49. Craig Hogan, Your Mind Is Not Your Brain (Podcast)

[Open Mind]

Originally Posted by Venom

I've listened to the last part of the interview.

I must say I was happy to hear Alex clearly stating that the reason why he's promoting parapsychology is because he wants to have spirituality and science merged. I had that impression before, with his previous episode when he interviewed an ID proponent. No this interview is even clearer about his agenda.

At least now it's cristal clear.

And it's also the big problem.

What is the 'big problem'?

[Open Mind]

During the interview Alex correctly mentions that mediums, mystics and psychics cannot agree on whether reincarnation exists.

The Eastern religion viewpoint is that the same consciousness keeps reincarnating through the different physical bodies....that doesn't mean this is the correct interpretation..

The question to ask mediums, etc. is this .... do souls go missing from the afterlife when they reincarnate? The answer is often no. Now at face value this seems impossible .... ... but if consciousness is split by being reborn into a physical world by past memory, telepathy etc. being filtered out by brain evolution ... this may be natures way of splitting new individuality of consciousness from prior one.

In philosophy for centuries people have pondered 'how did the one consciousness become the many'? ... the answer may be consciousness can split into conscious individualities that at a more unconscious level remain groups within groups etc. of minds evolving the whole....perhaps like an internet system where the whole is greater than the individualities who evolve it. Some might call this non-material internet 'God' but the programmers are the divisions of it, yet evolve it, so it is not the religious model of God.

Whether one views sharing a common past as reincarnation or not .... it purely a matter of perspective.... some minds may have the same source memories .... yet have split into new individualities and are no longer the same person or individuality.

Eastern religion / philosophy is somewhat contradictory IMHO .... to assume evolution is towards single universal consciousness ... this is the opposite of what we see in nature, we see lifeforms becoming the many, not lifeforms become the one. A greater sense of consciousness could just be less filtering, improved telepathy after brain death etc. it doesn't neccessarily mean individualities evolving back into the one universal mind

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

The NDE content seems to involve a moving on to a new stage of existence, sometimes with meetings with loved ones, and sometimes with something bigger and loving.

- all of which begins to sound a lot more like God than nothingness

Even if we accept all of this, the word 'God' has some pretty awful connotations

... back to the hijacked spirituality, I agree completely.

As I understand it, fundamentalist Christians don't really like NDE's because there doesn't usually seem to be a judgment, so they do not match their teachings!

- I'm sure Christians have a wide range of opinions on it, so what?

My feeling is that any understanding of what may be out there will involve dropping a lot of preconceived notions - scientific and religious. I particularly liked Craig's notion that the Church has hijacked the entire discussion of spirituality - (my comment) creating a carbon copy of an earthly power structure!

- who knows? let's ask the questions scientifically and get as close to an answer as possible.

Regarding applications, I guess we need something non-military - I mean for all we know, the US military trashed remote viewing in order to continue with a more secret version of the same program! Dowsing might be a fun area because some people believe there could be orthodox (if far fetched) explanations for some of it - so it blurs the distinction between Ψ and non-Ψ a little.

- I think the application for archeology has been established, check outThe Secret Vaults of Time by Stephan A. Schwartz Amazon.com: The Secret Vaults Of Time: Psychic Archaeology And The Quest For Man's Beginnings (Studies in Consciousness): Stephan A. Schwartz: Books

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

If one defines 'God' as a collective term for all evolving lifeforms then I am probably not an atheist.

If by 'God' ones means the Christian idea that God exists as a human like form ... then I am an atheist. (If a Christian sees a human being in intense light during an NDE etc. perhaps they assume 'God' since they have been conditioned to view God as a man like being?)

I would tend to view the situation as lifeforms evolving God rather than God evolving lifeforms. Religion doesn't like the concept of an evolving God (even if it is the same outcome) they want an unchanging eternally perfect creator ... so I just prefer to avoided using their terms altogether.

I understand your frustration with the word God, but what about the experience. Your previous post makes a very good case for the authenticity of NDEs.

So, what about the content of the NDE... peace, love, source of all-knowing consciousness, comfort of deceased relatives. Are we to dismiss this because it sounds too Christian? (I hereby add my standard disclaimer about not being Christian )

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by Open Mind

During the interview Alex correctly mentions that mediums, mystics and psychics cannot agree on whether reincarnation exists.

The Eastern religion viewpoint is that the same consciousness keeps reincarnating through the different physical bodies....that doesn't mean this is the correct interpretation..

The question to ask mediums, etc. is this .... do souls go missing from the afterlife when they reincarnate? The answer is often no. Now at face value this seems impossible .... ... but if consciousness is split by being reborn into a physical world by past memory, telepathy etc. being filtered out by brain evolution ... this may be natures way of splitting new individuality of consciousness from prior one.

In philosophy for centuries people have pondered 'how did the one consciousness become the many'? ... the answer may be consciousness can split into conscious individualities that at a more unconscious level remain groups within groups etc. of minds evolving the whole....perhaps like an internet system where the whole is greater than the individualities who evolve it. Some might call this non-material internet 'God' but the programmers are the divisions of it, yet evolve it, so it is not the religious model of God.

Whether one views sharing a common past as reincarnation or not .... it purely a matter of perspective.... some minds may have the same source memories .... yet have split into new individualities and are no longer the same person or individuality.

Eastern religion / philosophy is somewhat contradictory IMHO .... to assume evolution is towards single universal consciousness ... this is the opposite of what we see in nature, we see lifeforms becoming the many, not lifeforms become the one. A greater sense of consciousness could just be less filtering, improved telepathy after brain death etc. it doesn't neccessarily mean individualities evolving back into the one universal mind

Interesting theory... the biggest take-away for me is that we need to really do the research.

[Larry Boy]

Originally Posted by alextsakiris

I understand your frustration with the word God, but what about the experience. Your previous post makes a very good case for the authenticity of NDEs.

So, what about the content of the NDE... peace, love, source of all-knowing consciousness, comfort of deceased relatives. Are we to dismiss this because it sounds too Christian? (I hereby add my standard disclaimer about not being Christian )

On a surface level it may sound Christian. However if you look deeper into it I think there are many discrepancies between the NDE material and the Christian worldview. For instance, if I'm not mistaken the Bible talks about the Afterlife in a much more physical way, about our bodies being ressurected etc. To me, NDE experiences are closer to Eastern philosophy, with the experience of oneness etc. And isn't the Tibetan Book of the Dead more or less fully devoted to NDE-like experiences?

I think this discussion boils down to semantics. Some believers in a greater reality don't like to use the word God because of its various connotations, whereas some don't mind using it.

[David Bailey]

Alex,

I think the problem with talking about God is two-fold.

1) 'Out there' may not be organised hierarchically. Can you really say that it is, just from the evidence of NDE's? I see hierarchical organisation of social groups as a popular, but not very successful primate invention - why assume it for a much larger realm?

2) Craig's point about the Church hijacking spirituality is not really one of semantics - it is that they have stifled alternative points of view and research. Let orthodox religion monopolise the word 'God' - I don't see any point in using a word like 'God' that has all sorts of connotations that neither of us support. Words evolve in meaning - the words 'nice' has had a variety of almost contradictory meanings. There is no point at all in using a word that is not currently used to mean what we want it to mean. It would be like insisting on calling somebody 'gay' just because they were of a particularly happy disposition!

David

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

Alex,

I think the problem with talking about God is two-fold.

1) 'Out there' may not be organised hierarchically. Can you really say that it is, just from the evidence of NDE's? I see hierarchical organisation of social groups as a popular, but not very successful primate invention - why assume it for a much larger realm?

2) Craig's point about the Church hijacking spirituality is not really one of semantics - it is that they have stifled alternative points of view and research. Let orthodox religion monopolise the word 'God' - I don't see any point in using a word like 'God' that has all sorts of connotations that neither of us support. Words evolve in meaning - the words 'nice' has had a variety of almost contradictory meanings. There is no point at all in using a word that is not currently used to mean what we want it to mean. It would be like insisting on calling somebody 'gay' just because they were of a particularly happy disposition!

David

...it took NDErs several years to integrate the NDE into their lives. The transformation included life-changing insight, heightened intuition, and disappearance of fear of death. Id. at 2040. Contrarily, those who did not experience and NDE were more likely to become agnostic or atheist and still fear death. The depth of the experience, whether it was only an OBE or if it was a core experience, did not affect depth of spiritual transformation. Id. at 2042.
from: Lancet von Lommel Review

[David Bailey]

Alex,

I don't quarrel in the slightest with the depth of the NDE experience, or with its description as 'spritual', but I would avoid the use of the word 'God'.

'God' implies a stupid hierarchy - just like those we have on earth!

David

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

Alex,

I don't quarrel in the slightest with the depth of the NDE experience, or with its description as 'spritual', but I would avoid the use of the word 'God'.

'God' implies a stupid hierarchy - just like those we have on earth!

David

... but David, what if the majority of NDEers experience just such a hierarchy? I just don't think we should try and re-package the data to because we're afraid of the religious overtones... follow... wherever it goes!

... and I don't want to get all PC about the word God. It can have a multitude of diffeenrt meanings, but it's pretty close to what we're talking about.