A Case for Dualism - New? Or Not?

[Aetixintro]

This may be something I share with one or more people, but it's worth noting that "out-of-body" experiences are examples of thinking or sensing that put marks in brain activity, signal firing when a person recalls this memory. This should be able to pass for being a solid example of an argument for Dualism. This can be confirmed by a MR-examination or something like that where there's created an actual, objective signal firing of the recollection of this sensation. This sensation can also be compared by the signal firing due to the visual stimuli of the artistic picture of this sensation. You then have the recollection and the artistic picture or image, by your instructions and whatever aids used to create it as closely as possible to the subjective view of this "out-of-body" experience such as revisiting and taking pictures of the surgery room. You get the MR image of recollection and of the artistic picture. You can also ask this person to hypothetically try to view one's self while in the surgery room and have this 3rd MR image compared to the other 2. Remember, this person has no reason to lie about seeing one's self in 3rd person apart from the body and in all honesty what ways are there, but the subjective story of which you know nothing and therefore has no authority in? Why shouldn't you at least take this view into mind as a possibility? Of course, the skeptics are questioning the reality of this sensation, sensing, but I can't say that it can represent any weight to the discussion if the empirical examination by MR actually supports this discernment of distinction of experience.

Thoughts? Does this clinch the case for Dualism? At least, "out-of-body" experiences remain anomalies in the Reductionist account.

[i blame blame]

I don't know of any reported out-of-body experience that couldn't have been a hallucination.

[Aetixintro]

I see difficulties for being able to perceive one self, lying there, in 3rd person perspective as a matter of hallucination. There should be quite a difference between that of hallucinating one's way to above one's self and all of a sudden finding one's self floating over one's self, not to mention the whole process of losing the connection to the body. You know, there's nothing in the way of running whole film sequences of MR-data, pictures.

Besides, from the text, "You can also ask this person to hypothetically try to view one's self while in the surgery room and have this 3rd MR image compared to the other 2." I believe this includes the MR-mapping of the kind of hallucination you're mentioning and it can be taken away, I think, deduced! In case, the MR-image of "out-of-body" exp. stands out compared to the 3rd [this 3rd MR image] and equals the artistic factual image of one's memory in the MR-machine, I think it settles the case.

Usually, cardiac-arrest patients are also hooked up to medical devices showing clinical condition and this supports the fact that it hasn't been hallucination because the brain has no possibility of producing hallucination. Isn't hallucination quite a massive neuron-firing by the way?

Still then, the procedure I've outlined holds and carries the argument! Even so, please, describe how you think this hallucination takes place. I'd like to hear.

[Rortabend]

I don't see any argument here. Just anecdote. The fact that some people think they have out-of-body experiences proves nothing.

[Aetixintro]

In this thread, you assume business as usual even if the "soul", mind outside the body is confirmed by this or that account?

I think at least that my account is capable of being serious about all the cardiac arrest case where there's reported an "out-of-body" experience. Also this account describes a possible route to gain confirmation of such cases. Remember, not any nut can turn up and say there's been an "out-of-body" experience because there's simply no medical background or history to begin with. This is no child's play. It involves short period of clinical death! Also, the only way for the skeptic is to deny any real occurrence of "out-of-body" experiences.

This is the procedure with which to deal with it: "This can be confirmed by a MR-examination or something like that where there's created an actual, objective signal firing of the recollection of this sensation. This sensation can also be compared by the signal firing due to the visual stimuli of the artistic picture of this sensation. You then have the recollection and the artistic picture or image, by your instructions and whatever aids used to create it as closely as possible to the subjective view of this "out-of-body" experience such as revisiting and taking pictures of the surgery room. You get the MR image of recollection and of the artistic picture. You can also ask this person to hypothetically try to view one's self while in the surgery room and have this 3rd MR image compared to the other 2." Is there any problem with this?

This may well enter a debate over MR-screening since making up a lie has a different route of neuron-firing in the brain than simply telling the truth! So, I believe MR can be used as lie-detector, but this is a different story!

Well, alright!
Dictionary.com: an⋅ec⋅dote
-noun
a short account of a particular incident or event of an interesting or amusing nature, often biographical.

[nameless]

"Dualism" is a discredited and obsolete philosophy. More so every day.
There is no difference inherent between what is perceived, whether 'thoughts' or 'trees'. 'Differences/distinctions' are perceptions by some (ego) Perspectives (eye of the beholder sort of thing), like colorblindness.
What can speak to any such 'out of body' experiences is that there is 'one' Consciousness!
Consciousness is not local to the body perceived at the moment. There are many unique Perspectives, but one Consciousness.
This easily explains all OBE's and all other such phenomena. Occam necessarily discards such fruitless complexities and distinctions with one swipe of his famous razor. Where would the perceived complexities of 'distinctions' end? They do not seem to ever end, from 'that' Perspective.
For examole; many people perceive distinctions between things that exist and things that do not.
Everything exists!
That is the complete 'set'. Everything is 'true'. Making 'distinctions' therein is what the egoPerpsective perceives, and Occam dismisses. All and any such 'distinctions' would be, at best, (refuted) subsets of the complete set; everything exists!
'Dualism' is one of the toxins with which western 'philosophy' has tainted western 'civilisation' for the last couple millennia.
Time to clean up the mess.
(But I gotta go do the dishes first! *__- )

On the other hand, Cartesian dualism offers some clear advantages: For one thing, it provides an easy proof of the natural immortality of the human mind or soul, which cannot be substantially affected by death, understood as an alteration of the states of the physical organism. In addition, the distinction of mind from body establishes the absolute independence of the material realm from the spiritual, securing the freedom of scientists to rely exclusively on observation for their development of mechanistic explanations of physical events

Quotes from HERE demonstrates the emotional needs that believing in this 'dualism' can fill. Although it fails philosophically and scientifically, it works quite well egoically/emotionally.

"This radical separation of mind and body makes it difficult to account for the apparent interaction of the two in my own case. In ordinary experience, it surely seems that the volitions of my mind can cause physical movements in my body and that the physical states of my body can produce effects on my mental operations. But on Descartes's view, there can be no substantial connection between the two, nor did he believe it appropriate to think of the mind as residing in the body as a pilot resides within a ship. Although he offered several tenatative suggestions in his correspondence with Princess Elizabeth, Descartes largely left for future generations the task of developing some reasonable account of volition and sensation, either by securing the possibility of mind-body interaction or by proposing some alternative explanation of the appearances."

(op. cit.) Even he couldn't defend the paradoxes (signs of error) in his theory and "left for future generations the task of developing some reasonable account", because he could not.

[puto]

I can really tell you did your homework, before opening your mouth: what a joke, an argument for out-of-body-experience could have come better from a fifth grader, next time do your home-work before you make a complete fool of yourself, again!

[puto]

You know, I'm sorry, just have some fun.

[Aetixintro]

nameless
On Occam's Razor, if my life is empty it adheres to OR, if the region I live in adheres to OR it must be empty, and so on with the whole world and the universe! What is the principle of OR in evolution? That there should only be a few species!

But alright, OR is only meant for the theoretical expression where two competing theories are in the race and they are equivalent and one of them is more complex than the other.

I'd say if the "soul"/bodiless mind is confirmed, a revision of Dualism may follow! That's all!

[nameless]

nameless
On Occam's Razor, if my life is empty it adheres to OR, if the region I live in adheres to OR it must be empty, and so on with the whole world and the universe! What is the principle of OR in evolution? That there should only be a few species!

Occam's razor merely restricts fruitless complexity in support of a theory. It does not make life 'empty' unless perceived so. Truth is so much 'stranger' (more interesting/filling?) than fiction!
Besides, as far as I can see, all 'beliefs' add to the depth and texture of existence, whether 'scientific' or not.

I'd say if the "soul"/bodiless mind is confirmed, a revision of Dualism may follow! That's all! :)

It is. Nonlocality. The evidence grows all the time.
"Consciousness(/Mind) is the Ground of All Being!" - Copenhagen interpretation of QM. Science has finally found Consciousness!
Soul = Conscious Perspective (of Mind/'Self').
"One Consciousness, many Perpsectives."

[Aetixintro]

A little note to this topic: The Dirac stream!
I've come aware of the Dirac Stream in physics and some people claim that it's possible to see and other people don't. Even detectors and other data on it are unavailable!

So my assertion in this regard is this: I'd say that the Dirac Stream is this stream of "soul" from a person "or other source". Do you care to investigate it too, please?

So this is it, with a little less respect for physics: is the Dirac Stream simply the result of some "black magic voodoo ritual"? If not, where are the (scientific) pictures and other data of it?

Overall: the Dirac Stream can at least be considered alongside other unaccounted phenomena of undetermined nature, like ghosts, faeries, angles, demons, monsters, souls and other, but only, preferably, those of paranormal nature, that is, phenomena that can be seen as expressions of a kind of "hyper"-nature, the souls!

As such, in case this notion of "Dirac stream" is wrong, I've had NO intention whatsoever to make Dirac's name dirty of some kind, I've just been of a wrongful opinion!

Your views? Cheers!

[Edit:] Added excuse to the legacy of Dirac as well. [End of edit.]

[i blame blame]

A little note to this topic: The Dirac stream!
I've come aware of the Dirac Stream in physics and some people claim that it's possible to see and other people don't. Even detectors and other data on it are unavailable!

So my assertion in this regard is this: I'd say that the Dirac Stream is this stream of "soul" from a person "or other source". Do you care to investigate it too, please?

So this is it, with a little less respect for physics: is the Dirac Stream simply the result of some "black magic voodoo ritual"? If not, where are the (scientific) pictures and other data of it?

Overall: the Dirac Stream can at least be considered alongside other unaccounted phenomena of undetermined nature, like ghosts, faeries, angles, demons, monsters, souls and other, but only, preferably, those of paranormal nature, that is, phenomena that can be seen as expressions of a kind of "hyper"-nature, the souls!

Your views? Cheers!

Where did you read anything about this "Dirac stream"?

[Aetixintro]

By IBB: "Where did you read anything about this "Dirac stream"?"

I can't say exactly where I've read it, but I've originally thought of it as an example of observation bias where one group of scientists are able to see the "Dirac-stream" and another group has been unable to see the stream. Thus, in my honest belief, I have wanted to investigate it now that I'm better acquainted with physics and remain more critical to the physics as well, instead of being this awe-struck young student, full of admiration for the renowned scientists (and their alleged "good" nature of fair-game and life and respect for intelligence).

As such, in case this notion of "Dirac stream" is wrong, I've had NO intention whatsoever to make Dirac's name dirty of some kind, I've just been of a wrongful opinion!

I leave this as a peculiar writing of mine and ascribe it to the "informal" notion of scientists' "research" of some kind to some unknown end, probably more perverse than useful in any way. To be clear: this "Dirac stream" doesn't enter my writing on argument for Dualism. This makes my 2 latest posts rubbish, a bit embarrassing to be honest!

But you're right, you can consider this wholly unserious until I get my sources right! Thanks for the objection!

Cheers!

[Edit:] Added excuse to the legacy of Dirac as well. [End of edit.]
[Edit2:] Added the "informal" notion of scientists' "research" of some kind. [End of edit.]

[ImagineThat]

I don't know of any reported out-of-body experience that couldn't have been a hallucination.

I disagree, especially based on accounts from those who experience lucid dreaming and such events that do result in a documented out of body experience. Dualism is alive and real. The only issue can be when dualism results in night terrors that can pose a risk to one's health. You would be surprised at the number of health insurance claims filed in relation to these kinds of experiences.

[John]

I don't know of any reported out-of-body experience that couldn't have been a hallucination.

I disagree, especially based on accounts from those who experience lucid dreaming and such events that do result in a documented out of body experience. Dualism is alive and real.

Documented but there's no substantiated evidence to back them up. Just because someone says they've had an out of body experience doesn't mean they've actually had one.

People who claim out of body experiences are most likely to be mistaken or lying. How do they think they're perceiving the world without a body anyway?