/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10241989

Which just proves the point of the paper. You think a priori that there can not be evidence for an afterlife, and thus there is no reason to investigate the issue.

This is fundamentally no different from when a fundamentalist religious person won't read a science textbook because the bible just has to be true anyway.

>>9872722

>Making supernatural conclusions based on weird qualia when your brain is shitting itself is stupid, yes.

First of all, 'supernatural' is a worthless term. Think of it in terms of waking up from a simulation instead to a higher reality.

Secondly, these are not 'weird qualia', these are ultrareal experiences that are more real in every conceivable way than this life. Your cognition expands exponentially to an unfathomable degree, your perception expands, your certainty in the fact that you exist expands exponentially to an unfathomable degree, you remember where and what you were before you were born, why you came here, who you really are, etc. It's like waking up from a deep dream. When you wake up from a dream, do you use the same logic? "Omg man, such weird qualia of being awake, the dream was the true reality, I can't dispute that just because this reality feels and seems more real in every way xD" <- That's you when you say that NDEs are "weird qualia" that we shouldn't trust.

Thirdly, you're saying that it's impossible for anyone to ever experience the afterlife, even if an afterlife actually was to exist? Do you not see the extreme dogma in your own statement?

>We know other people are conscious because philosophical zombies are literally impossible.

That's your personal philosophical position. Many philosophers disagree.

We trust people when they say they have consciousness. We trust people when they say they have dreams at nights. We trust people when they say they have hallucinations. We trust people when they say they have NDEs. We trust people when they say they have a headache. We trust people when they say they are tired. We trust people when they say they are depressed.

We trust people when they report things, period.

Some of them will be liars, for sure. The vast majority won't be. Trusting in testimonies is reasonable, and science relies on testimonies at the core. See >>9872461 for an elaboration.

smartybump