/lit/ - Literature

>>21011170
>I have a knee-jerk reaction to it
So still a knee-jerk reaction to it because of <insert your reasons for incredulity here>, while uncharitably assuming that it is not taken into account by the book.
>its premise is inherently egoistic
Huh? What do you mean by this and how is it relevant? "Oh no I think of an afterlife as a selfish idea and therefore it upsets my feelings, therefore it can't exist!"
>suggestive of dualism
Not necessarily, that is just one way to interpret the idea of disembodied consciousness and an afterlife. But there is also idealism, for instance.
>It posits some kind of metaphysical self, distinct from the combined totality of everything
Again, h ow little about the NDE have you read? NDErs tend to say that we are all one consciousness, so that the entire physical world only exists as an idea in our mind. So disembodied self does not exist separate from it, but rather everything right now is something that is happening in our mind, a shared illusion. There is no matter, there is only the very persuasive idea and illusion of matter.
>b-b-but I can't believe that
Neither could many of the NDErs before having an NDE. After, however, they had no choice. And neither would you as per the argument in the book (which I know you won't ever read because >muh stubborn knee-jerk reaction).