In the first part of the article Harris addresses the case of Pam Reynold's NDE
, and his point is beyond pathetic. It is perfectly ok to have doubts about any NDE case and making sure to check and double check how events progressed and thinking of possible explanations for inexplicable facts, etc...
What is ridiculous is coming up with absurdities such as that she was able to learn the details of the surgical procedure including the general appearance of the instruments to be used in the surgery... all this under general anesthesia, laying on an operating table, covered from top to bottom.
And there's more, Pam Reynolds reported that she heard the medical personnel commenting about her veins being too small... under general anesthetics, with ear plugs in her ears firing loud signals to monitor her brain activity.
The para-skeptics will tell you that the hear plugs weren't molded around her specific hearing canal!
And she was eavesdropping!
Again, under general anesthesia, with the earplugs banging her hears with loud beeps.
And finally armed with these two highly convincing arguments
they can dismiss the whole story. Is this guy a proponent for critical thinking and rationality? How about adding intellectual honesty
in the list too?!
Personally, even if I were the Pope of the Hardcore Skeptics Church, I would have the honesty to concede that this is a highly interesting case, that it certainly suggests that something profound is going on (especially because this is not an isolated case
) and that personally
I still think we need more evidence, or I am not entirely convinced... or anything along those lines.
If any unlikely quibble is sufficient for Mr. Harris to explain away the complexity of cases like these (Eben Alexander's included) then he's just the next PR
guy of the above mentioned Skeptic's church. Nothing else, and there's really little to no interest in discussing with an apologist.