165. Dr. Caroline Watt Defends, There is Nothing Paranormal About Near-Death Experien

[alextsakiris]

Interview with Parapsychology researcher Dr. Caroline Watt explains why, despite criticism, she maintains, “there is nothing paranormal about near-death experiences.” - Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with University of Edinburgh pro...

Click here to read more ...

[mszlazak]

So she admits that her article was basically hyped to get attention. Nice!

[sbu]

Well, that was a brlliant interview. No doubt dr. Watts is on top of the NDE research. There just isn't any hard uncontestable evidence that NDEs are of paranormal nature. But clearly tons of anecdotal evidence. She sums up quite nicely why the AWARE study is so important.

[Interesting Ian]

Originally Posted by alextsakiris

Interview with Parapsychology researcher Dr. Caroline Watt explains why, despite criticism, she maintains, “there is nothing paranormal about near-death experiences.” - Join Skeptiko host Alex Tsakiris for an interview with University of Edinburgh pro...

Click here to read more ...

People almost invariably gravitate to one of 2 extreme positions: either that it is patently obvious that psi exists or that it is patently obvious it doesn't exist.

All the well known skeptics Wiseman, Blackmore, Shermer, Hyman, Randi blah blah are counter-advocates . . . nay they view the possibility of psi as ludicrous (eg "we're talking about a psychic dog here" -- one wonders why a psychic dog is intrinsically less likely than psychic abilities in humans??)

Not so much Chris French who is more of a sceptic in the original sense of the word . . or at least that's my impression from reading him and seeing him on TV.

Not sure about Dr. Caroline Watt but it's ludicrous to deny that people gravitate to these extreme positions. Skeptics are as certain a group of people about the non-existence of something that I've come across.

Also writing an article that makes no effort whatsoever to be balanced is utterly pointless. What we need is a careful and balanced appraisal of all the evidence and reasons. That will provoke as much debate as a "provocative" article -- the difference being that in the former case the debate will be informed . .

Just tell these dudhead psuedoskeptics to meditate seriously for 5 years and if they don't change their minds after that, then give half a sympathetic ear to their rambling nonsense.

[robbiehouston]

I find it both amazing, as well as utterly disgusting that she admits herself that the paper isn't addressing all sides of the argument, yet it makes such bold claims??? What the hell is going on? How has science become SO corrupted so as to permit such intellectual atrocities??

[Iyace]

I always found it remarkable that skeptics tend to leave one of the most important, and verifiable, aspects of the nde. The fact that people receive information from dead persons, who sometimes pass down messages to the living, and are verified upon delivering. Such as this one, from Penny Sartori's blog:

In the research that I did, one of the patients met a dead relative during his NDE and was sent back to life and told to give a message to one of his living relatives. When he recovered he relayed this message to his living relative and she was shocked that that he should know this information as it was something she had gone to great lengths to keep a secret. So this man gained information in ways other than through the senses during a time when he was deeply unconscious.

The problem begins when you don't sit down and talk about the NDE. You know it has certain features, and then you go on your merry way and try to find a cause. People like Watt don't sit down and actually talk with NDErs.

[robbiehouston]

I totally agree Iyace. I have had the opportunity to interview personally an NDEr and it was simply fascinating. His conviction and confidence with which he relayed his account was perhaps one of the most interesting/convincing aspects of the whole thing, for me at least.

[EthanT]

I thought this interview put a lot into perspective, as far as that article goes. I liked Dr Watt too and thought she was pretty reasonable.

And, I can see the point both Alex and Dr Watt were making.

(1) I agree with Alex and Dr Lommel that it seems there are pretty good indications that we can pin down when folks are having these OBEs and veridical experiences. I think it would be rather odd to dismiss the volume of reports on this

(2) However, I also agree with Dr Watt that it would be really nice to have a study like AWARE pin this down and minimize the "anecdotal" reporting as much as possible.

I think most of us who are already somewhat sold by the position stated in (1) would only have our positions strenghtened by (2). And, (2) will only put NDEs on a more solid basis than they are now, in general.

On another note, although the paper seems very fitting for that specific niche of the journal it was published in, I still think there was much bias and dishonesty within the mainstream media on how they sorta latched onto this and reported it. It seemed Dr Watt didn't want to go there, though.

anyhow, great interview ;-)

Originally Posted by robbiehouston

I find it both amazing, as well as utterly disgusting that she admits herself that the paper isn't addressing all sides of the argument, yet it makes such bold claims??? What the hell is going on? How has science become SO corrupted so as to permit such intellectual atrocities??

Exactly!

She approaches this interview as if she is coming from a completely neutral perspective when she knows full well what skeptiko is about, where Alex's biases lie, and what to expect and yet there is this condescending attitude towards the ACTUAL EVIDENCE for TONS of paranormal phenomena as if we are so stupid as to NOT consider NORMAL explanations aside from them.

Alex, i think you are doing a justified service to the global community by interviewing these kinds of people and pointing out their flaws, but sometimes i wonder whether giving them a voice isn't perpetuating the status quo of dumbheads out there who buy any redundent psuedoskeptical nonsense available day to day.