.
    There are better documentaries on this NDEs on TDF; save yourself the time and move along.

  • Achems Razor

    @ Sarp Kaya:

    Come-on you never make honest mistakes? than you lie.
    Big deal, knew I spelled your name wrong after entry.

    Don't worry my spelling checker and I are friends.

    Do not have to prove anything to you, but only peruse top scientists, since the 1950's and onwards. And you do not know how many degrees that I have, or not have.

  • John Seals

    @ Achem

    You know my stance on religion. I am totally set against it. But how does quantum theory disagree with Sarp Kaya? She basically said she did not believe in an afterlife and that man was vain and conceded to think he could escape mortality. I am not real familiar with quantum theory buit, I don't see how the two theories conflict, i.e. no after life versus quantum theory. Explain please. By the way- why am calling Sarp Kaya a she? The name just sounds feminine to me I guess.

  • Aristotle

    To John Seals and others??

    All religions at their root involved initiations for acceptance into their groups. The first Christians were divided into Catechumens and the Faithful. The Faithful were at one time the initiated.

    Others religions had longer learning periods leading up to their final initiations. Most religions have ritualized the initiations and others have used short-cuts through drugs for the initiation experiences. The ritual method usually produces nothing but un-experiential acceptance poorly termed as faith.

    The drugs users attempt to mimic the experience without learning, practice or adherence the path required by the particular Hierophant. Drugs are and were the perfect method for the instant gratification group from the 1960 through to today. They produce the drugged and quite active left and right brain lobes as a hallucination machine. Haute Asbury was full of them once.

    The religious experience is the “Out of Body Experience” and it no longer needs the religion to accomplish the experience nor the path set down by some Hierophant. It does however require practice, discipline and awareness. Your depth of each is your choice. If you have ever been under deep anesthesia of a particular type you have been in the state and may or may not have had the experience. It’s the awareness part that’s tricky.

    Among those who don’t use drugs but continue with the learning experience are the Buddhists, Brahmans and Hindus. All they add are their particular cultural memes and the memes make them a religion.

    You can use Binaural Tones to achieve the various brain states, Beta, Alpha, Theta and Delta. You naturally (and hopefully) bounce between Beta and Alpha during your waking day. If you never get to Alpha find a relaxing hobby, you’re killing yourself. Beta is when you are mentally engaged and Alpha is when you are relaxed and observant.

    Theta is generally “dream sleep”. No inhibitions, insightful and creative, hence the dream. Some bounce between Alpha and Theta while wakeful. It’s called daydreaming.

    Delta is the deepest sleep (4 to 1.5Hz [0Hz is brain dead]). During Delta (and deep Theta) you body is paralyzed. If you become aware (brain wakeful body asleep) during this time your body has not yet caught up. Some are fearful when this occurs. This particular state, Delta at some level, is the state of the experience described in the Doc. For it to be a real NDE brain state has to be 0 Hz.

    The objective is body and left and right brain lobes asleep while maintaining awareness. Some understand that this is not possible. What you make of it is solely up to you but it does take practice to purposefully achieve and recognize these states. Most that discuss this topic haven’t a clue. The bottom line is what you believe about or how you understand the experience (or illusion) of the separation of consciousness from the physical body.

  • Achems Razor

    @ John Sears:

    In answer to your query...all these scientists say the same thing, the reality as you know it does not exist.

    These are all top scientists, list as follows.
    *Jim Al-Khalili...Nuclear physicist.
    *David Bohm...Quantum physicist.
    *Anton Zeilinger...Q. physicist.
    *Fred Alan Wolf...Q. physicist.
    Dean Radin...senior scientist, IONS
    Amit Gaswami...Theoretical nuclear physicist;

    Click on..."youtube-a conscious universe-the observer effect".

  • Aristotle

    RoachInKansas..

    Do a little more research.. Everyone goes through all the brain states every day without having seizures. They are just unaware of them.

  • Sarp Kaya

    @ those concerned : I am male.
    @ achem : I did not mean you misspelt my name. You are misspelling your own username. It is spelled as Occam or Ockham, after the 14th-century English logician, theologian and Franciscan friar William of Ockham. Occam's Razor denotes an important principle still very useful in logic, philosophy and all manner of sciences including a framework for common everyday thinking. Your perusal of science for the last 60 years should have at least given you the background to pick a username that you could spell correctly.

    Meantime, the Chinese have crossed the DNA of a watermelon with those of a cockroach. As soon as you cut open the melon the seeds run out and scurry all over the place. Neat huh ? Will be available in Kansas as soon as it gets FDA clearance.

  • Achems Razor

    @ Sarp Kaya:

    Believe me, I do know what my username means, Achems means the same thing, Google it!!

    A lot of people use occam or ockham in reference to there discussions
    it would be easier if my username did not overlap.

    And why would it matter to you what handle I use, this is a ridiculous discussion!

  • Achems Razor

    Correction: their, instead of there. don't want @ Sarp after me again (LOL)

  • John Seals

    @ Sarp

    Come on man, back off Achem. He is a good guy. I didn't think he meant to single you out or anything. He knows all about his name and how to spell it, you are not the first to point it out. I'm not the Achem fan club or anything but you guys seem to have somewhat similiar ideas in alot of areas. I've read alot of Achems posts, he's a fairly level headed well informed guy and you seem the same. You guys both distrust religion, thiers a starting point. I meant no disrepect with the gender mix up by the way.

    @ Achem

    Thanks I'll check it out.

  • hawkpork

    I basically agree with Sarp and look forward to further posts from him. i spend ages trying to get my spelling write. hehe.

    humans are very conceited.
    does all life have a soul? is there an afterlife for amoebas?
    is there a soul hierarchy?

    might watch this 1. but i've seen people talking about 'the light' and hovering above themselves in the emergency wards and all that before.
    from dust to dust and nothing more, i reckon.

  • John Seals

    Just giving your opinion, while helpful to my paper that mentioned earlier is not the point. Thier is a phenom going on here that I think says something more than being just another hallucination or desperate attempt. It is to universal and linear in my opinion to be easily explained. The brain wave thing is a good theory, but no proof to sustain it. That said right now the "it means nothings" have it by quite a margine. Come on people give me one hundred opinions, it makes the math simple.

  • Farren

    Every arrogant word and action will cause grief when we too, will experience what these folks in the video experienced. This phenomenon is huge and only growing as more people gain the courage to "come out of the spiritual closet" and shed their fear of ridicule and of not being taken seriously by peers.

  • liz

    Beautiful & reassuring...answered a lot of my questions. So LOVE ha? what a powerful word, even more when it is used as a verb!

  • mugen

    @Aristotle.
    you have a great way of explaining consciousness. but do you believe that these states may happen on a molecular level?
    hope to hear from you.

  • Achems Razor

    @ John Seals:

    Thank you for intervening on my behalf, phenomena going on? has been since antiquity I suppose, called spiritualism, it is in all the eastern religions, supernaturalism in western religions.

    The other camp is the Tabula Rasa which believe you are born with a clean slate. Then how to explain people like Mozart etc:

    And then there is philosophy, like Kant, etc: another camp.

    Might be pretty hard to get anybody to say the things you are looking for, for your paper, they will of course be open for ridicule, and you know they will be jumped on severely. I myself will bow out on my "what ifs" also do not need the hassle.

    Will stick to science, and find out what I can about QM.
    The problem with QM. though, it is leaning towards spirituality, what to do? (LOL)

  • Sarp Kaya

    From Richard Feynman : "if you think you know quantum mechanics, you don't know quantum mechanics".
    As science progresses it finds new and wholly uncharted areas of potential discovery. Quantum theory is just such an area. It is the mathematical equivalent of exploring what there could have been before the big bang. In that area there are theories such as multiverses and parallel universes, etc. All of which are just theories waiting to be tested and confirmed. The LHC at CERN is trying to do the same with particle physics, which should eventually reveal to us the properties of matter just after the bang, which should shed light on the ongoing questions of dark matter and dark energy, still unsolved to this day.
    All of this impinges on the areas that religion deems "sacred". Thus the continuation of the clash between scientific progress and religious dogma. On a similar level the US has been left far behind in genetic research due to its religion based sanctions against it. Now China is the leader in this field.
    Why do I mention all this ? Because humans adore such mysteries and adorn them with spiritual significance. The Harry Potter approach is easier than science. To the masses, anything not yet fully explained by science shows that science is deficient. Because we don't yet understand dark energy then it has to be the work of god. There will always be things we can not know (such as death). Not knowing is a perfectly acceptable state of being. Creating imaginary entities and realms to fill in the gaps is a result of our temporal lobes that we acquired millions of years ago. These also gave us our ability to imagine and create. We still haven't mastered the use of these without the drawbacks of suffering illusionary and delusionary concepts. But the human animal is also evolving and sooner or later we will achieve it. (If we don't destroy the planet first.)

  • Achems Razor

    @ Sarp Kaya:

    Everything that you have said above, I totally agree on.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    Howdy y'all. I plan to watch this at some point today and oh boy, I can't wait to join the conversation. Nothing like being pigeonholed before you walk in a room.

    @Achem - do I have to do anything other than believe in the mysterious, the transcendent, etc. and ascribe it to a particular tradition, all the while loving science and being willing to to be wrong in order to qualify as a religee? In that case, I guess I'm "that guy." However, I'll give fair warning, I'm tenacious and love to have a vigorous discussion with little room for prepackaged arguments. :)

    also, not having watched this yet, I want to throw in the mix, regarding whether or not it is our brain creating these experiences - watch the BBC doc. The Day I Died - a world class neuro surgeon is left without explanation when a woman reduced to a clinically dead state is able to recount the surgery in vivid detail - as if she had been watching from above the table looking down. Crazy stuff.

  • Achems Razor

    @ Keith:

    Knock yourself out, we are waiting! Need some lively discussions.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    Here goes nothing...

    @ Achem - I don't have much for you my friend, because you state your thoughts quite respectfully and make few broad or condescending assumptions. I would offer a suggestion in your question about QM and spirituality - what to do? follow where it leads without fearing or deciding what you already presume the answer to be. In other words, if you have a naturalist and strictly empirical view of everything, so be it. Approach things that way, but never assume you won't be surprised by something that is new and empirical. Just a suggestion.

    @ Roach - thank you for taking the words out of my mouth. What you described in option 3 is something many people on these boards (including Sarp) could use a bit more of...good old fashioned humility...the ability to approach a subject with the notion that it is possible, no matter how remote, that you could be wrong.

    @ Hawkpork - You reckon? the "I reckon" approach to science, spirituality, nuclear physics and later bombs, criminal justice system, etc...is never a very fruitful or positive way to proceed. As I was suggesting to Achem, if you approach information or experience with the "I reckon" already in place, why bother? People reckoned pretty carefully before Galileo, and their reckoning turned out to be wrong. People reckoned before Einstein and their reckoning was wrong. People reckoned before Edwin Hubble peered out of our galaxy and realized how infinite it all might be and they were wrong. It's a human disease, this whole arrogant certainty with which you dismiss ideas and experiences you don't understand. Why not just let it be what it is, and accept that there might be infinitely more than your present understanding of things?

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    and finally @ Sarp...

    are you aware how arrogant and condescending your tone comes across? I have to remind you as I did in another such discussion that you weaken your arguments when you make sweeping generalizations about what "religion does" or does not do, or about what "religion" is or is not. No matter how much more comfortable and manageable and reducible it makes your worldview, you cannot simply use a caricature of something as wildly diverse and complex as religion, and still maintain your integrity as someone who is purely logical. I think Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins are both geniuses of a very different sort (though I can tolerate Hitchens's brashness far longer than Dawkins high-minded smarter-than-thouness), but unfortunately they also weaken their arguments when they stoop to this simplification. I am apparently one the adorable and amusing "religees" that Achem refers to, but I assure you, my logic, my mind, and my life are not lost in the clouds, and I will be happy to patiently point out again and again that your arguments lie flat if you are not willing to submit yourself to rigorous and thorough logic and appreciation of the WHOLE picture instead of the parts you choose to dabble in for your arguments' purposes.

    Throughout history, there is a long standing tradition of people with the arrogance to suggest that things they cannot explain simply are or are not a,b,c, or d. Most of them have been religious people assuming they have the corner on ultimate truth only to be proved wrong by scientists. Now, it is not to say the tables are turned, however there is a religious zeal and arrogant certainty on the part of many so-called empirical and scientifically minded people like yourself Sarp. You enter a conversation with 100% certainty that you are right. So why come to the table? Because it's your civic duty to point out where everyone is wrong?

    I can promise you that your quality of life will improve drastically if you attempt a bit of relaxation on your "charge in with the truth for the stupid masses" approach and instead, come into any situation with an openness to either being wrong or to having your "rightness" adjusted a tick or two.

    Now, I have to recognize before you point it out for me that I, like all of us, am a bit of a hypocrite because...I just accused you of telling people how wrong they are...thereby doing what I accused you of. We're all human. I'm trying to at least do it in the spirit of suggestion, not condescension.

  • Aristotle

    mugen...

    One has to play with words here and many on both sides of the understanding do just that. The problem lays in one’s definition of the words consciousness, awareness and self-awareness.

    A magnet can said to be aware of the presence and polarity of another magnet and the valence orbit in the electron cloud can be said to be aware or consciousness of the charge of the nucleus and the charge it manifests in itself. Some would term the valence orbit to be self aware. The ability of this valence orbit to exchange electrons or charge with another nearby atom can be termed as environmental consciousness or awareness.

    Molecules have similar properties that will allow predictable combinations with others and form organized chains. These are all physical properties that some term consciousness and hence the term conscious Universe. Depending on your view point this also can have a dual meaning.

    Molecules organized into organic substances, cells, raise the bar quite a bit. They are aware of their environments. When possible they will move to maintain their viability. They are aware of substances that will harm and move away as well as sustenance and move toward. It can be said that a plant knows the direction of the sun, water and nutrients. When they organize into more complex multi-cellular organisms, animals, they are aware of which organ and organism they are apart.

    All of that being said, are they conscious? I would say that molecules respond to the charge and the electro-chemical properties inherent in all matter. There is no choice, just stimulus and response. This type of action continues until the multi-cellular organism can think, predict the outcome of an action and choose between actions. That is an opinion and another subject more in line with this doc.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    oh yeah, @ Sarp - please please do not tell me what I deem sacred or do not. I am not the Pope. I am not Jimmy Swaggart. I am not Benny Hinn. I am not an abortion clinic bomber. I am not a gay-hater. I am not a Bush disciple. I am not an anti-evolutionist. shall I go on? You don't know me and you can't possible know and speak for the several billion people who hold some form of religious belief simply because you have read this person or that person's summary of a certain large group's beliefs. I for one, insist on remaining open and learning as much as I can to add to that which I already believe. I am open to having my beliefs changed and challenged, and they have been.

    You make it self-evident that my slimy religious worldview is far more open to adaptation and correction than your non-religious one.

    Feel free to speak for yourself and your loathing of religion and your opinion that those who belief anything transcendent are fools. Please do not speak for me, especially not by lumping me in with billions of diverse people whom you also don't know.

    thanks.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @my neoclassical brother.

    Loved that delta brain states info. Do you have anymore info on the frequencies of different brain states? The processes etc.

  • Aristotle

    Epicurean_Logic…

    Brain States have been induced through Binaural Tone generators used clinically in brain/mind research of various types. Caution when you research. Some have picked up on it as a money maker but what else is new. Others fear it expressing all the usual uninformed fall out.

    The basic Binaural Tones I believe can be found on-line. There are also a few software tone generators, some free some not, and some better some worse. The same effect can be produced using two tone generators once you know the basic single tones. They can also be copied to MP3s for portability. Use no back ground encoded messages or other information only the tones.

    Basically two separate tones are played simultaneously and create an audible beat frequency. When using separate speakers you can hear the beat tone but this is just physical properties produced by the sound waves for this purpose its just noise.

    When the tones are played on separate channels through ear buds one tone in the right ear and one in the left ear the brain itself produces the beat frequency. It is not a physical property of the sound but a function of the brain.

    The difference between the tones yields the beat frequency to match the various states. The brain will synchronize to the beat frequency producing the state after a period of 8 to 10 minutes. The rest is just to relax and observe or experience the state. With some practice you can learn to produce the states almost on demand.

    You have probably already observably experienced Theta while driving a long distance. The focus on the road, the tire hum, wind noise and lost in thought unable to recall the past five miles or struggling to recognize where you are. All the while your driving is flawless. Your body on auto pilot, mind engaged elsewhere, Theta.

    *The lowest end of the brainwave spectrum is called the "delta" range, with frequencies less than 4 Hz. This is usually considered a “sleep” range.

    *The "theta" range (between 4 and 8 Hz) is often associated with deep states of meditation.
    .
    *The high end of brainwave activity is called the "beta" range, and extends from about 14 to 40 Hz.

    *The “alpha” range (from 8 to 14 Hz) is often considered a area of “high focus”, possibly good for reading or for mental endurance while cramming for an exam.

    Used as tools they are useful in many ways. Hope that helps.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @mynewfriend

    That was fascinating.

  • marie72

    GREAT explanation of an after life experience.I really liked what choices you have if you do commit suicide,I wonder if a accidental drug overdose also counts as suicide?

  • mugen

    Aristotle

    wow so they can be aware of environment and yet have no self awareness at all. very unselfish of them lol. it is starting to seem to me that sentient beings are just larger and produce egos. the ego is what makes us different from our building blocks. am i right to suggest that?

  • John Seals

    @ Aristotle

    I am in the process of rercreating the Binaural tones on my recording software, then move to mp3 player and viola. Do you think I could learn to reproduce theta so I could get some sleep, I am a insomniac (got papers and all). I can't take all this ambien and stuff it makes me see stuff and sleep walk.

  • John Seals

    Actually i just downloaded winaural, a binaural tone generator. It's free and works great. You can create and save files or just dial up what you want and listen. It has a base frequency and a beat frequency, do these need to be set in any particular way to achieve certain states?

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    @ John Seals

    Where did you find that download? I saw a documentary about that a while ago and was sure that stuff had to be available for something less than the quacky spiritual sites' exorbitant cd prices. I am keen to hear anyone's thoughts or advice on how best to make use of that audio.

    Thanks!

  • Aristotle

    @ mugen

    You missed a clue. It is the various definitions of consciousness held by an individual. Some believe as you state and vehemently defend their positions. The common terms are Materialist and/or Rationalist. There are researchers that are trying to make a conscious computer. The limiting factor is the upper limit of a given storage medium. It seems that the amount of storage necessary cannot fit into one computer, electronic or organic (the brain). One answer they are probing is linked off line storage as in the internet. As far as I know the internet is still unconscious and I believe it will remain so.

    Even if consciousness is defined as purely stimulus and response at various levels there is still the problem of being conscious of being conscious. This is where one gets into Id, Ego and Super-Ego debate. There is a difference between a sentient being and a self-aware sentient being.

    One can gather and understand all data and forms of data existent and extrapolate an answer that is mentally satisfying for them. This is like reading or watching a video about sky diving. You don’t really know until you strap on a parachute and step out of an airplane at 10,000 feet. The reader has faith in the author. The sky diver has moved from faith to knowledge.

  • Aristotle

    @John Seals

    If I remember correctly, the binaural beat is the mathematical difference between the tones. In a prior post I listed the frequencies of the various states. You should be able to adjust the left and right tones to match a given frequency. There are “canned” audios out there. The best will have an anomaly periodically in the tones to catch your attention.

    This is not a panacea. You still have to devote some time and effort. I found it works better than biofeedback. I stumbled on this a long time ago. While driving long distances between sites I would mentally search for solutions to problems that were the reason for the travel. The success rate was (to me anyway) astounding. I became interested in why the car was my best think tank. The search led to the brain states and how to achieve them at will. (I don’t advise using the car in motion as a think tank)

    As far as the benefits go think about it for a moment. You take the time to relax and focus on nothing but the beat frequency. Your body and brain are relaxed. Your mind is focused on a simple reoccurring right and left lobe induced beat. The brain is busy producing the beat. The part that you play is observer. Much of the rest is automatic.

    For some the only difficult part is remaining a passive observer. Some tend to be distracted. Passively observe the distraction then return to focus. What one makes of the observations or distractions are their singular choice but you will at a minimum deeply relax. Every benefit beyond is a plus.

    It’s a personal experiment. One can of course read or watch videos about it or gain an experience. What any experience is and what to make of it is purely personal.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    @ aristotle

    thanks that's really interesting stuff. I have experienced similar phenomena. I bike commute to work and find a similar thing at work, my mind becomes very active creatively and problem solving while the rest of my brain is humming happily away at the physical exertion.

    Just last night I read a great article about this, in terms of athletes (not that I am one by any stretch) brains and how they function. This was in a back issue of Discover magazine from earlier this year. In any case it described very much of what you're talking about - training the brain, etc.

    Also, interesting to note how you described the strategy of being a passive observer - that is a nearly perfect secular analogue for the way I heard a Catholic nun who has practiced meditation and deeply contemplative practices for decades describe it. Her metaphor was to "greet the distraction and then kindly show it to the door and return to the listening prayer (meditation)."

    Aristotle, can you recommend where one might find good audio files for this purpose? I do have recording software that I could import left and right files into if that is needed. Any pointers? thanks.

    Keith

  • Aristotle

    @Keith

    John Seals found a free generator called winaural. Google it to find the download.

    @John Seals

    Sorry the post with the ranges I posted to @Epicurean_Logic above..

  • mugen

    Aristotle

    so how would you describe the difference between a human being conscious of consciousness and say the consciousness of a wild animal?

  • Aristotle

    @mugen

    One last shot. At a minimum a human beings know they are animals, mammalian and homo-sapiens. The species, arguably, has been physically unchanged other than skin tone and minor facial characteristics for around 100,000 years; call these changes epigenetic environmental adjustments or adaptation. This species exists with others similarly genetically unchanged for the same period of time, other species much longer.

    Somewhere on this journey the species, homo-sapiens, began to imagine, plan and execute the means and ways to improve their lot in the environment. One would be tempted to place the leap from epigenetic environmental evolution to conscious adaptation some where in there. In order to do that there must be an awareness of past, present and future and what they bring. There must also be awareness that the present and future can be affected by individual action. That is only a beginning but a major leap above the other species. One key is conscious awareness. The other is the ability to choose not to be an animal moved solely by instinct and hormone.

  • TriforceV

    @ all

    Clearly near-death experiences are very real!!!.

    I know a lot of skeptics will disagree with this, and that's their opinion.
    Many scientists claim that near-death experiences are simply the brains dieing gasp, resulting in hallucinations, loss of blood in the visual cortex (White light), and a release of euphoric hormones.
    In other words, simply a dieing mind's loss of functions and nothing more...

    While I am scientifically inclined, I disagree with this explanation, because it fails to explain the heart of the near death experience and the profound implications it has on the individual experiencing it.

    The way science tries to justify and defend its scientific ideology towards the paradox of Near-Death Experiences is ironically similar to the way the church defended the belief that the world was the center of the universe.

    In both cases they were each stuck within their own unique paradigm -- Yes, science can be tested, but as you delve deep into the physics (especially quantum physics), the more you realise that nothing is truly as it seems, and we have merely scratched the surface

    In addition a scientist fails to grasp the spiritual and perplexing visions as anything other than hallucinations.
    Before they begin their studies, they have already lumped and labeled all the visions as hallucinations, the near death experience as nothing more than a dream, and their tests are simply done to confirm their belief.

    But I have yet to see science adequately recreate a true near-death experience in a lab that can be tested.
    Nor have these explanations given explained why so many stories are similar and profoundly meaningful... furthermore, the debunked theory seems to bee too neatly packaged and fails to explain why so many hallucinations are similar and evoke a religious or omnipotent-presence.
    I just don't buy it.

    In addition Science has yet to explain the paradox of Consciousness which has have yet to be truly explained adequately by science.
    They have studied the brain and explain all the functions, (emotions, instincts, urges, sub-conscious)and yet consious remains elusive..
    The question is "The brain functions perfectly?, so why are we aware of it, and how are we aware of it".
    It's what separates us from the machine and the missing link to building a true AI.

    And if anyone study's the wonderful world of quantum physics, you realize that the universe is very strange... especially considering new theories like String-Theory.

    The point i'm trying to make is maybe there is a better, more logical explanation of near-death experiences that more intricate and profoundly revolutionary that do have a scientific basis that is more complex and intricate than we simple mortals can yet comprehend....

  • Bobo

    I really liked this documentary. Been dealing with the death of an idol recently and I hope he's experiencing what these people have gone through. It sounds nice.

  • pulunco

    Aristotle any of these tones help with OBE's? Its been a long time since I had one and I have just started to try again. All I can say is that they are real and very scary when you first do it. It is the most real thing I have ever experienced, it is more vivid than this reality.

  • Achems Razor

    @ pulunco:

    I tend to agree with OBE's, myself never had one, but can relate an experience a girl cousin told me, when she was 12 years old, was very sick, laying in grandma's bed, grandma went out to some outhouses, chicken houses, on the farm some distance away.

    My cousin followed her out there, hovering above her. saw everything she was doing and followed her back, saw her body in bed, and returned.
    She did not tell anyone about this until in her thirties.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    @ Triforce V

    I agree for the most part. I don't know if you read any of my posts here but you and I are saying the same thing to a great degree, especially the idea that so-called scientifically minded folks often fall into the same trap of presupposing what is possible instead of being open to possibility. This kind of unwise certainty is what I was jokingly referring to as the "I reckon" phenomena based on hawkpork's broad "I reckon" approach.

    For me it all comes back to humility. If we can't be humble enough to go through life saying, "I could be wrong..." given that particularly when it comes to matters where science is fuzzy, still unfolding, unsure, etc...that many people would have been better off to work that way, instead of acting with arrogant certainty and then going down in the footnotes of history as just another bright person with wrong ideas. Even Einstein's hallowed research is now being called into question in many ways as they look deeper and closer into QM. I guess if I'm looking for humility and wisdom in a generous supply, an online documentary forum is probably not the best place to start! lol -

    that is the first time in my life I have typed lol. I am spending too much time online!

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    by the way, if anyone is interested I found a pretty cool program for free download called gnaural which allows you to generate a standard binaural audio file but if you want to play with it and customize it you can do that as well. There is an easy export to wav feature so you can put it on a cd or an ipod, etc. I haven't used the file for meditation yet, so can't vouch for its efficacy but it all works well and seems to be legit.

  • hawkpork

    keith, wtf?
    "i reckon" is another way of saying "i think" or, "my oppinion is", or "i deduce"..
    i said 'from dust to dust, i reckon'
    do you think i am the god whose existence we all love to debate?
    do you expect me to be adamant about my beliefs?

    isn't that what you ridiculed sarp for?

    this quote from sarp is my fav comment on this page. hits the nail on the head.
    "Creating imaginary entities and realms to fill in the gaps is a result of our temporal lobes that we acquired millions of years ago. These also gave us our ability to imagine and create. We still haven’t mastered the use of these without the drawbacks of suffering illusionary and delusionary concepts. But the human animal is also evolving and sooner or later we will achieve it. (If we don’t destroy the planet first.)

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    @hawkpork,

    Yes, I'm familiar with the phrase "I reckon" and it's generally accepted meaning. My point is, that saying I reckon, I deduce, etc. about something which is still too esoteric and elusive is itself foolish and indeed a bit arrogant. Actually, "I deduce" about a subject which is still all theory and speculation is even more so. I am not sure I understand what you're getting at with the comment "do you think I am the god whose existence...etc."

    Do I expect you to be adamant about your beliefs? I don't have any expectations of you because I do not know you save a few words typed into a keyboard. I didn't ridicule Sarp for being adamant, I ridiculed his certainty about things it is entirely impossible to be truly certain.

    For example, I believe in God. I am not certain that I understand who God is exactly, but I have beliefs about it. I would not argue that I know who and what God is because I recognize that this kind of certainty is human hubris. To frame a scientific declaration that such and such is or isn't or can or can't be about things which are still in the realm of esoteric theory is also human hubris.

    I can appreciate the logic of Sarp's quote and it is a good one. However, it still represents about 10% science (we can agree that the temporal lobe and it's current function has been studied) and 90% conjecture. For what it's worth I do agree that we ought to hurry up and evolve before we destroy the planet, but we disagree about what evolving in a positive direction looks like.

  • hawkpork

    keith,

    seriously .. how can you misunderstand such simple english?

    "i believe, i reckon, i deduce etc", all have similar meanings within this context. as do the words "certain" and "adamant".

    i say it in recognition of my ignorance. "I think, therefor I am" is all I profess to KNOW.

    is it foolish and arrogant to express one's thoughts and beliefs?

    wouldn't it be better to share your own beliefs with me rather than calling me names?

    sounds like you're basically telling me to shut up and keep it to myself.

  • Aristotle

    @pulunco

    Yes. It depends on the depth of the meditation and the mediator. The tones present the target the mediator can follow and synchronize with the beat or fight it. The rule is to be an observer not an architect. The architect is like the gamers that switch on the cheats or alter the code. They never experience the true game.

    Some won’t relax and achieve “Alpha”. Hyper activity is a problem today but it can be overcome. The target is to get to Theta then Delta and remain passively observant.

    A help might be to keep a log and note failures, successes and observations. (If you don’t note them you will forget them.)

    You learn when you observe where the meditation naturally takes you. It reveals you’re base attractions. They are like keys to doorways. Find the key open the door. Ignore the key the door stays shut. It’s a personal unveiling. If the experience is an “OBE” then that’s what it is and they do occur but it’s not the primary objective. It’s a way of stripping away the illusions, like using fire to fight fire.

    For another perspective here is an example that mixes the architect and the observer for practical use. Then I have to get back to my lab. Physicists execute experiments on various levels. Some visualize the math. Some use the physical experiment. Some mentally place themselves within and then without the environment of the experiment. One level would be the famous falling elevator or the train ride. Envisioning warped space and the effects of mass is a whole other dimension. Are any “OBEs”? It’s possible but if so they are just another tool.

    All mentally observe but all write notes and work on the math. All operate in at least three mental states. Alpha relaxes and frees the mind. Focusing on the problem brings on Theta for inspiration. It’s where the “ah ha” moment occurs. Beta is used when logging the observations and results. Knowingly or not that is the process. Much depends on ones objective, problem solving or personal enrichment.

    Never loose sight of the fact these things are tools for discovery.

  • hawkpork

    keith,
    i think you should've said,
    I THINK "we disagree about what evolving in a positive direction looks like."
    to be certain, or adamant about the oppinions of someone who is just "a few words typed into a keyboard" is foolish and arrogant.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    Hawkpork,

    First of all, I'm sorry if you've taken what I said to be a personal attack or if it seems like I'm asking you to shut up or whatever. I'm not. I am also sorry that I used your words to make an example that I meant to be a broader point. Maybe it wasn't the best idea to single out your words. In fact I used your two words as an example to further take apart Sarp's approach and I should have taken a different tack.

    I'm not having any trouble with the English, incidentally, and the reason I haven't delved deeply into what I believe yet is that in these forums the tone is so often hostile, that when I know I'm already pegged as a "religee" despite the caliber of my intelligence or the thought and experience that have gone into shaping my beliefs, sometimes I wind up spending time asking people to be reasonable and set aside their broad stereotypes first.

    It is not foolish or arrogant to express one's beliefs, but the trick is here we are wading between scientific fact and belief and I find an unfair - and yes, foolish and arrogant - trend in these discussions to rather than admit that perhaps science can't explain certain things so it's possible there is a spiritual reality - to instead start confusing belief and facts. When you claim to believe in nothing supernatural and make it clear that your overall approach is to condescend to those who do, not to mention blame them for all the world's ills as Hitchens and Dawkins famously do, how can you argue anything except straight facts?

    If you are in that camp, then you restrict yourself to naturalist, empirical facts. What I'm trying to get at is, that for people who love to harpoon anyone with religious belief, to then talk about your own beliefs (which are no more certain than religious ones) as if they are somehow more high-minded or more allowable in a logical discussion is disingenuous.

    So, my point was...and I'm seeing now that it has gotten pretty muddy and that is indeed my fault...if you claim to be someone who sees the world empirically, casting not only doubt but derision on anyone else (and this is the spirit I think Sarp has approached the discussion with), then you ought to be careful in saying anything that is based on "i believe" or "i reckon" as opposed to..."I believe only what is empirically verifiable, therefore I KNOW a, b, c, and d." and then in this case, all that falls outside of that, should not be speculated on for the mere purpose of ridiculing those that choose to look beyond the immediately empirical.

    I hope you'll accept that my apology is genuine, and I also hope you are able to see my point, and realize that it is not personal in the slightest.

  • hawkpork

    keith,
    thank you for your apology. i accept. but must add that i don't think i condescended to anyone or meme.
    i myself haven't decided whether i'm agnostic or athiest and i never will cause i aint got the data required for me to do so.

    but i resolvedly believe in all beings right to spiritual self determination, and expression. within a moral framework; ie do unto others as.... u know the rest.
    i think i get your point. but it seems to be a bit off the mark and to be honest, pedantic. i mean, at a basic level you're ridiculing me for being uncertain and sarp for being too certain whilst ignoring the ideas we are offering.
    sarp was expressing his oppinion based on learned facts. as was i.
    it is primarily through speculation, hypothesising, theorising, that science, memes and perhaps even consciousness evolves.
    i too have had and seen many amazingly bitchy convo's on the web and hope that i haven't come across as offensive in any way.
    so, thanks for the apology and i hope for further constructive discussion.
    peace, love and mung beans.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @mynewfavouriteperson.

    To be able to induce a desired brain state is just amazing. It's not always easy to get into the right frame of mind. Its not even obvious that brain states fall into a d-t-a-b structure. (delta-theta-alpha-beta is confusing. Why not have them in alphabetical order:))

    'Theta and then delta'? thats like going down through the gears. I suppose thats for relaxing? Going up through the gears is also desirable in certain circumstances and it's usually automatic, but can also presumably be induced?

    I am a bit dissapointed that creative theta states require a lower frequency brain functioning than logging/recording notes beta states. maybe thats why we have a lot of creative dreamers and driven pencil pushers!

  • TriforceV

    @ hawkpark

    In reply to the quote
    "“Creating imaginary entities and realms to fill in the gaps is a result of our temporal lobes that we acquired millions of years ago. These also gave us our ability to imagine and create. We still haven’t mastered the use of these without the drawbacks of suffering illusionary and delusionary concepts. But the human animal is also evolving and sooner or later we will achieve it. (If we don’t destroy the planet first.)"

    I think this is a very interesting quote, but I'm afraid I'm in total disagreement with most of it.
    Part of creation is experiencing these so called illusions or delusions as you describe.
    Just like Jules Vern who dreamed of such delusions like traveling to the moon, or under the sea was often used to strive and reach these illusions in reality, and has lead to scientific research.

    In addition, I fail to see how this quote relates to the question of NDE or OBE's, as so many cases follow a similar and yet strange path... The question really is if we were simply imagining this as unique and different humans, shouldn't we all see something completely different in the whole foundation of these experiences?
    Just a thought.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    cool man. I agree with most of what you said. I'm glad we could come back from the edge so to speak.

    My reason for belaboring the point is that I think it really matters the way one approaches conversations about what we all have to admit is just simply, uncertain. So, bringing assumptions to the table that the explanation simply can't include God or any concept like it, simply because we have decided that's the case...that's the kind of certainty that bugs me and I harp on it because I think it's a really big deal.

    Sarp's comments are well worded, but they are the same arguments I have heard many many many times when people draw up assumed lines and camps on the discussion of "religees" versus whatever the opposite is

    Here is what I'm getting at...Sarp says..."All of this impinges on the areas that religion deems “sacred”."

    Notice how the world "religion" is used as personality, as if you can draw together a vast and diverse range of people from violent radicals to near-atheists (Buddhists) to harmless pagans. How can I take the arguments that follow seriously or respond to them? I have already been discredited in his mind before the actual "points" begin. I wouldn't presume to refer to atheists, agnostics, physicists, etc. as a monolithic group because it simply isn't accurate. So I am asking for the same courtesy - which you have extended and I appreciate it. But since you bring up Sarp's points to defend them, I thought I'd explain.

    He goes on to say,"Thus the continuation of the clash between scientific progress and religious dogma."

    Again this is oversimplifying. There has been a clash between scientific research and SOME religious dogma. Stack that statement with the one before it, and I am further in the whole before I open my mouth. Not to mention that scientific progress unrestrained and unchecked has never been a wholly positive thing as the humanist hubris I mentioned earlier tends to get us on the fast track to blowing countries up or creating toxic waste.

    He says, "To the masses, anything not yet fully explained by science shows that science is deficient."

    I would counter that to many virulent materialists, anything not yet fully explained by science is certain to be explained someday...but not by anything that could call God because...well that would be crazy! Both predispositions are out of balance.

    "Because we don’t yet understand dark energy then it has to be the work of god."

    No, it doesn't have to be the work of God, but because we don't understand it we ought to be patient enough to recognize we can't assume it is NOT the work of God.

    "Not knowing is a perfectly acceptable state of being."

    Finally we agree on something. However I would say it is acceptable to not know and leave all options open, but Sarp seems to insinuate that only religious people should learn this skill. People as wise as Sarp somehow have the prescience to already know enough to assure me that x and y are wrong...because someday it will be proved.

    "Creating imaginary entities...etc. etc." Now we get the heart of the whole thing. Religious experience is 99.9% subjective. It is experience, and one in my opinion that is not well served by attempts to quality and quantify it. If you say to me, "I saw a lion walking down my street..." and I say, "that's impossible! I know for a fact you did not! Your temporal lobes are overacting again." How can I truly know you did not in fact see a lion, that one didn't get loose from a circus, etc? I can't. How can Sarp, or anyone have the audacity to tell me what I have or have not experienced? I wouldn't use words as strong as "pearls before swine" but I am not about to make my life an open book when it comes to spiritual experience when the vibe is to impugn it outright. I am a bright person. I am a lover of science. I have had religious experience which informs my religious belief. If I thought I could say all those things and not invoke a sneer before I have a chance to continue, I would continue.

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    Someone else named them and I haven’t a clue why. I have also found it interesting that inspiration or creativity increases at the lower frequency but then again inhibitions decrease. Isn’t there an interesting set of messages in that conundrum? Maybe that's why its called inspiration.

  • hawkpork

    triforce,
    i'm sorry, i don't know what you mean by NDE or OBE's.
    and i'm not sure really what you disagree with in the quote.
    we use imagination a lot right? for all kinds of stuff. and then we use logic or the scientifc method to prove or disprove the imagined.
    i realize there is many things we still can't imagine or let alone prove as of yet. but with dilligence and intelligence we might.

    keith,
    i'm sorry you felt offended by sarps attitude. i mean it's a pity when ppl can't communicate considerately.
    re par 2.
    i think we agree that certainty, regarding spirituality, cannot be asserted. perhaps we differ in that i believe it is unattainable.

    when you say "anything not yet fully explained by science is certain to be explained someday…but not by anything that could call God because…well that would be crazy! Both predispositions are out of balance."
    do you mean we should give equal credibility to god thesis and scientific hypothesis?
    science has a much better track record.

    no sneers heres :)

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    hawk - nde - near death experience, obe - out of body experience

    Actually I do agree with you on attainability of spiritual certainty. That's why I'm not arguing in any way to try to PROVE any spiritual reality and I consider it subjective.

    I don't necessarily mean one should give equal credibility to a "god thesis." I just think it shouldn't be a foregone conclusion that we know what we won't discover some day. I find it odd and out of balance that while scientific discovery continues to surprise us beyond our wildest imagination, many would put arbitrary limits on what may just surprise them some day, whether through fact or experience. That's what I mean.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @myuninhibitedandcreativecousin.

    It makes perfect sense. The more uninhibited you are-the more willing you are to take risks-the more new things you encounter and expose youself to-the more creative tools you have to develop in order to succeed.

    Processes, Processes. I am obsessed with processes. I need more information on this.

  • hawkpork

    keith,
    thankyou for explaining the acronyms, always obvious in hindsight.

    i guessi could've figured out that you agreed spiritual certainty is unattainable. i mean, obviously none of us know the answers to it all.
    i was just sick of scrolling to top of page to reread stuff. and fearful of putting words in your mouth. lol.
    yes i agree we must keep an open mind to all possiblities, whilst of course using our intellect to determine whats possible.

    epicurian,
    not sure really what you're talking about, but hey, what the heck.
    if one is to uninhibited and take to many risks one might just succeed in an early death!

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Hawkpork.

    I'm just shooting from the hip on this one. Nothing new there then!

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    These inhibitions are mental paradigms resulting in knee-jerk reactions often interpersonal. These are easily overcome if one cares to do so.

    The real problems are the intrapersonal impediments, harder to spot, harder to change. Both are at times exhibited in emotional eruptions both negative and positive; assumed truths and falsehoods all acting as stimuli.

    They are usually situational involving something you want or something you want to avoid. The responses to the stimuli are learned behavior. None of this is necessarily bad unless you’re unaware of the source, hence a paradigm. In the least it makes reading posts a kind of mirror. Everything has multiple facets. Examine them all.

    The word processes I immediately associate with Deming management principles. That topic is for another place.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aristotle

    Amongst other things, i find it interesting when you say,

    'These are easily overcome if one cares to do so.'

    as i just thought that all these inhibitions and emotional eruptions are just part of the human condition. I have all of the above in varying degrees, and i just assume that everyone does. Is being aware of the brain states and how to induce them the start of the improvement process? and is this information part of neurophsycology? and...

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    I have to apologize. I have a tendency to assume everyone is on the same page of the same book. Quite a while back I moderated (led) two of what ended up being open discussion forums. It didn’t start up that way but members could invite anyone they cared to invite. The groups became quite eclectic as were the topics. The discussions were a give and take after the Socratic Method, like peeling back an onion. The only requirements were civility, due consideration and interest. There is plenty of interest today but much less of the latter two.

    Some in the older group were methodically geometric in their thinking positing theorem and assumption leading to a proof. The assumptions were recognized as such so the discussions targeted the validity of the theorem, were they also assumptions?

    That being said, yes inhibitions and emotional eruptions are all part of the human condition but they don’t have to lead to involuntary reaction. Some have learned to purposefully use these traits in others as a method of quieting opposing views.

    These brain states are all natural and can be used as a form of meditation. Being able to purposefully achieve them is a tool for relaxation, introspection, exploration and problem solving. Your mind is not limited by time, space or physics and the brain is trainable once it is taught and you realize who the master is and who the slave is. (Slave is a little harsh, try junior partner.)

    These tones are a tool used to (more or less) easily focus the mind. Maintaining the states in it self is quite and achievement as is learning to shut out distractions and be quietly alone in time and space. What pops in to this empty space can be intriguing. There are other methods, TM, physical exercise, writing, word and number problems can all do the same thing. The question is the intent of the user. Intent is a key.

    Is it Neurophysiology, loosely yes but you are the psychologist. Is it mysticism? It can be. Is it a method for self improvement? Again, it can be. For sure it is a method mental exercise.

    The basic triggers in the human psyche are used to manipulate in more ways than imaginable. There is even unconscious self manipulation. It’s amazing how the brain fills in the missing parts of any perception, physical or mental, for its comfort. (The idea of this comfort is a key also.) These missing parts are an auto manufacturing process of the ever creative brain and not necessarily true. Illusions are more than visual.

    If your objective is to discover your own vulnerability it can help with that. They are problem solving techniques. Some require the exercise of the imagination and some let this property exhibit it self. The imaginary topics can range from what a room would look like if you could see it from all view point at the same time to what would it be like to traverse through a black hole. I hope that answers your questions.

  • John Seals

    @ Kieth and Hawkpork

    Hey guys. Just wanted to weigh in on your conversation about belief in the supernatural versus science. The truth is they both come down to faith. One of you has faith in science and that it will eventually have all the answers. The other places faith in some type of religion or spirituality at least. But they are both faith. Now faith in science comes through disproving some supernatural phenomenon, also because science has made some really accurate predictions through out the years. But it is still a leap of faith because for all we know it will reach it's limit, i.e. simplify things down to a certain point and then have no more answers. Organized religion has to take some blame as well as it has made some really silly and fantastic assertions through out the years, which turns some off to theism period. Faith in the supernatural comes from inside, it is a personal judgement not lending itself to measurement or explanation. Logic can suggest however that it is the answer as well. When we think of the natural phenomenons we have identified, none could explain the origin of the universe. Why, becuase of cause and effect, every natural effect has a cause. This sets up infinite regression and is not logical in the real world that we know, so it seems that a supernatural cause, where causation breaks down, could be the answer. This is called the cosmological arguement and we have a huge proponet of it here on site, his name is Chris- a very bright guy. Any way my basic point is that both points of view require a leap of faith. I myself support a natural cause and do not believe in the supernatural, but that is just my faith- not fact. Obviousely Kieth supports a supernatural cause, this is his faith and I commend him for being so articulate and open about it. I used to be just like others on here that attacked the "religees" as we called them. I was wrong for that, as long as no one is condecending or pushy about thier beliefs we should listen and try and understand. I have changed and if you listen you just might as well.

  • John Seals

    @ Kieth

    Take it from one of the guys that used to attack people just like you. We do not know anymore than you do and should feel really crappy that you feel like you can not say what you believe in. I am sorry man. I got your back go on and scream it brother. Your ideas and thoughts are just as valid as everyone elses, I'm sure you knew that already. I am just trying to say i apologize I guess, i feel really bad.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aristotle. Thanks for the response, tell me more...

  • Achems Razor

    @ John Seals:

    I coined the term, "religee's" so everyone can blame me for that, but you are right, if there is any sin, it is sin to try to take someones beliefs away.

    I do not know if I can turn a new leaf like you, but will try.

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    That is an open ended question with a lot of paths. Is there any area in particular?

  • hawkpork

    i like the word religee's (but wouldn't use it).
    i interpret it as being used in a slightly diminutive, but basically jesting manner. but then, i'm biased.
    it can be a very fine line between trying to take someones beliefs away and sharing and evolving ideas.
    i guess one just has to be polite and respectful.
    i try to "do unto others as i would have others do..", so don't challenge beliefs when it'll cause offense. but sometimes i just can't help myself, when faced with idiocy or evil.

    i think ultimate or unwavering faith in anything except ones existence is irrational . "i think therefor i am" and all that. the rest could be an illusion,, or even a hologram.

  • d.

    I have had a experience like an NDE , I was feeling quite strange one night, i had an feeling that something very big,scary and important was about to happen, and was feeling very worried,so i just went to bed, then while i was sleeping i had a dream that two bars of light were colliding against each other, i felt pressure around me, i got up and walked across the room, the pressure I was feeling was worrying me so much I dropped to my knees to prey,i didn't even think i believed in god but could not think of anything else to do and i put my whole heart because of the feelings i was having, then suddenly the pressure stopped and i felt a very strong feeling of love around me,I was wondering why i was loved so much,i felt as small as a piece of dust, i then saw myself from outside of the body,i also saw the earth, and all the people on it like ants, then my view went further out,and i could see the planets and stars and also feel where they were,I seemed to have had some kind of awakening,my direction in life changed after this point,that connection of all of us on this so small little planet became clear to me,i now know that there is a spiritual reality, this is what religions try to explain.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aristotle

    I am intuitive extrovert personality type, so talking without thinking is what i frquently do! The only issue i have is that it sometimes makes me look silly... I love rationale and reason it's just that i enjoy meandering emotional conversations more!

    The main thoughts with brain funtions that concerns me are to somehow combine the rational with the emotional in a meaningful way, it's just hard to do as it very much one or the other for me. This is my main interest in most ares af thought and i'm not sure if other people knock me out of sync or it's just not possible for me to maintain the balance!!

    I am starting to come to the conclusion that it very much depends on being with the right people as most men do not have this quirky duality at the top of their minds. The answer lies with smart women i guess! and guys of a similar type...

    Any ideas?

  • Achems Razor

    @ d:

    Wow! An epiphany, maybe you should start a new religion. Make a ton of money.

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    This may be drawn out but this enemy is hard to pin down and I’m not sure this is the forum for this but here goes. My side interests were theology, philosophy, psychology and, predictably, meta-physics and mysticism. These side interests can all be mulled over while doing just about anything. They only sound compatible, they are not.

    The side interest involved some of the most obscure reading material imaginable. And yes it included Hermetic Philosophy. In order to understand what the writer was saying I was forced to delve into word entomology. I’ve found verbatim translations more enlightening than interpretations. I began to understand that the dictionary definitions of words, their root meanings in the original language base would erase much of the dichotomy in a given text.

    The historical setting and a cultures use of key words often said more than the text itself. This helped stop my knee jerk reactions to the writer. The writer became just another thinker once the prejudice was eliminated. The only necessity was to get off the throne, listen, understand and then form any mental debate. (Art of War, know the adversary, the battlefield and the weaponry. I would add an understanding of self.)

    There are words and phrases that illicit an immediate visceral response. Why? Ones reaction to a word or phrase is dependant on what you mentally add to it. What is added?

    Some reduce emotions to just two, love and fear. (Here comes one of those words.) The common belief is that we worship what we love. Worship, one definition is: to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion. I would add, and emulation. Stockholm syndrome refutes that statement. One can also regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion and emulate what they fear. It’s a good thing to know which is the motivator and why.

    It seems in all too many cases fear is the chief motivator. Observe the young in any rough and dangerous neighborhood. Although it’s less obvious, school systems have the same problem, peer pressure. No one wants to be un-cool or out-of it. All of this is rhetorical but what’s the motivator? Why be manipulated?

    The same can be found in the hallowed halls of higher education. A student can have regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion and emulate a professor for one of the same two reasons and do. The only real question is has the professor produced a bright well grounded original thinker or a manipulated clone. It’s a question of whose mind is at work, yours or the professors. Is one a new light or an old reflection? Consequences??

    Language in it self can be said to have evolved for manipulation and not information sharing. An obscure French philosopher, Jacques Elluel, wrote “The Humiliation of the Word” a thesis on the abuse of language and the dangerous addiction to the images. I know that Elluel was a Christian anarchist (dichotomy?). The labels don’t change the validity of his thesis. None of his observations have been lost on today’s political, commercial and cultural stage. Know one’s addictions and enable a conscious response.

    That I hope is an understandable description of the battle ground and its environment. A soldier trains to control primitive instinctual reactions. It is very possible to accomplish.

    Here is the “if you care to”. If you enjoy exchanging quips with equals, no harm no foul. If information exchange and furthering understanding is your objective quips are opportunistic, usually rude and terminate dialogue. Often that is the purpose, blatant manipulation. Televised news round tables are prime examples, over talk and ridicule to subdue, little if any dialogue.

    Transparency should be an attribute and within ones control and the knowledge of when to be is wise. It is never silly.

    Consider the source. If the source is you change your perspective. Any other source is of no consequence. Passionate discourse is always stimulating within the proper forum or not. Gender within the forum is of no consequence. State your ideas and let the hard bark develop. Notice that there are quite a few that already have.

    The only idea of the exercises in the various states is to observe. One of many objects that can be observed is you’re self within the various contexts and understand the internal source. Most often when the true why is seen it’s all that’s necessary.

    The problem is to be able to recognize the triggers and promote a thoughtful pause. There are many ways to do this. One is using the body. It is the best detector. The body has an initial response to every emotional stimulus, usually in the viscera or gut reaction, in preparation. Where in the body is the first place fear manifests? What do you notice first when angered? If you learn to recognize the clues the controls are yours. Even when the reaction is an uncontrolled knee-jerk you mentally compose a response. One wants to just preempt the initial response and the mind is quicker than the body parts.

    It looks like this discussion has prompted some advertising. Hope Vlatko is getting paid.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aristotle

    Hope Vlatko is getting paid: Usually TDF ratings go up when the boys have a bust up so it's refreshing to see that there are some gains from friendly conversation. I click on at least 3 banners a day!

    I like the idea of thinking before response and being sensetive to external stimulus, not reacting and waiting for the rational mind to catch up with the fast emotional response... Then reactions have the rational component to them and hopefully make more sense to an observer... It's just that the speed of response of the emotional mind entices and gives pleasure in a more instantaneous way! There is more pleasure. The rational building of an argument with logical consequence is also pleasing in a 'Eureka' realization way! very different stimulus/response. More of a long term gain?

    Transparency is an attribute that i have in abundance, although ironically many peolple find me impossible to work out and i kinda like that. In the context of mental improvement and fruitful interaction with others it can only be a good thing...

    Fear is the motivator: On this i bow to the greater knowledge and understanding of Machiavelli and (Thomas)Hobbs. You say love is the other motivator (than fear) i like Hobbs interpretation that 'desire' being more general than love is the key player. All motivation is fuelled by fear and desire, and that love is but a sub-category of desire!

    I am still thinking about many of the other points that you have raised. Thanks.

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    As I was reading your response your “nom de plume” juxtaposed my attention. Epicurus was not the hedonist the feast bearing his name would lead one to believe. His indulgence was in being free of stress and turmoil (Ataraxia), a peaceful mind, emotional tranquility. His particular brand of hedonism was that of mental or passive pleasures as in music, contemplation, and philosophical debate. It fits as do the questions.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aristotle

    Very true about Epicurus not being a hedonist. Its a misleading representation that has stuck. He was just a guy who freely discussed emotions and feelings. Not really the done thing at the time amongst serious Greek scolars! Plato compared love to a serious mental illness. lol. what a funny guy.

    I finally get what you and others say about not reacting and the benefits. The problem i have with this is that if you don't react to this and then don't react to that you come across as very cold and unfeeling, an attribute that does not endear me to another person. Not to say that this isn't a very useful technique when used appropriately!

    sigh. where are all the modern christian anarchists...

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    @Epicurean Logic

    modern Christian anarchist - that more or less describes me :)

    Also wanted to respond to a few other things. Thanks John Seal and Hawkpork for what you said.

    I want to make it clear that I'm not looking for an apology for the jesting term "religee" or similar condescensions to my intellect. It really isn't about me. I just feel that if these sort of conversations are to be useful to anyone, then setting a precedent that, joking or not, essentially discredits a large swath of people is not...well not useful I guess. So I just want to encourage all of us to attempt open mindedness in the areas we are least inclined to be openminded, and if not open minded, than at least courteous.

    I really have appreciated and enjoyed the conversation between Aristotle and Epicurean Logic about reaction because I think that gets at my point. I agree that non being reactionary in a personal situation might make you a little cold and...platonic, but we are at a distance from one another and this is not exactly personal so it's precisely the kind of place where that philosophy is most helpful.

    It occurs to me that it is incredibly silly for me to take offense or allow myself to feel "hurt" by comments made, no matter how foolish, arrogant, or ignorant I might deem them - because I have to remind myself that these cannot be personal attacks because my "personhood" isn't even available to be attacked in a setting like this...only my words are. My words and my username are not ME.

    So, I'd prefer that people didn't needlessly attack my words, and therefore my ideas, but it is helpful to remember that even when they do, we are dealing in a postmodern and abstracted medium here and not a personal conversation. I wish these WERE personal conversations though because I think a lot of the condescension and subtle or not so subtle hostility would be dropped if we were sitting face to face. I'd like to think so anyway.

    Take care, all.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    oh and John Seals I wanted to make sure I thank you specifically for your kind apology. Accepted!

    And I agree with you that both areas come down to faith. A frustration of mine, and the great thinker and writer Wendell Barry articulates this well, is the modern obsession with separating the two. You note that obviously I believe in a supernatural cause and someone else believes in a natural one. I don't believe that one must choose one or the other. I think that as science advances it is probing deeper into the mind of God and I think that as true religion (according to Christ this pretty much means living what we'd all consider a pretty good life) advances it brings with it a sense of awe and wonder and humility that are appropriate in science too, and that there is a place at which they come together. I really dislike the postmodern notion, which many of us take for granted and assume is the only possible disposition, that one must simply choose one over the other. I see only harmony between the two when one approaches both with humility and a willingness to be proven wrong or have one's ideas amended by new discovery or experience at the next bend in the road.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @ Keith

    Lay some of those christo-anarchic bombshells down on the good people of TDF!

    It's actually really strange conversing using only the medium of written word! We use the visual sense but only a small part of it! visual can also involve pictures, moving images and the like. So really we only use a small part of one of the five senses. You would think that this restriction would have limiting consequences and yet it is not really the case..

    Sometimes restrictions cause dialogue/*things* to move in unexpected ways. The medium restricts/directs flow of conversation. Hmmm.

  • cdk

    @ to all you people who still believe death is the end

    What more proof do you need for an afterlife than what already have been stated, not only in this documentary, but in countless other statements?

    Really. I love the concept of you guys hiding behind the curtain of "science" when all in all science is in its majority based on belief and not factual evidence. Indeed, read up on some material related to theoretical physics and you will soon discover that what you perceive as the normal world will change.

    Please, I urge you to keep an open (and of course questioning) mind on subjects related to this documentary.

  • BeyondFher

    DMT Dimethyltryptamine naturally release in higher amounts in the human body when you have a near death experience=] trippy sh*t huhh its also found in alot of plants. their is no life after death you dummies.

  • BeyondFher

    DMT Dimethyltryptamine naturaly release in higher amounts in the human body when you have a near death experience=] trippy sh*T huhh its also found in alot of plants. their is no life after death you dummies

  • sarp kaya

    Don't bother BeyondFher.
    The level here is apparent.
    We have the likes of Keith cleverly expousing his modernised theistic garbage under the guise of "keeping an open mind".
    The same pseudo "democratic" tactic is used by the creationists with their pleas to "teach the controversy" to the school boards of our children.
    And then we have the likes of cdk above.
    I wonder what would happen if we took that wretched thing called "science" out of cdk's world and set him free once and for all.
    Let's take away the "belief" from his laptop and the internet, which he uses to sprout his nonsense. Let's take away his car, made of high tech composites and electronics. Let's make him walk instead of flying in those contraptions called airplanes, which, god forbid, attempt to fly on nothing more than "belief".
    Let's take away his food, packed with all kinds of chemicals and processed in high tech factories producing thousands of tons per year.
    And while we're at it, let's also dispose of all the other vestiges of that heretical activity, like his house, his clothes, the fillings in his teeth, the glasses on his nose and the condom on his cock.
    You guys want OBE's and NDE's ? Take LSD. Quite a simple chemical, variants of which abound in the plant world. All it does is rewire the switches in your brain for a few hours so that you "feel" the music, "smell" the colors and "taste" the wind. If you want to see other worlds and imaginary entities the same chemical will oblige you admirably. If you still cherish your childhood stories you can return to those too. Santa, aliens, dragons, demons, Jesus, Superman, Satan or Mary, whatever rocks your boat...
    But when the trip is finally over please don't expect us to share the remnants of your creative fantasies by "respecting" your right to believe in them.
    If you want to masturbate your temporal lobes keep the theistic semen to yourself.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus keith

    Sarp, I have tried to at least be polite and courteous and respectful. If you are going to address me, with bitter venom or not, you could at least read some of the specific thought out things I presented and respond to them directly instead of just categorizing me as you did before I "walked" into this room. I'm not going to stoop to your level and trade insults, but since we do manage some pretty reasonable discussions here, I'll ask you to take your vitriol (theistic semen? really?) elsewhere. Anyone else going to back me up here on basic courtesy?

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    Okay, I am not, as the Dude says, "into the whole brevity thing" and in fact I'm terrible at it so I'm not finished yet...

    Sarp, I'd just like to ask you to take note that after you dropped in early in this conversation and tossed a few grenades, then disappeared, the rest of us managed to simmer down to have a civil discussion. If you think that asking for you to respect my right to believe in something (again please stop telling me what this is, you truly don't know) is such an outlandish request then you ought to go somewhere where you can preach only to the choir. I don't get the feeling the rest of the folks on here want to make this a bloodsport about personal attacks, but rather an exchange of ideas which might get understandably heated from time to time. I come in here to listen, learn, chat, etc. You come with a vigilante mindset, to assasinate, just moving that laser sight thing around and waiting for someone to do anything that might suggest they are your sworn enemy, which you suspected along. No matter how well it would fit your stereotype, I am not some kind of clever trojan horse like Intelligen Design, trying to sneak evangelism into TDF boards.

    For whatever reason, personal I would guess, you have got some intense anger and hatred going on. You seem to have an uncontrolable need to harpoon this mythical white whale. Sail on, Captain Ahab. I'm not your Moby Dick.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    tried to post but a word out of context sent it to moderation - here's the edited version....

    I am not, as the Dude says, “into the whole brevity thing” and in fact I’m terrible at being concise so I’m not finished yet…

    Sarp, I’d just like to ask you to take note that after you dropped in early in this conversation and tossed a few grenades, then disappeared, the rest of us managed to simmer down to have a civil discussion. If you think that asking for you to respect my right to believe in something (again please stop telling me what this is, you truly don’t know) is such an outlandish request then you ought to go somewhere where you can preach only to the choir. I don’t get the feeling the rest of the folks on here want to make this a bloodsport about personal attacks, but rather an exchange of ideas which might get understandably heated from time to time. I come in here to listen, learn, chat, etc. You come with a vigilante mindset, to assasinate, just moving that laser sight thing around and waiting for someone to do anything that might suggest they are your sworn enemy, which you suspected along. No matter how well it would fit your stereotype, I am not some kind of clever trojan horse like Intelligen Design, trying to sneak evangelism into TDF boards.

    For whatever reason, personal I would guess, you have got some intense anger and hatred going on. You seem to have an uncontrolable need to harpoon this mythical white whale. Sail on, Captain Ahab. I’m not your Moby D**k.

  • sarp kaya

    Keith,
    I have nothing against you per se. Unfortunately, by taking comments personally you incite a clash. You did this before and I ignored you. But cdk was just too much and I came back. I imagine you do this on purpose but if not then don't blame me.
    By the way I was not aware that I had to have your permission to post here. I'll present my vitriol where and when I please thank you very much. If it hurts too much to hear the plain truth then take something for it (a dose of reality, perhaps ?)

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    I take comments personally when they are personally addressed to me, yes. I think that's a pretty common interpretation of the English language in a conversational context. I'm not blaming you, I'm asking you to step up to the plate and engage with the specific ideas a little more carefully instead of launching occastional vitriolic salvos.

    Certainly you don't need my permission, I wasn't attempting to suggest otherwise. I was ASKING you to dial it down or go elsewhere and I am ASKING if anyone else here agrees that the angry tone is not useful or helpful and they'd prefer its absence as well.

    Finally, I welcome the truth. I seek it. I look for it everywhere, yes even in your words. I'm not injured by reality or truth. You clearly have no interest in actual dialogue wherein you read what I say and then respond to it specifically and with real thought. You are angry. I get it.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    By the way, for anyone who might be interested - there is a great BBC show and blog forum called World Have Your Say, you'll find the site if you google it. Many of you would enjoy the lively discussion going on there at the moment. When the show is on air later, they'll be talking to Philip Pullman and his comments about the Catholic Church, etc. All pretty relevant to these discussions. However, it's not a free for all over there. Plenty of agenda-driven atheists and anti-theists to be sure, but there are actually some rules of conduct that prohibit out and out attacks. I might be a call in guest today, not sure.

  • Achems Razor

    Ha,Ha, love it. why are some people so worried about someone saying it like it is. Right away they refer to an anger management scenario.

    Stand up and fight fire with fire, your feeling are hurt? tough tits!
    Don't go crying back to mommy

    Don't like pussy-footing around myself.

    @ sarp kaya: says it the way it is, so what? he just "might" be a "INTJ.
    personality type", nothing wrong with that. All the more power to him.

  • Aristotle

    Apparently we have some real “Scientific Mystics” out there. Someone died and came back to tell all consciousness ceased. They have to be scientific mystics they returned with reproducible evidence……

    We have a whole civilization (more of less) that is attempting to revolve around the ideas of the “trippy” anarchists in the Baby Boomer generation and their predecessors. It’s called Utopia, love, peace, understanding and living in harmony? It’s called a “Perennial Heresy”. “Imagine there’s no heaven. It’s easy if you try, no hell below us, above us only sky. Imagine all the people living for today……Imagine all the people sharing all the World. (Living for today and sharing the world are dichotomies.) Well I can imagine it alright. Call it a vision, a natural use of naturally produced DMT. All visions must be worked out in reality.

    The working out of that utopian world requires the living out of an “Ethic”. If an ethic is to be true by definition it must be universal and its source reason, reasonable to everyone. (There's another workable idea?) The method used to see or realize this vision in the minds eye is of no consequence. The Freedom to exercise ANY thought process requires just that Freedom.

    Universal freedom requires a universal ethic. Unfortunately living out an ethic is an individual choice. If you refuse to live out the ethic you will loose your own freedom if, at first, only by personal restriction. Part of that ethic is to respect another’s freedom.

    One of the visions of those anarchists of the sixties was the internet. How’s that working out? Thought police are everywhere, politicians, idealists, theists and atheists. There are also little gremlins at work in dark places creating viruses, Trojans, worms, bots and distorted information.

    Angst is a flame that needs fuel to grow. Some individually meditate on it and fuel their own fire, others attempts are through induction. If your belief is in human rationalism, live it. If that belief is in a higher power, live it. Leave the preaching in the Cathedrals of each.

    But then again isn’t ones personal freedom more worthy than another’s???

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    @ achem

    Just curious, was that directed at me? Are you accusing me of p*ssy footing around, etc? Interesting. If you scroll back through these discussions, you'll see that I'm not in the least bit afraid of confrontation, it's just that personal attacks are entirely useless. Also useless is the standard model that some use of attacking what they assume a person is or believes, instead of actually finding out what those beliefs are and attacking THOSE ones instead. My feelings are not hurt. I'm trying to keep this discussion useful and interesting and when it devolves into aggression we might as well just stand across the room and shout "no it's not! yes it is! no it's not! yes it is!" over and over again like 3 year olds.

    Sorry I won't be crying back to mommy. Though I refuse to stoop to personal attacks or meaningless ones based on irrelevant stereotypes, I am a tenacious and persistent S.O.B.

    Being abrasive - no matter how many one liner pseudo-intellectualisms you pepper it with - does not pass muster as sound logic.

  • Achems Razor

    @ Keith:

    Was not referring to you specifically, so do not bring it up as a "case in point"!

    "You are a tenacious and persistent S.O.B".???

    Good, then we can be friends.

    Peace.

  • http://myspace.com/saintnarcissus Keith

    Achem,

    it sure did seem like I was the most likely target for your remarks but I'll take your word for it. If I can't give you the benefit of the doubt, I can't realistically expect you to reciprocate now can I?

    I'd like to think that a number of people that spar in forums like this might actually quite like one another over a few beers. We don't have the benefit of all other aspects of human communication which is pretty limiting...yet another good reason to give one another the benefit of the doubt eh?

  • Achems Razor

    @ Keith:

    Yes, am in agreement!

  • http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/ jesusramones

    ive researched a lot of Egyptology and that makes me believe that there is life after death... but i think people should do this absent religion. its not necessary. just be the best person you can be.

    look for the pyramid code and mystical Egypt. theyre both documentary series.

  • cdk

    @ sarp kaya

    First of all, thank you for your profound insight into how the applications of science have contributed to enhance my life.

    Secondly, holding a MSc I'm not "against" science nor am I a creationist, or even religious for that matter.

    Science does not EXCLUDE the possibilities of an afterlife. Mutual exclusion is simply not the case here. What you personally believe to be the truth is really just not interesting and trivial - but do not use science as your wall of protection. If you actually had understood science you would not be as fanatic in your statements.

  • sarp kaya

    @ cdk,
    Holding a MSc obviously doesn't preclude or exclude you from anything.
    If you talk like a fool be prepared to be treated like one.
    What I perceive to be the truth ranges from the perceivable and calculable nano particle all the way to the endless reaches of the perceivable and calculable universe.
    If all that is not interesting and trivial, I suggest you go back to your bronze age scriptures to find more exciting material to float your boat.
    (I am going on vacation. Keith and cdk should get together for some beers methinks)

  • cdk

    @ sarp kaya

    OK, so you perceive nano particles as your smallest unit of reality?

    Endless reaches of the perceivable and calculable universe? Please explain that one. Are you hinting toward theory of relativity here? Please combine "calculable nano particles" with the "endless reaches of the perceivable and calculable universe" to give me either a proof or theory discarding NDEs/an afterlife.

    What you try do to here is simply what the church did with Galileo some 450 years ago. You refuse to accept the possibility of something you haven't seen with your own eyes. The best part is that you can't disprove it. You have nothing, absolutely nothing to back up your statements. So indeed you are a skeptic, and skepticism is excellent as long as it is thoroughly backed up, but of course you fail at brining even the slightest material which can strengthen your case.

    Now, I have read some of your posts and the words you choose to express your irritation is terrible. Why do you choose to name people in the way you do? I will acknowledge your theories when you show me the evidence. Until you can provide sufficient evidence you can not use "endless reaches of the perceivable and calculable universe" as an idiotic excuse.

    I'd love to have a beer with Keith. I'd love to have a beer with you as well. Hell, I'd even buy you some beers for showing up :-) Have a nice vacation!

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aristotle

    Quick question for you. A theta brain state is quite easy to induce. Pink Floyd seems to do the job nicely, a more 'organic' approach than binaurial tones for me.

    Can you suggest any music that will induce the high end beta state? Iron Maiden or Mettallica maybe?

    p.s. thanks for the advice on not reacting, it really is a useful mental tool. You know my feelings are that i like some reaction, but in some situations it works like a dream.

  • Aristotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    Always works like a charm. It usually catches them off guard. Ever watch the Mentalist? More truth there than you would think.

    As for the music, its hunt and peck thing but some does work and there are musicians that purposefully use binaural beats in their music, just after dual channel ear buds hit the scene. Remember the caution about being in a suggestible state because that works also.

    Whatever your method, if this discussion has opened your mind to the idea that there is more going on than the obvious, that the states are at your command and for your use and that it is used daily in an attempt to manipulate is was worth the typing..

    By the way, Pink Floyd’s “The Wall” is a deeper message than most see….. The others are way out of my era.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Arstotle

    I need an onboard, binaurally activated @Aristotle implant:))

    The wall is good and as you say the message is deep and meaningful! The albums that came before that like 'wish you were here' and others induce the theta state. What alerted me to this is when you you made the analogy of flawless driving while not consciously concentrating on the road ahead. The earlier albums are the perfect driving music and a 3 hour drive down the highway with the Floyd playing becomes one interlocking continuous movement. Time contracts to a moment and the driving is flawless...

    When you say that 'it is used daily in an attempt to manipulate' can you pinpoint any specific examples of this? it will give me a point of reference for further exploration.

    I suppose that the binaural tones are a distilled version of a multi-layered song and as such there is less extra 'noise' and emotional connection. To the Pythagoreans music was medicine. Sounds and tones are a more fundamental way to achieve the same effect by the looks of things.

    On a side note. The classic Pythagorean problem (still unsolved to this day) of finding a pattern to the prime numbers has a direct relationship to sounds! The problem is so difficult that you need to study at post graduate level to even formulate the question into mathematical language.

    I really do need an onboard, binaurally activated @Aristotle implant! An @Epicurus or @HaTe_MachiNE implant would also be nice.

  • Arstotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    From bottom to top… With knowledge of the proper math rules within a music ledger, riffs can be established and evolved into symphonies, never tried it but it is possible.

    Manipulation: on the relatively harmless side, when one is involved in a TV show of any kind sports, drama and etc., you are naturally in a theta, suggestive state, the commercial has a direct shot to the subliminal. Do you want pizza after a pizza commercial? How about mixing gorgeous provocatively clad women with beer, auto or life style commercials? This particular one subliminally adds to a susceptible individual’s self image. The play back comes at the time of purchase. Just what does a hot blond have to do with a car, a boat or a beer, nothing. It’s something that you subliminally add. Does a blond make the beer taste better? Don’t think that the add agency is not aware of this and is skilled in its usage.

    On a more serious note, as I mentioned in a prior post, some believe there are two emotions. I (and others) believe there is only one. For lack of a better “thought out word”, let’s call it or its root comfort. The rest evolve from it. We only label them for communication purposes. If I can affect your comfort level in any way, I can draw out an expression of that emotion. If I am skilled enough at that point, I literally own your response. You loose control. I gain control of you at some level. All I had to do is draw out the response.

    Do a little mental exercise. Think of an emotion label. Label a consciously or unconsciously manipulative individual as a catalyst, include your unconscious self. What happens in any relationship with a catalyst, be they a lover, friend, boss, self image or any aggressive encounter??? The term aggressive is used in neither a negative or positive vein, just aggressive.

    Everyone finds themselves in these situations from time to time. Mentally imagine a few. What do you notice? See the cure. Hope they are examples you can use.

  • sibel

    once i ve watched a documentary called ''the day after i die'' on bbc and liked it ...though have searched for it too much couldnt find it on the web.. ..this doc must be smt like it..anyway thx

  • Keith

    Sarp climbs angrily back onto his high horse. I am familiar with the arguments and will gladly look at them again. I like Michael Shermer and his outlook and think he, and people like him, provide a needed balance to these kind of esoteric discussions. I have also watched him patiently and with an open mind listen to others with differing views in open forums. You could learn from his attitude Sarp. Let's not get started on courage.

  • Keith

    You know, I think the thing that mystifies me and admittedly rubs me the wrong way, Sarp, is that your attitude seems to consistently communicate that you are convinced one of us is 100% right and the other is 100% wrong...about everything! Courage I see lacking is yours to admit that these things are not so simple, that just maybe, just maybe there is room for some helpful exchange in which we might both learn something from one another.

  • Arstotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    @sarp kaya posted something worth a look in line with my last post to you; it’s the Michael Shermer (The Skeptic) video in the link on his post.

    The video can be viewed in numerous ways from at least three points of view. The primaries are the skeptic, neutral observer and the believer. Least often seen is that Shermer is manipulating an audience looking for support or affirmation for their particular point of view. The laughter signals their afferimation. (as a note: laughter is a type of fear response)

    A neutral observer will note Shermer’s political stance, that he is a rationalist materialist reductionist and not below the ridicule of those whom he deems as less than intelligent (some of which only need broader experience). Then again that is what his audience came to hear, see and affirm. They need not investigate further. Their “comfort” level is increased.

    The video itself contains a plethora of examples of the point driven at in a prior post. But then there is the case of his prehistoric Hominid. The rustel of leaves could be more then noisy foliage and less than a leapord. "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." I read Shermer occasionally, he is a professional skeptic and scientific in his method except at the point where he posits unprovable assumptions from his belief system. We and they all do it.

    There is what can be termed as a “language of the mind” feelings, symbols and archtypes that are better understood than ignored, if one cares to…. When understood they are insightful keys. There are physical, mental or even optical illusions as Shermer states but exactly what is their message? Aren’t all physical impressions illusions presented to the brain to precieve the environment?

  • Farren

    Yse Michael Shermer is way too closed for anything beyond reductionist materialist thinking. That is so 20th century. It's time to move forward and not stay stuck.

  • sarp kaya

    This will be my last post on this particular blog as it has become a bit tedious of late.
    There is always more than one way to look at things. Expecially things that are still in the process of being discovered, about which all the information is not yet available. Everything that we know and use and consume and do in our daily lives is more or less a product of the scientific advances of the last two centuries. The only things that have not changed for a long time and which are probably the ONLY things that are left free for us to consume are the warmth of the sun and the air that we breathe. Mind you, even that has changed considerably with all the chemicals sprouting out of the industrial machine. Global warming and the green house effect are evidence of that.
    Science is not nor has ever been infallible.
    Science advances with "wrongs" just as well as with "rights". It is an ongoing process that was devised by humans to understand better their surroundings and to create better living conditions for themselves. It is limited by our capacity to reason, imagine and create, which are also faculties that continue to develop within the confines of our brains. It is the greatest show on earth, the only game in town. One of its greatest virtues is that it is perfectly OK to say "I don't know" until you do know. The answer that best fits that particular question, even though it may be partly deficient, is the best that you have at that time. Until a new theory arrives, one that is supported by observable data and / or the mathematics to match, and which is also peer reviewed by the greatest minds on earth (which is how things work in the scientific community), you do not discard the old theory.
    It is OK not to know what existed before the big bang. It is OK to find that 90 % of the universe is filled with stuff we can not find or observe. Be sure that sooner or later we will find out. It is only a matter of time before we do.

    If you can not stand the idea of not knowing everything RIGHT NOW, then you will have to join the ranks of the billions who prefer to invent decorative solutions to this troubling malady they suffer. For some it is a brutal, revengeful rescuer of slaves from the Nile delta, for others it is a quirky psychopathic trinity, for others it is the unrivalled rise to power of the most ambitious and cunning camel herdsman the world has ever seen. There are many others still, as there have been thousands before them. All are there for you to choose from, so that you may quench that unrelenting passion to KNOW what you already do not know.
    Without exception the "soul" is the most important element in all of these doctrines, past and present. Because without it there is no vessel by which the individual can pass in to the "afterlife" to suffer the consequences of his earthly actions in front of the judge and the executioner.
    Without it he can't getcha and he wants to getcha !
    Now coming to the point : the notion of NDE's and OBE's by definition are founded on the acceptance of the existance of a soul. That is, there is a "vessel" whereby the individual continues to exist and experience everything even though he is "out" of his physical body. If you want to believe it go ahead, so long as you know where it comes from and what it was really invented for and by whom.
    Or, alternatively, you can believe that science can explain you the extraordinary situations when the synapses in your brain cause such short circuits, such as: shock, illness, mental or physical trauma, depression, narcotics, etc etc.
    One very good real life case was that of an adolescent girl who was seeing all kinds of apparitions, including the virgin Mary, during her sleep. The case was taken up by all manner of quacks as "proof" of all kinds of utter nonsense. It turned out that the digital clock right by her head was off spec and emitting electronic waves that were relentlessly bombarding the poor girls' temporal lobes every night.
    I am ready to believe in absolutely anything and everything. So long as you provide me your evidence and show me WHY.

  • sarp kaya

    Until then, you may as well just be speaking about the flying spaghetti monster....

  • Keith

    @ Sarp,

    The first half of your post is some of the most seasoned, well-reasoned, and well said ideas that you've presented. Then you stooped once again to sheer condescension. I agree with the first half.

    First of all you once again do yourself the disservice of informing others about what or why they believe. You're assumptions reveal ignorance and intolerance. In addition, speaking for myself, they are incorrect. I do not maintain and explore my religious belief because I want to know something or have something explained. I also am OK with not knowing. I don't use religion as a means of answering questions that I can't find answers to in science or reasoning. For me, it is experiential. I experience something that would not be worth attempting an explanation to you, because you are openly hostile to the mere premise. But suffice it to say that it's got nothing to do with finding answers to questions that I'm too immature to hold in suspension in my life. I think one could easily turn this line of reasoning back around at you, but I'll spare us both the mental gymnastics.

    I don't believe in a God with any interest in "getting me."

    I have no interest in proving anything to anyone, but would simply like to go on as I am, experiencing what I experience without having to explain again and again to ignorant and intolerant people that I do not believe the things that would be most convenient for all their arguments. I genuinely resent the condescension and would like to say that, Sarp, you make yourself the fool when you prance around with intellectual arrogance assuming you are smarter than I or anyone else in these discussions. Your closing line is a mockery of humility.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @Aritotle, apologies in advance for the choppy nature of this post:

    The point of realization is nearly there my friend, it has been a long journey to find out about the think/feel duality; and through a path suggested by the Hate-MaChinE of the myers Briggs personality test in all its different forms the seemingly intaractable problem is becoming more visible through the dark clouds of lack of knowledge. The nom de plume as you noticed is my way of asking the question in an open, unavoidable way while still holding out a little to the uninitiated.

    Each individual has a possibility of four *outcomes* with the duality, they are think- extrovert - feel introvert, think inrovert- feel extrovert- and i assume although i have not consciously encountered these types feel- extrovert feel introvert- think extrovert- think introvert!!

    Its also woth noting that we are all variable depending on time of day, mood, and many other different factors... for example: when you are not talking do you think or feel more??? and when you are talking do you think or feel more?? depends on the individual and how they are hard wired as well as external factors... this is something to be explored by the individual.

    At this point it takes a bit of deeper thought and experiment to see what these outcomes offer, and which is the most natural for each individual.

    I still need to figure out how to induce the higher beta state?? it can be hopefully be used for maths study without the cost of high introversion and social difficulties (its a blessing and a curse/). Then again all benefits have a cost dont they?

    ' pleasure without pain does not exist' to paraphrase the original Epicurus...

    It's hard to accept that laughter is a fear response. I can understand what you say, its just that if you can turn this concept on its head and see laughter as an affirming process of giving confidence and reasurrence to another individual for a greater good it puts a positive spin on the exact same concept! viewing anything with a negative spin does not allow you to project a positive picture of yourself.

    My question to you remains: Can we induce the beta state or is it something that is catalysed by higher cognitive interactions? It will help with maths study.

    I like Sharmer! He appeals to the rational. Thanks Sarp Kaya for the link. I dont get why you have a problem with Sarp @ Keith, then again it's none of my business:))

    E_L is nearly dead!

  • Epicurean_Logic

    also, the root comfort emotional response intrigues me... it makes sense (no pun inteneded) from the point of view that everything is basic, and complex processes are just the combination of many base processes...

    The manipulation side of this is something that we should all be aware of, and when you see the manipulation that occurss on a daily basis! through media etc, it confims that mental processes can be manipulated.

    One base emotional response seems logical.

  • Arstotle

    @Epicurean_Logic

    To the last points first, both deal with “triggers” and “comfort”. Your last point with Sarp @ Keith (with apologies to both, it’s just a good example.) Comfort is found in one’s “world view”. There are expressed thought processes that gnaw on the zone and a response is believed to be warranted. The only question is whether or not a response will be enlightening? Sharmer both provokes and invokes, negatively and positively, that’s why I read him and don’t necessarily always agree.

    The initial response of the duality of either a think- extrovert - feel introvert, a think introverts- feel extrovert- or a feel- extrovert feel introvert- think extrovert- think introvert are types. None of the types are necessarily good or bad if you are aware of the motivating force within. If you are not or refuse not to be it is self imposed blindness.

    Although an open exchange such as this does allow any of the above personality type’s expression, know your motivator. That alone will widen one’s world view. (And consider laughter as affirming when we associate or see ourselves in the situation. It’s an instant surprise flash in the mind and definitely reflects the area of comfort. Comfort levels are learned arenas. The idea of negative (fear) and positive (elation) is self imposed.)

    Everyone is an introvert during contemplation. It’s the first part of any thought process and inescapable but are you comfortable with the ugly and the beautiful, the true and the false that the light of contemplation shines on?? If not we need some bumps and bruises, to form some calluses and move forward…

    Is any world view the absolute truth? Realize it is only true in the mind of the believer, self inclusive.

    Achieving a higher beta is more or less automatic when permitted. One can have higher cognitive interactions within by being the protagonist and the antagonist as well as through external interaction. It’s a question of self imposed blocks. If one can consider all knowledge as “assumption” than all knowledge can be questioned. The degree of questioning is directly connected to ones area of comfort. Sometimes it’s more profitable to explore the assumptions first therein could lay inspiration. Didn’t Wiles produce a proof of Fermat’s last theorem by connecting disassociated theories, leaving a first assumption, trashing the second and then returning to the first, both in collaboration and alone? It’s all high beta but the answers are discovered in theta. (The next paragraph I cut. It seems I was bifurcated but here it is anyway.)

    If you are asked a question, what do you owe the questioner? A balanced responder will provide all fascists of the area in question to the best of their knowledge and insight. This should include thesis and antithesis. While responding they should question their own response for completeness and provide an admission of their leanings. This should be seen as a duty. Failure to do so is recruitment, fallacious and an attempt to close the questioner’s mind. Simply put it’s preaching…

  • Keith

    @Aristotle and Epicurean logic

    I have really enjoyed the conversation you guys have been maintaining alongside the others. It sort of seems like an intellectual version of the old guys on Muppets who sat up in the balcony and poked fun at everyone. I say that as a compliment.:)

    I admit to yo-yo-ing back and forth in a discussion like this from a place of emotional remove where I feel I can apply logic and perspective and occasional lapses when my attempts at civility are met with open derision and hostility. Occasionally this does indeed become a trigger which incites a more biting response - which admittedly will degrade the value of what I am actually trying to communicate.

    Also, I appreciate your point about the comfort of one's own world view. This is something that continues to baffle me in this forum - this dynamic. I am fairly committed to an ever expanding world view, to one that encompasses science and as Christopher Hitchens likes to call it, the numinous. I honestly seek and would love to have some civil exchanges (of exactly the ideal kind you describe)but I am routinely frustrated that there seems to be little appetite for a patient and respectful conversation. In the end, maybe the kind of discussion - the give and take and mutual respect - that I am seeking will never be found in a forum like this one...but I keep getting sucked in anyway.

    Finally, regarding your ongoing conversation on "states." Can you tell me, what is the state of so called "hypnogogia?" I understand that to be the state between waking and sleeping. I have always had long periods of this - which I slip easily into, and it actually aggravates my insomnia as I can lay in that state for a long time wishing I was sleeping. However unsettling it may be, I have had bizarre experiences and creative revelations in these times. I have had experiences which, if I were less skeptical of myself, would characterize as remote viewing. I have also several times in the last year had "visions" of higher math - math far beyond what I understand. It is hard to articulate as the experience seems to draw in all kinds of intelligence and perspective while in it, but then when it's over, it's hard to pin down - though there are times where I can scrawl notes and make sense of some bits and pieces.

    In any case, I wondered if you have any thoughts about that. I downloaded one of those binaural things and plan to use it, but want to really have time where I can be relaxed and undisturbed for the full 70 minutes or so and I have two small children and a busy life, so that part is a challenge. Anyway, I'd appreciate any thoughts.

    peace,

    Keith

  • Achems Razor

    @Keith:

    I can't help but comment on your last post. I to at times have almost lucid dreams wherein I have visions of some kind of extremely high math that does make sense, at least when I am dreaming, and I don't even like math. Some times in my dreaming state my mind feels like it went up to a genius IQ. level.

    But not only math, other things, that are completely beyond me at my waking level.

    I have no idea what it all means, but have read somewhere that sometimes in a dreaming state a person can achieve these height's and tap into resources that would be unheard of in the waking state.

    Maybe Epic. or Aristotle can comment on that.

  • Arstotle

    @Keith and @Achems Razor

    (There’s no way to make these short. Sorry)

    Hypnogogia and hypnopompia are simply terms to describe transitions. The first is generally approaching or entering the sleep state. The last is just the reverse or the awakening process. The experience of light where there is no source while in the sleep state is termed phosphene. There are more terms used to describe these areas then you would believe. All are just labels for moving to and from the conscious to the sub and/or unconscious.

    If you are writing a paper they are necessary along with the research for their proper usage. If one is exploring the area first person they are not, exploring the experience is main objective. Trash the terms. Yours is to use whatever tool you find the most successful to enter into a state, learn the environment and above all enjoy the experience. They will deepen with use.

    The binaural beats are simply a tool that is the least invasive, no external subliminal messages. The natural sleep process can also be used as a tool when properly approached. This is true even if sleep evades you. The only subliminal message you want to use is your own. It might simply be “remember”, when passing through a door way, touch the jam and mentally (or vocally) ask “am I sleeping” or actively pondering a problem. The idea is to promote a conscious realization of and within the state. Sometimes the results to the door jam approach are enlightening….

    I really dislike using the computer metaphor but what you are doing is flagging the software to promote a desired response. Remember, you are the programmer.

    It has been mentioned that the delta state is the lowest frequency and that seemingly presupposes less activity. This is not true. During this state the blood flow increases to the brain by approximately a factor of three. Stated otherwise, there is a whole lot of low frequency activity. The higher frequency states used reduced blood flow. It’s like beta or gamma are coasting modes.

    The heavy lifting, neural pathway work, is done during theta and delta i.e., maintenance, association, discovery and storage. During higher blood flow states glandular activity increases. Drawing conclusions of the effects here is what the labs are attempting through third party observation. First party observation is the method of the explorer.

    A brief and incomplete process explanation would look something like this: Mundane repetitious tasks require less mental effort. They require learned responses. It's automatic. (If you’re into higher math, consider the effortless formula notation when you know where it’s going. It’s almost like automatic writing) When engaged (beta) in a discussion, learning or discovery process temporary pathways are established. Flags are set for the unknown or questioned during wakeful theta, deep thinking. The data is processed during delta. Awareness of theta and delta processing is a targeted state. Results are realized as knowledge or understanding in the wakeful states.

    To the final questions, the following is personal speculation:

    I think Carl Gustav Jung is correct in stating that there is a collective unconscious. I also think that it is the source of our bouts with brilliance (they are transitory so write good notes). Further we do have an (however weak) electro-magnetic field around us. The strongest area is a toroidal type at the heart and I am very familiar with the properties of a toroidal field.

    One of these docs had a researcher bombarding an area of the brain EM pulses to induce visions. There are weak and strong EM pulses all about us and some have information encoded within. From that view point consider that an AM transmitter/receiver broadcasts and receives signals within an amplitude modulated band. The receiver and transmitter must be tuned to the proper AM band and will not respond to FM, VHF or UHF. Extrapolate the rest for yourselves. It’s a topic for a much different forum, highly speculative and argumentative.

    Eirene kai agatha

  • Achems Razor

    @Arstotle:

    Ah, the collective consciousness, or the cosmic Akashic records.
    Have been looking into all of that stuff over the years.
    Ha, Ha, my friends on this site again will probably say, am doing my hippie bent!

    I tried to learn about lucid dreaming, because did have dreams where I awoke in my dreams, knew that I was dreaming, but awake in my dreams.
    That was a sort of breathtaking experience, Not brave enough to really delve into it though. Always scared of loosing my consciousness of now. (LOL)

    Have read about what Jung said about collective consc"
    Most of the new age books, Edgar Casey expose on all that stuff also.
    But don't know, think it still is somewhat of a mystery, some of the great minds have had dreams which then they have used to formulate new paradigm's. I believe even Einstein was one of them.

    Thank you for your in-depth response.

  • Arstotle

    @Achems Razor

    You becha Einstein was a lucid dreamer and he wasn't alone.

    And the New Age mvt isn't new just reworked for a new group of spiritually starved buyers...

  • debs

    when i watched this film my thoughts were , while i don't think this was anything religious ... this is quite amazing stuff though still skeptical, but i didn't bother to write a comment but i just finished watching "A question of miracles" i feel persuaded or more convinced that this is more power of suggestion and people who are more suceptable do to frontal lobe brain "engineering."
    there was a scientific experiment done that showed this evidence.

  • John Doe

    You perceive with your 5 senses. Without them you are just consciousness. 5-Meo-DMT is naturally occurring in your bodies. It is the molecule that links our consciousness to the illusion of reality. Put that one in your pipe and smoke it.

  • Y

    This doc gave me a very warm feeling and assurance that all the books that I have been reading about Life are true: that energy is not created nor destroyed it is only transformed from one form to the next that the greatest secret to Life is that there Is no death.

    My brother was murdered almost 2 years ago and the thought that I was never going to see him physically in My physical reality messed with my head completely; it had me questioning my Own reality, myself as a physically living human being as if I were just a thought operating in this world that was just was perpetuated by the existence of other human thoughts that made mine real and the fact that my brother, who was a huge part of my life was gone, deleted a big part of who I Was...I was also lost when he passed away-made me believe I could not prove my past anymore because He is gone. I know this has nothing to do with near death experiences, but having suffered the death of a loved one truly brings Death to partake of your reality which questions Life.

    All in all, this doc brought a smile to myself to know that one day I WILL see my brother again eventhough he has passed to the next Life, but that there is another Life in which he will be part of my life again like it once was...

    (I cannot help but go into tears of hope)

  • DeepPeace

    This is good work. His written work is good, as well. For those who will not be convinced, nothing can be said. I will say, however, that it is not wise to be too sure that one is right absent an OBE (out of body experience) or NDE, lucid dreaming, or any such, themselves. Life is NOT what we've been taught to believe. ;)

    Science gives us the latest theories, yes - on neurology and such - but let us recall it was once a mortal offense to believe the earth was anything but flat. We grow too complacent, in our day, to rest overmuch on anything science says.

    My suggestion - petition, even - would be for less complacency, more openness. Let's let life have a little of mystery in it. Who are we, to think we know so much? "I don't know" provides a reasonable openness, the empty cup, that Life can then fill.

  • warren

    weather or not there life after death this one is over as we know it.

  • Ally

    I ask the science minded nay-sayers this, before we discovered infared, did that mean it didn't exist just because we couldn't see it? And when we found a way to see infared and put it to good use how much extra information did it give us? We may not be in a position to understand NDE or see it yet, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

  • John

    My father-in-law was clinically dead from heart failure for a minute or so and then stayed in a coma for 2 weeks. He said he saw the light and the warm feelings; his father and brother who had been dead a long time talked to him. But after that he felt he was being pulled down into "hell" and was being tormented by "demons" until he woke up. He never goes into the hell description very much, but the experience changed him dramatically.

  • avidseeker

    I'll keep an open mind and agree that i simply dont know..however the idea that we come back and relive our lives is ridiculous, purely because if we all "went back" in time until we got it right, there would be NO suicides ever witnessed. However we still dont know what consciousness is. I believe it is an intrinsic part of space-time and energy-matter, not just a product of electrical impulses. So life after death could be possible in a purely conscious, egoless state without any feeling of individuality. But i dont even know about that.. i dont really know anything and im proud to admit that i can admit that.

  • http://www.keepthedeadalive.org Jacob Woods

    I will second the passing of energy theory. I am a bit skeptical but at the same time if people say that it is a nice experience then I will be not afraid of death as well.

  • Epicurean_Logic

    @ Achems Razor and Keith

    The math in your dreams is a metaphor for unknown knowledge and information. Your studies and learning here at TDF has opened your mind up to many different ideas and thoughts and this seems to be the meaning of the math based dreams. The impenetrable fog clearing…

    @myneoclassicalbrother

    I never got around to saying this but thank you for the guidance and patience. I have learned a lot from our interactions. Thank you.

    Peace and innocence

  • Achems Razor

    @Epicurean_Logic:

    Thank you, have learned a lot from you also!

  • Achems Razor

    @Epic_Logic:

    Meant to thank you and @Arstotle also!

  • Arstotle

    @Epic_Logic & @Achems Razor

    Just got back from two weeks in Egypt and am sorely behind. Both of you help make this forum enjoyable, very little vitriol, much information and great thought provoking exchanges.

  • Keith

    Thanks to all of you for the insights. @Epicurean Logic, that is certainly one interpretation but I don't think you can say that is certainly what it means, as dreams are still pretty wide open and much that is unexplainable happens there. I have also had a remote viewing dream (before I had heard of the phenomenon, I only discovered what it was after my strange experience) where an image and a place in Italy came into my mind for no understandable reason - I had never heard of it, been there, thought about it, etc. and I looked it up the next day and confirmed it. What I heard/saw was "Como, Italy, standing stone circle." Along with that was a picture of a small standing stone on a high point over looking a lake. It was so vivid that I woke up, wrote it down, and sketched the stone and location. When I tried to search with those terms and see if there was a connection I discovered that near Lake Como, Italy a prehistoric set of Celtic or similar stone circles (with small stones, not large Stone Henge stones) was discovered while a construction dig was going on. It was only reported locally and I found the newspaper article noted by an obscure archaeoastronomy website, but it was very recent. The point is, it was far from an item that had made news I could have come across for it to enter my subconscious. I have no idea WHY I saw that tidbit of information, but that experience has led me to believe that whether it is collective subconscious or what, I don't know, but I have experienced the phenomenon. I have also had what some would call "psychic" dreams throughout out my life - where I dream about someone I haven't heard of or thought about in years and find out they died the night of my dream, etc. So, I am not attempting to place religious or otherwise significance on it, but I have reason from my own experience to think that the math in a dream like that may be something other than a metaphor for new insight and expansion of the mind, etc.

    Just some more food for thought.

  • Micky

    This video moved me. I don't care what anyone else has to say about it. I know how it made me feel. Also, I would like to say yes I'm a christian. Say what you may it does't matter to me.

  • Blessed

    honestly i feel sorry for those that think after death there is complete nothingness. how boring. i'm not afraid of death. quien le toca le toca. knowing there is an afterlife has given me peace with the death of my father and will give me peace when my other parents pass too. Thank God I have faith :) yeeppeeee. It must be difficult for those that don't have faith to lose someone close to them. I'll be praying for you too

  • http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/about/ Vlatko

    @Blessed,

    It is not difficult for those who don't have faith. You really don't have to pray for them. It's pointless since prayers will not help you nor them.

    It's funny you say that you're not afraid of death and you still hope that there is afterlife. The truth is you don't know what happens after death. No one really knows.

  • Achems Razor

    @Blessed:

    Ah! Faith! Knew Faith, she went with a girl called Destiny.

    Who are you to pray for anyone with your blatant unconvincing pseudo-argument from your vague authority? Are you your Gods little sunbeam maybe?

    Don't give me that I am not scared of death garbage, you are petrified!
    You know nothing of any afterlife! The reason why am talking this way is I take umbrage from your thinking that your ineffectual praying to your invisible God will somehow alleviate the ills of fellow man.

    In other words keep your praying to yourself, don't want or need it!

  • panpan

    The Russian guy with the tux came back as Liberace.

  • wasted

    Firstly let me say this: I'm not highly educated nor am I religious (in the sense that I do not carry out religious traditions/rituals or go to church/mosque/etc). So please set your flame-throwers to the low setting!

    I have always put faith (whoops! oxymoron!) in science & logic, but having said that I have always felt that there is a small part of me that is spiritual (upbringing?, social exposure to theology?, just part of the human experience created as a by-product of evolution?); I don't know why it's 'there' but it is!

    I believe that this feeling of spirituality probably exists within the majority of people & has been repeatedly exploited by those seeking to subdue & dominate their fellow man. BUT I'm not saying all religious beliefs were created for this purpose. To the contrary in fact!, I imagine most religions were created/founded in the best of intentions (i.e. to create harmony & love, instead of discord & despair) & to explain this feeling of spirituality but were hijacked along the way.

    So I might dare to theorise that ALL religions are a man made fabrication designed to explain the endless unknown & give us comfort where there was fear (& used by the unscrupulous for dominion).

    But does this invalidate the idea that there might be a 'universal energy' that all life/energy/forces come from & must one day return? even the flying spaghetti monster :D

    I think not.......(therefore I am not? eh? well forget this bit! lol)

    So to summarise the ramblings of this madman:

    1. Does god exist as described by religions?

    I do not think so.

    2. Is there a god/universal energy?

    Well I haven't seen any concrete repeatable evidence.

    3. Is there an afterlife?

    Well, I'm not dead yet so I can offer no personal account! But many people from different cultures, religions, countries claim to have very similar experiences. So possibly, er, I guess.

    4. Am I afraid of dying? - Is that why I'm tempted away from purely scientific thinking on this subject?

    You bet your ass I am!! & lets face it so are the rest of you. If you weren't then we would have lots of people in the perfect position to test the afterlife theory!

    5. Should we learn to embrace each other, love & care for all? Be tolerant & try to understand each others viewpoint?

    ABSOLUTELY. We have a fairly short time together. Why spend it making each other unhappy.

    HAVE A GOOD ONE!

  • dawnriser

    Props to wasted!

    Whether you believe, question, wonder, hope, doubt or dismiss the idea of an afterlife, one thing is certain. If we all behaved with love and compassion toward one another and ourselves, THIS life would be a lot better.

  • Divona

    Well if Life after Life is so amazing, beautifull, happy....ect why live at all?????

  • girum

    hi guys,
    I am an Ethiopian Orthodox Christian. I learned about all these guys are talking all my life. Every year in the mid of the Great Lent, usually on Sunday, the whole day is dedicated to remember the second coming of Christ. In that day, the same exact teaching, of what the guys have experienced, is narrated. If it were that all the guys are Ethiopians, I was not amazed. I was really amazed to hear it from unrelated parties.

    Especially the KGB victim told there is deep darkness! Exactly the same dark tunnel is built in Lalibella, Northern Ethiopia to show how it is dark in Sheol. You can pay a visit to Lalibela.

    The other what amazed me is the panoramic view of all our lifetime at the same time. As a child I was always puzzled by the same teaching. Now I believed it without questioning it, I will share this video to all my friends the whole my life!!!

    Thanks for sharing this video...it had a tremendous effect on my view of the Spiritual World and EOTC.

  • Frank U

    I Love to how people that claim this is all fake take their precious time to watch the whole documentary and then trash it.

  • stoned

    perseption makes this world and the next, differnt modes of veiwing for differnt realitys we will never understand the unseen in this world but we can all feel it.

  • John

    OBE and NDE are certainly very real and do somehow bridge the conscious self to the world outside of their physical bodies. Don't take my word for it, you'll have to experience it at some point for yourself. Other than that I don't know what happens after death, no one knows for sure. To say any different just shows foolish arrogance.

    How will you feel when you finally realize there are no "neutron stars", "black holes", and certainly no mystical substance called "dark matter". All that time spent reading and looking at lovely diagrams, watching neat-o videos, arguing with people who know just as little as you. For what? Vanity? Unconditional love?

    String theory this and big bang that - why are people still perpetuating these ideas which have no real basis in reality, much less any concrete or reproducible evidence, as scientific fact? You claim to be scientists, but you're just part of a new religion.

    How can you be so certain of anything without personally experiencing the primary source? At some point everyone has faith in something or someone, no one knows everything for fact.

    PS If you think Einstein was a genius, you don't know enough about his work or who he was (you most likely were indoctrinated in Israeli or US public schools). If he was so smart why have his theories been thrown out (they were not even his own ideas)? Ben Franklin had more imagination and knowledge in his left testicle, and he was merely a part-time scientist.

  • sarp kaya

    @John:

    "arguing with people who know just as little as you"...

    If there is one thing we can be grateful for, it is that at least almost all people know a great deal more than you, and that would include every man's right or left testicle.

  • customroadshow

    if your in a room and your turn the light out . there is no power to light the bulb .
    so once your light goes out there is no other place we go .
    no power no light .
    if the light bulb expires same thing happend we have to change the bulb

  • ghostchasingsouls

    hahha wasted

  • Kung Fu'zi

    "We do not understand life; how can we understand death?"

  • customroadshow

    what is there to understand about death . once your gone your gone . its case of we die to make room for another body .
    but i would ask my self what is the point in life at all then we will understand death . or not .

  • bigsury

    I love this video. There is a God and he loves us. Take it for what its worth. Maybe this video will help people to be better and more loving. I just love how people taught by other PEOPLE think they know everything. The lack of true wisdom gives me a head ache. "I think I will use a bunch of big words and try and sound smart." Comparing life to a "lightbulb"? Even if these athiest ideas where true, why would you dare chance it? Do you honestly think that you have all understanding? I guess its your choice and only you have to answer for it. Trying to destroy other peoples hope and faith will lead to failure no matter what religion you are. Even if your life is lacking any religion at all. I pray that you find your "light" before its to late. We are lucky if we are given 85 years on this earth. Why not have faith, why not have hope?

  • soulchasingghosts

    Even a light bulb requires a life force. In the case of the light bulb this is an electric current. If the bulb fails the electric current remains. A person who had never seen or heard of a t.v. (it is a bit unlikely I must admit) would probably imagine that the sound and picture were somehow stored inside the device. The life force in this case is the transmitted picture and sound from the transmitter. We do not have the knowledge to prove that there is a soul, but we do have faith. Do not dismiss something because it cannot be proved.
    There are some amazing things taking place in the field of quantom physics that may yet hold the answer to a life after death.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FWWLBEEGKFYNGOZ22E3D7DCSAE Mayzee

    I know that God is real. He loves us. He created us. If we receive the redemption purchased for us on the cross, when we die, our finite minds cannot even imagine the beauty and joy that awaits us. Not just the beauty to see, but the thing we all desire most... every single being in Heaven has the joy of belonging, being loved, valued and having purpose and dignity. And after all of that, the reunion with loved ones, the meeting of new friends, the privilege of walking and talking with God Himself, we also get to travel at the speed of thought, fly, invent, continue learning, explore and... man... it's going to be a ball up there! There is nothing here that can compare... as beautiful as nature is.

  • http://www.facebook.com/danthenoman Daniel Berdichevsky

    amazing, I have had a near death experience myself, I was sucked out of my body into space, where I saw the earth, and every detail of it. After wards I continued on to the tunnel of infinite love. Very similar experience to these people. This video stirs up unbelievable emotions in me, I can barely handle it because I still think about that experience every single day. I didn't even deserve that experience, but because of the love of jesus christ, he accepted me for who I was, even though prior to that I have done many terrible things in my life. I just wanna tell people out their, that God loves you, and you are his treasure forever.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=519397406 Michelle Kjertinge

    I'm still amazed at the fact that one can take a photo and see a moment image captured yet, later....or, on video. So, this doesn't surprise me at all...

  • Suriell

    If the power goes out the power is still there, just not in use in the way that you last knew it. the bulb is just a conduct in which we aquire the light through the power. The "power" electricity is just as the soul and you dont destroy it simply by turning off the light.

  • Morsie

    Why would our brain be so kind to us? That sounds so......inexplicable.

  • desperad0oo7

    wait a minute, how do people make the jump from NDE to soul?? there is the possibility of non-local consciousness. As a matter of fact that would be the most likely explanation, nothing to do with souls. We would all be one "soul" basically, and that "soul" (consciousness) is the universe experiencing itself.

    No need for a soul or God. Still would be a matter of pure faith.

  • Norm

    I have yet to watch the documentary. I have been so engrossed in the conversation you, Epic_Logic and Achems Razor have had that I need to stop now and do some processing.

    Thank you

  • jonathan jackward

    google this .....unified field of consciousness

  • Craigzz

    What drugs have you been smoking, cos they is the only people who can get there minds firing rapidly enough to experience such states of conciousness, or unconciousness, as the case may be.

    Geez, check out the God squad posts here, any mention of death and there like flys round S... oh he loves me, he loves me not, he loves me, he loves me not, mayzee, nature is'nt always beautiful, sometimes it kills and mames. And, this Earth which seems right now to mean the world to you, is a big fat zero in the universe, and if there is a God, who created the whole universe and everything in it, you have zero meaning to that God in terms of the mass of the universe and all which is in it, so wake up, your not going to be having tea and biscuits with God, but theres every chance you'll be put in heavens hospital for the mentally in love !!!

  • http://www.facebook.com/VIKINGLION77 Alex Dixon

    Why dont you think you deserved it ?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_AB72XZIIGTWC6E767WHTH6DHIM Kahina

    It moved me, too and I consider myself more of an agnostic. I tend to believe in the theory of non local consciousness.

  • jameylee

    I am happy now because i know when i die i will still be a live with God and i will be happy.

  • Chad Christopher

    two snazzy dressed dudes, spending a pleasant day together! it's actually a very interesting doc.

  • wanksta5

    I recently was put under anaesthesia for Surgery. I was gone three hours, knocked out no dream, nothing absolute void.

    Sadly this experience is what I believe will happen when the day comes when I die my brain might squirt off some endorphins but when my brain stops firing I believe that just like when I was put under anaesthesia the same will happen however this time, it won't just be for three ours it will be a perpetual void.

  • knowledgeizpower

    alot of different opinions beliefs or non beliefs as far as the comments on this doc goes lol but me personally looking past all this I really enjoyed this one just listening to each person own personal experiences.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Lynda-Warren/100001711383636 Lynda Warren

    this is fascinating, i love watching things like this..thanks :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1014411211 Jordan Stevens

    No, we have ultimate meaning to God, because consciousness is not at all dimensional. Size makes no difference. And the Universe is born of meaning, each atom an expression of Bliss of a God who creates to please. Consciousness is primary, not matter. I repeat that: consciousness is primary, not matter. It is totally logically impossible the other way around. Something cannot exist without being observed by consciousness. That something is God, the One Being who created this big movie called reality.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1014411211 Jordan Stevens

    I was put under anesthesia as well and blacked out. I also died on a separate occasion and awoke in a spirit body as these people did. It's impossible that its a hallucination and I guess you need to experience it to know its real. But the most hardened atheist will turn spiritual after such an experience and never look back 100% of the time. Anesthesia is not death.

  • His Forever

    Jordan: Epicurus would say you had too much carbon dioxide in your blood at that time and it was a by-product of that--essentually the hullucinations of a dying brain. I would, however, like to know what you experienced when you died as it would be "on topic" to this documentary. How did you die and what did you experience if you don't mind me asking?

    Edit: I've also added you to my "follow" list so I won't miss any of your interesting comments. Thanks!

  • XUSMCVET

    I had a very different experience and I can't elaborate now as I am out of time. Stay tuned. I'll be back in a day or two.

    I'm going to guess (correct me if I'm wrong) you belong to some form of organized religion?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V53UWF2PPUDD3AOFIY3GYJ3VPQ bluerose

    It's not hallucinations, it is real. It was confirm when I had an out of body experience. I used to think when the church told everyone that you are a bad person for seeing things that can not be explained. When it was confirmed I was in an car accident and I was shown that all this is true. I have a gift that used to scare me since I was three years old. It was told to me that it was not a bad thing to have and yes it is a gift that I was given. I also have the ability to go out of my body when I sleep it feels the same way but there is no light or tunnel, I'm either in the past, present, or future.

  • http://twitter.com/Q_Bert_ Q*Bert

    Christian propoganda.

  • XUSMCVET

    This isn't a documentary by ANY definition; it's typical christian propoganda bullsh*t!

    Don't waste your time watching this unless you believe in the invisible man in the sky.

  • http://twitter.com/Brotha_jeff Jeff Martin

    I'm not religious. I have Out of body experiences. In fact you can have them when you are about to fall asleep. Your mind stays awake and your body falls asleep. You hear some buzzing noises in your ears and then you float up. It feels so vivid and real. I can't explain it. If you're interested in having OBEs look up Astral Projection and Night Paralysis.

  • Josh Goldberg

    If that's your opinion than you missed the point. This is not about religion at all. it's about our responsibility to one another. Our true reason for being here is to learn. To love and to forgive. To grow as spiritual beings with the knowledge that we are greater than our earthly ourselves. We are only here for a brief moment and than we're gone. Eternity is our home. It is where we started and where we will (after many lifetimes of lessons learned), finally unite with the universal spirit from which we sprang. Good luck on your own path. I hope you find peace! : )

  • Josh Goldberg

    Hi. Glade to see you're still around for now! lol

  • Josh Goldberg

    I didn't come away with that at all. To me it's a spiritual experience not religious.

  • Lisa Kline

    I have had OBEs many times without even knowing what it was. I found out recently that this is what is going on. I absolutely understand the "buzzing." It feels like my whole being is buzzing, and it is very uncomfortable....are yours usually terrifying? Mine are almost always terrifying until and only until I acknowledge that I am out of my body.

    After I acknowledge that I am out of my body, I am able to relax, and I usually come back to. I've been trying to figure out how to leave the area -- currently, I can't actually leave the area, but I have been able to see things going on while I was definitely NOT moving and NOT awake (person in the room confirmed).

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/N2ZV3HYHBTONTQ5JWZIUTJ5F3I KingHockeyMan

    Lisa, I beleive you. The buzzing I don't remember, but the floating I do w/a freaky sensation. I was 8 or 9 and went thru atleast 4 or 5 expeirences . Like seeing a UFO, or spirits/ghosts, etc..etc.., its life changing even altering. Your whole perspective changes Unless a person expeirences those things. The people who doubt those things that never expeirenced them. Keep your pie-hole shut. Take care hun :-)... .

  • kawaiw

    Watch this with skepticism. I will explain...

    Firstly this documentary is very biased. It focuses entirely on descriptions of life after death but completely ignores all the scientific explanations. Therefore in my books this is not a documentary.

    Secondly, I initially thought the individuals in each case study are actors because of their wide usage of the word, "panoramic" to describe their lives after death. Since they're ages vary, different backgrounds, different education levels and even a Russian, they are unlikely to have used the same word. HOWEVER, then i decided to GOOGLE a few names and suddenly it all became clear.

    Third, fourth, fifth and sixth, The case studies are not a random bunch, several of these individuals have economic interests in this programme. George Richie and Sandi Rogers both have books out on this subject which was not mentioned in the programme. Dannion Brinkley, well he claims to have special powers and is a prophet. He previously announced there will be nuclear disaster in Norway but didn't happen among many other predictions. George Rodonaia's story of the a baby with a broken pelivs, well his story has changed a couple of times, thigh bone, sometimes its a boy, other times a girl.

    I couldn't find much dirt on the others. Viola Horton sounded genuine to be honest.

    SEVENTH: How many times did he say KGB???

    EIGHTH: Contradictions. They talk of living without a body, time and space is infinite, be everywhere at the same time. But they also talk of seeing loved ones. Well firstly why do they have a body? Secondly in infinite time and space how would you recognise someone, in what part of development will they take? Why are they loved ones and others are what? Strangers in a love infused heaven?

    But overall, watch with caution.

    NOTE: I gave up watching, had 15 mins left.

  • http://twitter.com/ihatemacOS xRTCx

    Hate to bust all your balls but when you die your brain releases a large amount of DMT which would explain all the trippy experiences. Still, it is nice to live in hope that life doesn't just cease existing. Btw, I'm not a skeptical person, mearly logical.

  • dusheti

    so....why brain is designed to release DMT ???

  • http://riondluz.myopenid.com/ riondluz

    i realize one must have senses in order to lose them, but please explain why I feel my right leg, long amputated many years ago. Or, FTM, how a lucid dream is any different from a waking reality?

  • flinktor flinktor

    i dont buy this..if they could go anywhere and do anything then why didnt they bring back some knowledge other than just experience and prove that knowledge scientifically, it seemed like they had a lot of time. If it was for a short term then it was nothing but hallucination. Well one day we all will know as we'd die, for me i dont believe it but if it turns out true i'll be kicking some arse! Otherwise, ___________________(into the darkness)

  • Olivia Lewis

    Even if its not true, it's an amazing thing/idea to live by. If everyone believed in this documentary maybe there would be less violence, hatred, etc in the world and more love. Like it said - we were born with love - by people who made love. We give to others out of love. It's the strongest emotion and can wash away any other hurt or anger. To love is to live and I'm sure this will bring a lot of closure and happiness for people to watch this and know their loved ones who have died are happy and at peace :)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=545476672 Mark Clavelle

    this was very well done. the accounts held that ring of truth, and the whole story had a single theme

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/KNBFXRALGKDH2KMTMLIHXC3GIQ Wade

    It's sad that almost all atheists are unable to express an opinion without lashing out with hateful hyperbole and character put-downs directed at the ones that come to a different conclusion. Reminds me of a distinct group that wrongly believe themselves to be "conservative". There are at least 20 published PhD.s that have extensively researched this topic and concluded that the evidence is heavily weighted toward after-life and God being reality. Experiments in modern physics concurs. But any atheist worth his salt is way, way smarter than those guys.

  • Achems_Razor

    @Wade:

    Show us as you say your "20 published PHD's that say evidence is heavily weighted toward after-life and God being reality. Experiments in modern physics concurs.??"

    Waiting!

  • fender24

    My mother has 40 years of experience in the healthcare. From the operation department she has seen enough of miracles to fill my apartment, even the biggest ateist have to think twice. My Personal experience, evidence from people i know and religion have led me to my faith about god and after life. I couldn't say that two years ago. Wery good documentary.

  • jcreamx23

    the only thing that sucks about heaven is that we have to share it with atheists. im kidding of course (im not kidding). you ***** should be forced to sit in the darkness for a few million years as penance for running around trying to rain on everybodies parades all the time and acting like you know wtf youre talking about, when in reality you're just as ignorant -- if not more so -- than the theists you spend all your free time ******* with. what makes a group of people vehemently oppose an outcome thats in their best interest, i'll never know. get back to me when your beloved empirical process has something in the way of concrete evidence that "proves" NDE's are solely the product of physiology....until then, im gonna need you to go watch bill nye the science guy or whatever it is you pretentious know-it-alls do when you're not trolling NDE video's.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=553120449 Gen Osson

    To those of you who call this Christian Propaganda, you clearly didn't watch the same movie. If you paid attention the term "God" is used as a reference for an all loving presence that cannot be explained otherwise. Anyone who is open enough to the idea can in fact have an out of body experience, probably not as intense as a Near Death Experience, but the freedom, warmth and calmness that comes over you from having one, opens your mind to what "science" refuses to acknowledge; we are merely souls/spirits that continue to live on past this physical body.

    If you don't believe, it doesn't matter anyway, because when your physical body dies you will then know the truth. We have a choice, to live a life full of hate and anger or live a life filled with love and acceptance. The choice is yours to make, no one else's.

    It does amaze me when reading other peoples' posts, how much of a pattern is seen; all those who deny have really mean and hateful things to say, and those that believe are kind and accepting of others' views. Food for thought.

  • sknb

    My mom has been an atheist for over a decade now. She is neither hateful not arrogant about it. In fact, she lives a religious life out of respect for my father who is a deeply religious and mystical man. My mother rarely speaks about her beliefs. She is charitable, kind, and an excellent citizen.Because I have been exposed to both very religious people, agnostics, and atheists, I realize it is impossible to generalize about any of these three groups of people. There are mean spirited people of all different kinds of belief - religious and not.

    Also: Why are there no black people in this movie? Africans? Indians? Asian people? Jews? I find this very lacking. It is in fact a very narrow group of people.

  • sknb

    I can be open to the experiences of these people. However, it does seem that many things these people are saying seem to follow a Christian paradigm and a Christian narrative. Where are the people of other religions? Other cultures? Even other races? When I see a documentary that only presents the viewpoints of experiences of a narrow range of white Westerners I am skeptical. I would love to hear the experiences from more varied cultural groups.

    Also, haven't they proven that Dimethyltriptamine which is proven to exist in the brain and react strongly during death creates many of the effects that are shown in people who have near death experiences.

    Anyway, just a thought. Peace and Good Will to you.

  • Heidi Dresser

    I just love how some comments are bashing this as "typical Christian propaganda" when throughout the entire video I heard the mention of Jesus only ONCE. Most of the video describes the experience and/or being as "light", "presence", "love" etc. Everything's yellow to the jaundiced eye I guess.

  • ATINUKE YUSUF

    The documentary confirms every single thing i read in a spiritual book entitled IN THE LIGHT OF TRUTH THE GRAIL MESSAGE

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002044415396 Katja Wand

    What does that mean - "Also, haven't they proven that Dimethyltriptamine which is proven to exist in the brain and react strongly during death creates many of the effects that are shown in people who have near death experiences."???
    What does that PROVE??? Its just a chemical response in your physical body that is similar to a messenger. It´s like the very easy-made materialistic thought that consciousness is created in the brain while consciousness is still one of the biggest mysteries in science. Its also said that DMT seems to be the conscious molecule that lets the soul go in and out of the physical body. That can explain why it is active when we die and "creates" that (as our soul leaves the body). Every living being on this planet has DMT (also plants) and might have a spirit. I recommend the documentary "DMT - the conscious molecule". Who can judge what´s an hallucination and what´s real? Are dreams from my future a hallucination? My soul (highest vibration) can travel easier in time than my materialistic body (what is very calmed down vibration). The truth is only WITHIN us, you cannot find it outside of yourself.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002044415396 Katja Wand

    Because the soul wants to EXPERIENCE its knowledge in this physical reality with a body. Thats the reason for this physical world. But you have to forget before. All the knowledge doesn´t serve that goal as your soul wants to experience special ideas to evolve, to grow. Its the goal to remember that knowledge in the physical reality. Besides that, as I had an intense, life-changing near-death-experience too during an ayahuasca-workshop (DMT), the experience is beyond words and what you realise just cannot be transfered into this physical world. I think experience is the greatest gift - better than any knowledge. Truth is very personal. Even light changes its characteristics just because we watch it. ;) And DMT might be related to letting the soul in and out of the body - so DMT in the brain is just a chemical reaction, a messenger, but that doesn´t mean the experience isn´t real. What´s reality? See the documentary "DMT - the conscious molecule". Truth is just WITHIN us, we cannot find it outside of ourselves.

  • Caroline Lowe

    I have had 2 NDE's within the last few years & I'm nearly 50 now and I was told to come back last time by my maternal grandmother. I didn't want to as it was so beautiful and I no longer felt any pain. But I came back for love. As I heard from beyond my dear husband pleading with me to come back and so I did.

    Over my lifetime I have studied nearly every religion & belief systems in the world. I am a spiritualist, psychic & wiccan. I was brought up as a Christian and I still see Jesus as the greatest, mystic & healer of all, then the Buddha etc. When is the human race going to understand that many path's lead to the "One". It doesn't matter if you call it God, Goddess, Allah, Jehovah, Krishna etc. Often what we call this divine source of love is culturally determined by our culture, parent's religion and our own life's learnings.

    Since my 1st NDE I have dedicated my life to spiritual learning and knowledege. So please people don't argue and fight over what's christian, islam, judaism etc. That sort of things causes wars as we know.

    The overwhelming message that we can all learn from NDE's is that love is what gives our lives meaning, not material success and gain. Our immortal soul is here to learn lessons in this life and if we don't? We're just going to have to do it all over again. To forgive is divine.

    I would also recommend any of Dr. Raymond's books to everyone. I know this was filmed back in the 1980's but it's as relevant now as it was then.

    Blessings to you all no matter what your reiigion or beliefs are!

  • influenza

    I believe in all these stories as this is often told in many religions. In Tibetan Buddhism this out-of-body experience is in the so called bardo state, or a kind of "intermediate" existence between lives during reincarnation. At this state the being has five supernatural abilities, as reported by different figures in this video. I heard of people talking about stories of very little kids seeing the newly deceased on the occasion of their death, or people were seen somewhere else in the last days of their lives. This spiritual things are very different as what has been observed and explained in science. The God mentioned in this video are said from those western people interviewed; it might also mean "Tao" for a Chinese or anything else for other nationals.

  • Cody

    Your theory is correct if physics as you know them apply in another dimension. However, we no so very little about our universe. Consequently, we must be able to open our minds to all possibilities until we have all of the facts. I do not believe our human minds have the capability of understanding everything.

  • Vivian Oberon

    The release of a chemical does not necessarily mean that the experiences aren't really happening.

  • Vivian Oberon

    Thanks for your comment, it's too bad. I enjoy watching stuff like this while keeping an open mind and hate when I research something and it comes up dodgy.

  • Vivian Oberon

    I used to use drugs (clean for 15 years) and I overdosed a few times. A couple of times I had a seizure, stopped breathing and actually turned blue. (This was witnessed by two different people) I had another seizure which I guess jump started me again and came to, full of absolute terror. Nothing in life can prepare you or come close to explaining that kind of terror. I was screaming so hard that no sound came out and looking around the room wildly in the corners as if something was there (according to witness). When I finally come to the part where I remember I was so terrified and I had no knowledge of not only who I was (or anyone else) but also WHAT I was (or anything else). For example I did not know I was a human being. I did not know I was anything. I could not have told you what a table was and what it meant. Just this pure terror. My roommate was on top of me trying to hold me down for my safety-a man bigger than I was. I had the strength to push him off me , deke past him (he used to be a football player) and run down the hall screaming, I ran so fast I ran right into the stove at full speed. I finally calmed down a bit when my roommate (who I'd known for years and did not know or recognize in any way-again did not even know the concept that he was a man, a human being) told me about my pet rabbit and my mother and I remembered those things. It took 3 hours for me to know who my roommate was. I watched as his face slowly went from a stranger to familiar-it was a very strange experience. Anyway, all this was no doubt my brain all messed up because of the seizure, but I hope I wasn't dead for a moment and saw something so terrifying that I screamed until there was no sound and out fought and ran a man a lot bigger than me. What was I seeing when I was looking wildly at the corners of the room screaming? Why the terror? Where was my light and love? One other sad thing. I forgot I was a junkie and when I was told this, it was terrible. Imagine that.

  • fender24

    Invisible? how do u know he's a man then? :D

  • hellena one

    there is no racial, religious or cultural diversity in this documentary because it was made a long time ago. if it was made today, people from many other backgrounds would have been in it, which is way i hope somebody will make one some time soon, so we can hear from the people like the japanese, who have a completely different culture from the rest of the world. as i have heard, they report somewhat different experiences (not a lot different, but different) from NDE. very interesting!

  • Michal Szymanski

    not a congruent doco. Maybe will suit certain minds, but if you are logical and want explanations to be clear, may not be your cup of tea

  • Khadeeja

    What does Ahmed Deedat say?