John, I just watched a video on
this link (about half way down the article) that you might find helpful as it explains much that is being said. The article itself is about Quantum Theory and Consciousness and gives an example of Materialism vs what they term Post-Materialism, the next video on near-death experiences is good also - very interesting research and videos.
Incidentally John,
the second video also gives a good example of Native Son's comment of having someone Slap them as it mentions the limitations of Socrates' logic, something that would limit them in their ability to grasp the
two-slit experiment that demonstrates the power of Consciousness as it influences photons. I think that these videos are fairly easy to understand and may broaden your thought process somewhat if the principles are unfamiliar to you.
I also agree with you about Native Son's reluctance to participate with personal experiences.
KenJ, the second video mentions Aristotelian "logic", and not Plato's/Socrates'. Aristotle broke away from his master Plato when it came to materialism and the unseen world. Aristotle, although he was convinced that something like the soul exists, still, he concentrated and gave preference to the material world, thinking that the material came before the non material soul. Aristotle searched for answers in the material world. Plato reflects Socratic ideology/philosophy, with a touch of Pythagorean principles, and a whole lot of Parmenides'/Zeno's logic/dialectics. And if one were to look into Quantum Mechanics, and the Quantum Mechanics theory advocates, one would discover that these advocates, at least the Copenhagen quantum physicists of the 1960s, relate to us, that of all the ancient cosmological accounts and explanation of the laws of physics, Plato's cosmology comes closest to our current understanding of the cosmos (fundamental law of nature). And again, in reference to the first link and the argument putting forth the idea that consciousness (mind) is prior to the material universe, based on Quantum Mechanics, and especially the double slit experiment, is clearly addressed within Plato's dialogues. And I ask here, where else one is apt to find OBE, NDE, reincarnation, science, and theology getting on so well with each other, and put forth in such a manner to have withstood the test of time with little or no tempering along the way, as in Plato's work?
Regarding my slap simile, it's not Aristotelian "logic", because it's both yes and no, as far as your understanding of it. In a nutshell, subjectivity needs a slap (objectivity) to confirm anything subjectively perceived of the non physical world, as the nature of it requires. Yes, it's similar to the extremes/exceptions pointed out by Dr. Greyson, and how a brain is effected when it is injured by a blow or disease. Here I was meaning the opposite, as when one gets amnesia by a blow to the head, and applying the law of cure of, like cures like, another blow, many times, clears away the patient's amnesia. All I meant by the slap is that in extremes, when a brain, any brain, is reluctant to accept reality, such as in self-delusion, or an hysterical person, or one that is a schizophrenic, or paranoid, or manic, etc., extremes and unorthodox methods are necessary, in the hope of making the sick and irrational brain see what we all plainly see. However, on the same token, what we all are supposed to see is questionable in our world, as history has shown that few have seen truth, but many blindly follow, and imitate, and propagate. Or as better put, and this was the meaning of the founders of the mysteries when they said, ’Many are the wandbearers but few are the mystics.’ There are only a handful, in my opinion, that have caught a glimpse of the "other side" of the coin, and even less who can reliably, precisely, and truthfully relate it to all. Just like, there are many that will profess belief, but will not follow that belief, as only the few act upon that belief. But perhaps this latter part is not appropriate for discussion.
I also agree with you in telling John that what you provided with the link, covers a good deal of what we are discussing. The videos are both about science and the medical field getting together, and attempting at getting nearer to truth. It is a good link for the skeptics, and just a primer relating to an indirect way for corroborating reincarnation. However, I disagree with Dr. Grayson's opinion for the reason why we have NDE patients giving inconsistent descriptions of what they observe and the place they visit during these episodes, and is illogical by any class of logic he mentions. He feels that these patients lack the proper language knowledge of the other world and of the things they see there, therefore, according to him, each patient experiencing an NDE describes what they have seen and heard based on their earthly knowledge, and even religious beliefs. A careful reflection of this reasoning by Dr. Greyson, and those that reason likewise, will show it to be unjustified and illogical on many aspects, and as also based on many other accounts. For instance, Christian NDE patients often see and meet with Jesus, whereas Buddhists NDE patients do not. Therefore what do those who are Christians see in their NDE, that would make them relate to us that they meet Jesus, but not the ones that are Buddhists? Was not Jesus a man? And was not Buddha also a man? I am certain that many of these NDE modern Christian patients who are familiar with Jesus, also know of Buddha, and vice versa for the Buddhists NDE patients.
But if I were to clearly state my reason for the slap simile, it's more in line with Plato's cave allegory, and the slap was meant as a forceful method of attempting to remove the chains from those cave prisoners unwilling to leave their "holographic" world of shadows. Or as Socrates really meant, telling the movie goers that it's just a movie that is being projected, and what they are observing on the cave walls, so don't let your emotions get the best part you, your soul. What we all see, and smell, and touch, and taste, and most of all hear, is not reality. No, not even what we think we see in our OBEs, or NDEs, or dreams, or even what we fantasy is reality. And perhaps there is some truth when we hear that, in a twinkling of an eye we shall all wake up to real reality, as we are all asleep now, having both common and uncommon dreams with each other. Or perhaps we are all just parts of the One Consciousness that eludes each of us parts, as only the whole can see itself as a whole, and we the parts of the whole can only see parts only. And it fallows that I, as a part, see THIS, and you, as another part, see THAT. This and that put together comes up with one "hell" of One Consciousness. Excuse the expression! But it's a hell of a movie that is being projected in our cave's wall. Would you, as participants, not agree? I say it's all about LOVE when it comes to the real reality. Why even Socrates professed to be an expert in something, and that something was Love. Socrates specialized in the love for truth, philo-sophy. And if it permissible, this last reminds me of a couple of good songs. As this and that religion are all about love and helping out the hopeless, the homeless, the downtrodden, the castaways, the helpless souls among us. It is a royal decree from the One great and wonderful Consciousness, that the better-off parts help the other less fortunate parts, so that we can all be one big happy whole. For existence and life is not concerned with just the happiness of a part of our world, but that the whole should be happy. Who will guard truth, and assure that love of the whole is maintained? We would make our guardians truly guardians, and that we were fashioning the State with a view to the greatest happiness, not of any particular class, but of the whole? The first shall be last and the last first, the decree of justice; love your neighbor as you love yourself, after all we are all adjoined parts of the same One.
