This is where every outer body experience takes place. Your brain, which exists in this material reality, the only reality. When you are out of body, and your brain gets destroyed by bullets, your out of body experience comes to an end, and you experience what it's like to not experience, like before conception.
>>42392547How do you account for all the near-death experiences people have reported?People who have had conscious experiences even though medical science says they were braindead???
>>42392547>Can you cope with a hypotheticalNo because "death" is not the end
>>42392547Not many can understand the truth of this statement.
>>42392552not even that but how do account for when two or more people report seeing the same apparition, the usual explanation of a purely private hallucination becomes harder to sustain.Braude, S.E. (1997). The Limits of Influence: Psychokinesis and the Philosophy of Science (rev. ed.). Lanham, Maryland, USA: University Press of America.Broad, C.D. (1962). Lectures on Psychical Research. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Gurney, E., Myers, F.W.H., & Podmore, F. (1886). Phantasms of the Living. London: Society for Psychical Research.Hart, H. (1956). Six theories about apparitions. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 50, 153-239.Myers, F.W.H. (1903). Human Personality and its Survival of Bodily Death. London: Longmans, Green & Co.Osis, K., & Haraldsson, E. (1976). OOBEs in Indian Swamis: Sathya Sai Baba and Dadaji. In Research in Parapsychology 1975, ed. by J.D. Morris, W.G. Roll, & R.L. Morris, 147-50. Metuchen, New Jersey, USA: Scarecrow.Price, H.H. (1960). Apparitions: Two theories. Journal of Parapsychology 24, 110-28.Richet, C. (1923/1975). Thirty Years of Psychical Research. New York: Macmillan/Arno Press.Sidgwick, E.M. (1922). Phantasms of the living. An examination and analysis of cases of telepathy between living persons printed in the Journal of the Society since the publication of the book Phantasms of the Living by Gurney, Myers, and Podmore, in 1886. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 33, 23-429.Society for Psychical Research (1894). Report on the Census of Hallucinations. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 10, 25-422.Tyrrell, G.N.M. (1942/1961). Apparitions. New Hyde Park, NY: University Books. [Published with Tyrrell, Science and Psychical Phenomena]Wallace, A.R. (1896/1975). Miracles and Modern Spiritualism. London: George Redway. [Reprinted 1975 by Arno Press, New York.]
>>42392559Streetshitter demon, be gone!
>>42392555Brvtal. There is no escape.
>>42392563This "demon" is a fierce protective deitie, corresponding to the Sanskrit Vidyaraja (“King of Knowledge”), worshiped mainly by the Shingon sect which is Japanese. God people like you are the reason why I'm leavening
>>42392547No, wrong, OP is a stupid faggot materialist shithead. Fuck off OP, stop gobbling cocks.
>>42392572Designated.
>>42392585?
>>42392547Yes, I believe extraordinary and paranormal things and the logics you bring up don't scare me at all.
>>42392575This is too brvtal a reality for many to accept. Because we all would like to experience another reality better than this one, or at the very least experience the peace of death. But there is nothing to experience. You can only experience this physical reality. The same death you are already experiencing while alive because there is literally nothing to experience in death. No peace. Can you cope with that?
>>42392547Then how does astral projection work retard
>>42392673It takes place inside the brain. Everything there is to experience takes place inside your brain.
>>42392673because it doesn't
>>42392677>>42392678Oh buddy you guys are in for a treatAlvarado, C.S. (1980). The physical detection of the astral body: An historical perspective. Theta 8/2, 4-7.Alvarado, C.S. (2005). Ernesto Bozzano on the phenomena of bilocation. Journal of Near-Death Studies 23, 207-38.Alvarado, C.S. (2008). Further notes on historical ideas of human radiations: II. The perispirit and mediumistic forces. Psypioneer 4, 85–92. [Web page]Alvarado, C.S. (2009a). Historical notes on doubles and travelling spirits: II–J.H. Jung-Stilling on the soul. Paranormal Review 51, 3–7.Alvarado, C.S. (2009b). The spirit in out-of-body experiences: Historical and conceptual notes. In Spirituality, Science and the Paranormal, ed. by B. Batey, 3–19. Bloomfield, Connecticut, USA: Academy of Spirituality and Paranormal Studies.Alvarado, C.S. (2010). Historical notes on doubles and travelling spirits: V.: Adolphe D’Assier’s ideas of doubles. Paranormal Review 54, 6–9.Alvarado, C.S. (2011a). Apparitions of the living: The views of William H. Harrison and Gabriel Delanne. Journal of Scientific Exploration 25, 357–66.Alvarado, C.S. (2011b). Historical notes on doubles and travelling spirits: VIII.: Frederic W.H. Myers. Paranormal Review 58, 12–18.Alvarado, C.S. (2011c). On doubles and excursions from the physical body, 1876–1956. Journal of Scientific Exploration 25, 563–80.Alvarado, C.S. (2012). Historical notes on doubles and travelling spirits: XI. Hector Durville. Paranormal Review 61, 3–11.Alvarado, C.S. (2015). Out-of-body experience (OBE). Psi Encyclopedia. [Web page.]Alvarado, C.S. (2016a). The Phenomena of Astral Projection (1951). Psi Encyclopedia. [Web page.]Alvarado, C.S. (2016b). On psychic forces and doubles: The case of Albert de Rochas. Journal of Scientific Exploration 30, 63–84.
>>42392682Anon. (1873). Spirit forms. The Spiritualist (December 12), 451–54.Ashmore, M. (1993). The theatre of the blind: Starring a promethean prankster, a phony phenomenon, a prism, a pocket, and a piece of wood. Social Studies of Science 23, 67–106.Battersby, H.F.P. (1969). Man Outside Himself. New Hyde Park, NY: University Books. (Original work published 1942.)Besant, A. (1892). The Seven Principles of Man (2nd ed.). London: Theosophical Publishing Society.Blackburn, T. (1868). The double. Spiritual Magazine 3, 432.Blackmore, S.J. (1982) Beyond the Body: An Investigation of Out-of-the-Body Experiences. London: Heinemann.Bozzano, E. (1911). Considerations et hypothéses sur les phénomènes de ‘bilocation’ [Considerations and hypotheses about the phenomena of ‘bilocation’]. Annales des sciences psychiques 21, 65–72, 109–16, 143–52, 166–72.Bozzano, E. (1937). Les Phénomènes de Bilocation [The phenomena of bilocation]. Paris: Jean Meyer. (Original work published 1934.)Bozzano, E. (n.d., ca 1938). Discarnate Influence in Human Life: A Review of the Case for Spirit Intervention (I. Emerson, trans.). London: International Institute for Psychical Research/John M. Watkins.Brittan, S.B. (1864). Man and his Relations: Illustrating the Influence of the Mind on the Body. New York; WA. Townsend.Britten, E.H. (1875). Spiritual gifts No. 6: The double; or, the apparition of still embodied human spirits. Banner of Light, November 6, 1–2.Bulford, S. (1947). Man’s Unknown Journey (3rd ed.). London: Rider.Caratelli, G. (2006). La vicenda delle due Sagée. Il Mondo del Paranormale 6/1, 22–27.Carrington, H. (1915). True Ghost Stories. New York: J.S. Ogilvie.Carrington, H. (1919). Modern Psychical Phenomena: Recent researches and speculations. New York: Dodd, Mead.
>>42392684Coleman, B. (1865). Passing events. The spread of Spiritualism. Spiritual Magazine 6, 110–28.Cornillier, P.E. (1921). The Survival of the Soul and its Evolution After Death. London: Kegan, Paul, Trench, Trübner. [First published in French, 1920.)]Crookall, R. (1967). Events on the Threshold of the After Life: ‘Clues’ as to ‘ the greatest of all enigmas.’ Moradabad, India: Darshana International.Crowe, C. (1848). The Night-Side of Nature; or, Ghosts and Ghost Seers (2 vols.). London: T.C. Newby.D’Assier, A. (1887). Posthumous Humanity: A Study of Phantoms. London: George Redway. [Original work published 1883.)]Davies, R. (1998). Doubles: The Enigma of the Second Self. London: Robert Hale.Delanne, G. (1904). Evidence for a Future Life. London: Philip Wellby. [Original work published 1899.]Delanne, G. (1909). Les Apparitions Matérialisées des Vivants & des Morts: 1: Les fantômes de vivants [Materialized apparitions of the living & the dead: 1: Phantasms of the living]. Paris: Librairie Spirite.Delanne, G. (1911). Les Apparitions Matérialisées des Vivants & des Morts: 2: Les apparitions de morts [Materialized apparitions of the living & the dead: 2: Apparitions of the dead]. Paris: Librairie Spirite.de Rochas, A. (1895a). L’Extériorisation de la Sensibilité: Étude expérimentale et historique [The exteriorization of sensibility: An experimental and historical study] (2nd ed.). Paris: Chamuel.de Rochas, A. (1895b). Les fantômes des vivants [Phantoms of the living]. Annales des Sciences Psychiques 5, 257–75.de Rochas, A. (1896). A change of personality. The Theosophist 17, 227–33, 287–96.de Rochas, A. (1897a). Les expériences de Choisy-Yvrec (près Bordeaux) du 2 au 14 Octobre 1896. Annales des Sciences Psychiques 7, 6–28.
>>42392684I could go on but i dont what to shit up this shit thread anymoreTL;DR; just look intoRobert Dale OwenAllan KardecWilliam Stainton MosesWilliam H HarrisonAdolphe d’AssierFrederic WH MyersAlbert de RochasHector DurvilleGabriel DelanneErnesto BozzanoSylvan J Muldoon and Hereward CarringtonHornell Hartanyways this all doesn't matter, just do it yourself lmao it not hardI can teach you how if you wantyou can listen to this if you need https://youtu.be/9vhbLdLRuqc?si=cO5pv0PMP0j19atdyou can do a more advanced guide https://archive.4plebs.org/x/thread/42233714/#42233714 (i wonder why it got removed on page 3, makes you think)Have faith --> learn more about it --> test it --> prove itIts as simple as this
>>42392552>>42392559Notice how OP and the hivemind like him / her have no response for these things, lol. Every NDE vision (the ones where one person is pronounced dead, no brain activity) is almost identical with the only differences being the location of the Afterlife, all of them can see their own body as well as a spiritual guide which is just another dead person helping you out. I'm sure everyone here has noticed an influx of suspicious posters trying to deny all of this in the past 2 months, we must be touching a sensitive topic.
>42392638The troll didn't like my reply. He's just another stupid trolling faggot materialist with absolutely no proof of his assertions of nihilism.
The brain is a filter. It localizes consciousness to whatever density it exists within.
>>42392638I dunno, my deep sleep is very peaceful.
>>42392547>he trusts the chemicals in his brain to tell him theyre chemicalsHypocrite that you are
>>42392547I embrace temporality and the transient nature of life completely. I have no need to cope.>>42385943
The truth is...You're already dead.HAATATATTATATATATATATA
>>42393108nani!
The mind is a product of the brain, there is zero evidence that it exists outside of it. Like none. You have your eyes gouged out, you will not experience sight; you have your nerves damaged in your hands, you will not experience feeling in your hands. You have someone shock you in your motor cortex and one of your limbs will jerk. You take a drug that acts on the 5-HT2A receptor in the brain, you will experience visual and spatial distortions. Fundamental alterations of experience are predictable and mechanistic and only happen when you've done something to mess with the brain or the connections to the brain. You can look at that evidence yourself by searching through scientific articles [research methods and data are all there for you to independently scrutinize] OR experience it yourself if you feel too skeptical of other people's conclusions. Go take a sertonergic substance like LSD and compare it with something like coffee which acts on different receptors -- they are altering your conscious experience differently because they are altering your brain differently. Better yet, why not try and volunteer for a scientific study where they hook you up to an EEG and read your brain signals in different states OR even better - try and get yourself into a sleep study where they keep you hooked up to an EEG machine while you sleep. You can see your own brain waves go into theta and delta patterns during your sleep states so you can see the direct correlation there.
atheist materialists are always retarded fucking leftard commies and now ludditesI guaranfuckingtee OP is a retarded leftard that hates AI and Israel
they hate Israel, they hate God and spirituality and now they hate AI because its going to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that leftard "skeptics” are fucking braindead retards and they will commit suicide "en masse”
>>42393752> The mind is a product of the brainThen parapsychology testing comes in and debunks your whole claim
>>42392547>This is where every outer body experience takes place.lolno>The gastrointestinal nervous system, or Enteric Nervous System (ENS), acts as a "second brain" that profoundly influences consciousness, emotion, and mental well-being via the gut-brain axis. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK11097/https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11433641/
>>42394210The point is it takes place in your physical body in the physical world. There is no out of body experience. There is no consciousness outside of this reality.
>>42392730Its to keep people from killing themselves because this world is dystopia for like %75 of its population. Also you likley have to "mature" here for a bit to be viable for what's next.
>>42396000The point is you are wrong, the brain is not the only place consciousness takes place, and awareness of how it works will continue to expand.You are exactly like those that proclaimed the DC 10 was the largest anyone could ever build an airplane.
>>42392547I can cut off 85% of the blood flow to my brain for several minutes and stay fully conscious without any real problems, whereas most people would faint, wet their pants, get brain damage, and die in that order. Not all of us as all mortal as you.
>>42394010Hush, yahweh worshipper. It's almost over.
>>42396677The point is you can't prove me wrong and while you are having an out of body experience you wouldn't be comfortable with your body being destroyed because you know that would be the end of you. When will I get my paranormal experience? Maybe when im older and my brain starts degrading.
>>42396945>The point is you can't prove me wrongI already did, and you had to backpedal and weasel.
>>42396978How did you prove me wrong? I don't care if it's in the brain or gut. Out of body experiences are not out of body. Go out of body and let someone put your body through a woodchipper. That out of body experience ends there. There are no other realities.
>>42392553what happens if i launch hot lead at my brainstem from a steel tube?
ok lol>>42397006
>>42397022"Your" current physical body dies and "you" reincarnate
>>42392547>you experience what it's like to not experienceThat is not an experience anyone can have. Your post is illogical on its face. OP stop replying, you lost the argument and you're a massive massive faggot.
>>42397006>How did you prove me wrong?By showing you were wrong when you said all consciousness is in the brain.You dont know recent understanding, and you wont know it when systemic rote confirmation catches up to the truth.
>>42397029>reincarnateproof?
>>42394010Shut up, you're no better.
>>42397315A collection from RU anonDoyle, A.C. (1926). The History of Spiritualism. New York: George H. Doran.Glenconner, P. (1921). The Earthen Vessel. London: John Lane.Harding, E. (1869). Modern American Spiritualism. New Hyde Park, New York, USA: University Books.Moses, W.S. (1924). Spirit Teachings. New York: Arno Press.Sidgwick, E. (1921). An examination of book-tests obtained in sittings with Mrs Leonard. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 31, 241-416.Thomas, C.D. (1922). Some New Evidence for Human Survival. London: Spiritualist Press (rev. 1948).Unattributed (1923). On the element of chance in book tests. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 33, 606-20.Eddington, A. (1935). The Nature of the Physical World. New York: MacMillan.The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss by David Bentley HartEdwards, J.C.W. (2005). Is consciousness only a property of individual cells? Journal of Consciousness Studies 12/4-5, 60-76.Edwards, J.C.W. (2006). How Many People are There in My Head, and in Hers? An Exploration of Single-Cell Consciousness. Exeter, UK: Imprint Academic.Henry, R.C. (2005). The mental universe. Nature 436, 29.Hölldobler, B., & Wilson, E.O. (2008). The Superorganism: The Beauty, Elegance and Strangeness of Insect Societies. New York: Norton.Jeans, J. (1937). The Mysterious Universe. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Jung, C.G. (1973). Synchronicity: An Acasual Connecting Principle. Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.Jung. C.G. (1981). The Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. (Collected works of C. G. Jung Volume 9, Part 1). Princeton, New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.Krauss, L.M. (2012). A Universe from Nothing. New York: Free Press.Mind and Cosmos by Thomas Nagel
>>42397370Lund, D.H. (2009). Persons, Souls and Death: A Philosophical Investigation of an Afterlife. Jefferson, North Carolina, USA: McFarland.McDougall, W. (1920). Presidential address. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 31, 150-223.McDougall, W. (1926). An Outline of Abnormal Psychology. London: Methuen.McGinn, C. (1999). The Mysterious Flame: Conscious Minds in a Material World. New York: Basic Books.Miranker, W. (2005). The Hebbian synapse: Progenitor of consciousness. Mind and Matter 3/2, 87-102.Myers, F.W.H. (1903). Human Personality and its Survival of Bodily Death. London: Longmans.Stapp, H.P. (2005). Commentary on Hodgson. Journal of Consciousness Studies 12/1, 70-75.Teilhard de Chardin, P. (2008). The Phenomenon of Man. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.Allison, L.W. (1934). Proxy sittings with Mrs. Leonard. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 42, 104-46.Allison, L.W. (1941). Further proxy sittings with Mrs. Leonard. Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research 35, 196-225.Almeder, R. (1992). Death and Personal Survival. Lanham, Maryland, USA: Rowman & Littlefield.
>>42397371Anderson, R.I. (1981). The therapist as exorcist: James H. Hyslop and the possession theory of osychotherapy. Journal of Religion and Psychical Research 4, 96-112.Bacci, M. (1991). Il Mistero delle Voci dall’ Aldillà (2nd ed.). Rome: Edizioni Mediterranee.Baker, R.A. (1982). The effect of suggestion on past-lives regression. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 25, 71-76.Balfour, G.W. (1935). A study of the psychological aspects of Mrs. Willett’s mediumship, and of the statements of the communicators concerning process. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research, 43/139, 41-318.Balfour, J. (1960). The ‘Palm Sunday’ case: New light on an old love story. Proceedings of the Society for Psychical Research 52, 79-267.Barrington, M.R. (2002). The case of Jenny Cockell: Towards a verification of an unusual ‘past life’ report. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 66, 106-12.Barrington, M.R., Mulacz, P., & Rivas, T. (2005). The case of Iris Farczády – A stolen life. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 69, 49-77.Barušs, I. (2001). Failure to replicate electronic voice phenomena. Journal of Scientific Exploration 15, 355-67.Bayless, R. (1976). Voices From Beyond. Secaucus, New Jersey, USA: University Books.Beischel, J., Boccuzzi, M., Biuso, M., & Rock, A.J.. (2015). Anomalous information reception by research mediums under blinded conditions II: Replication and extension. EXPLORE: The Journal of Science and Healing 11/2, 136-42.Beischel, J., & Rock, A.J. (2009). Addressing the survival versus psi debate through process-focused mediumship research. Journal of Parapsychology 73, 71-88.Bender, H. (1972). The phenomena of Friedrich Jurgenson. Journal of Paraphysics 6, 65-75.Bernstein, M. (1965). The Search for Bridey Murphy. New York: Lancer Books.Besterman, T. (1931). A notable booktest obtained at a stting with Mrs. Leonard. Journal of the Society for Psychical Research 27, 59-69.
>>42397377There, here is your "proof"
>>42392547>>42392638>>42393752Explain to us this then. If everything is just physical matter, which is made up of unthinking, unaware, inanimate atoms, then at what point exactly do those inanimate things somehow realize such a fact? To realize that they are inanimate proves that they cannot be inanimate, since by definition an inanimate thing shouldn't be able to realize anything.Therefore, since science absolutely proves that the body and brain are made of physical, unthinking atoms, then logically the thing that is aware of that fact must be non-physical, and therefore a part of further reality that we cannot perceive. With that being true, that there is reality that cannot be perceived by the physical body, then all bets are off on the nature of the soul, consciousness, and the afterlife, for science itself is proven to currently be too limited to even comprehend such things, let alone make any final statements in regard to them.
>>42397006>Out of body experiences are not out of body>>42392693>>42392690>>42392684>>42392682
>>42392547Why cope? Every big thing is made of smaller things. Even our unknown universe is part of somethibg unknowably big. Maybe there is consciousness in each and every single atom and quark that encompass us.So be kind to yourself and others just in case.
>>42397424Consciousness is biological process, a side effect of how the atoms (and therefore, neurons) interact.Damage the brain, and one's consciousness is altered. Brain damage can fundamentally alter one's personality, for instance. >>42392559Group Psychosis>>42397370>>42397371>>42397377>>42392693>>42392690>>42392684>>42392682Not reading your faggot gish-gallop. Make an actual point.
>>42398060>Damage the brain, and one's consciousness is altered. Brain damage can fundamentally alter one's personality, for instance.A damaged consciousness alters the material realm. Whether or not material reality is more fundamental than conscious remains an open question.
>Proof?>>42397315Provides proof>Not reading your faggot gish-gallop. Make an actual point.>>42398060A lot of demands coming from a dumbass faggot
>>42398060You literately asked for proof, nothing else; learn how to formulate questions before post here retard
>>42398081>>42398088Yeah, posting a wall of "studies" isn't proof, fagtard. I'm not going to go through each and every one to verify your claim. How about you give me your point, and source said point with one of your faggot "studies".
>>42392638What material controls gravity, oh wise one?
>>42398060>Consciousness is biological process, a side effect of how the atoms (and therefore, neurons) interactThis does not answer the question I asked so let me boil it down to a more direct form for you. Really try this time, I know you've got more than two braincells so please try to use them.How does an inanimate thing become aware that it is inanimate? Does this not create a paradox that is only solved by an outside awareness?Answer this and you'll have truly disproven all religion and belief in higher power. >Damage the brain, and one's consciousness is altered. Brain damage can fundamentally alter one's personality, for instance.If you damage an antenna, the signal loses clarity. If the consciousness exists beyond the physical, then the brain is most likely just its receptor, not source.
>>42398116>retard doesn't like having to do any amount of research or reading>wants answers spoonfed to him>thinks he knows better than those that have actually done their research >probably loves science>not even level one mageFuck off back to the red site with this bullshit
>>42392547The true question is can you cope that it's not true. Consciousness is objective, reality is subjective
>>42398152The inanimate things themselves are not realizing or becoming aware of anything. The atoms "themselves" are not capable of thought. Certain properties do not have to be present in the individual components compared to the system as a whole.When does an individual pixel become a movie? Would you ever consider an individual pixel to be displaying a movie on its own, individually? No, it only does so when they are arranged into a organization or system. It's similar to how cells form tissues, and tissues form organs, but neither an individual cell or tissue possess the final properties of what they comprise. >Answer this and you'll have truly disproven all religion and belief in higher power. I don't have to disprove any of that. Those are all extraordinary claims beholden to extraordinary evidence. > If the consciousness exists beyond the physical, then the brain is most likely just its receptor, not source.If, but there is no reason to believe that is the case. >>42398189>retard can't make a point of his own, just shits out a bunch of titlesNo different than a Flat Earther upchucking a bunch of links when someone asks for evidence. Genuinely subhuman. You probably didn't even read the majority of what you posted.
>>42398211>The atoms "themselves" are not capable of thoughtBut a collection of them somehow is?>Certain properties do not have to be present in the individual components compared to the system as a wholeNot true. Name me one system in which the components do not carry the necessary properties to create the final result. Then tell me where the components for self awareness are in the atoms that compose us.>The inanimate things themselves are not realizing or becoming aware of anything.Yes exactly you smoothbrain. We are made of inanimate things and no matter how many such things you put together in whatever order or configuration, inanimate things cannot become aware that they are inanimate. Otherwise explain EXACTLY how this occurs. Don't just hide behind the classic "oh well we just haven't discovered it yet, how convenient" nonsense either.>When does an individual pixel become a movie? Would you ever consider an individual pixel to be displaying a movie on its own, individually? No, it only does so when they are arranged into an organization or system.This is a false comparison. The two are not similar.
>>42398211>You probably didn't even read the majority of what you posted.Not the same anon first of all. Second, you clearly haven't done any actual research on this to begin with besides what science daily tells you is right, so my point stands. Pretty sure even the ancient greeks knew you had to study and understand the other viewpoint to argue against it. You'd probably know that if you actually read more. Retard
>>42398331>But a collection of them somehow is?Yes, there are plenty of cases where properties emerge from systems where they wouldn't from their individual parts. Temperature, for example. The market, as well. Tch, even life; individual molecules aren't considered "alive". >Not true. Name me one system in which the components do not carry the necessary properties to create the final result. Then tell me where the components for self awareness are in the atoms that compose us.A pancreatic cell isn't the pancreas. One neuron isn't a brain. You cannot have one cell of either that could fulfill the functions of the whole.>Yes exactly you smoothbrain. We are made of inanimate things and no matter how many such things you put together in whatever order or configuration, inanimate things cannot become aware that they are inanimate. Otherwise explain EXACTLY how this occurs. Don't just hide behind the classic "oh well we just haven't discovered it yet, how convenient" nonsense either.Humans aren't atoms. They aren't molecules. We are beings composed of matter that interacts with eachother and forms complex systems that begin processes that would not occur otherwise. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.>This is a false comparison. The two are not similar.How so? An individual pixel could never be capable of display a film, or much of anything, yet a combination of them working together in a system allows for this capability.>>42398366>he still can't provide an argument towards his positionI accept your concession.
>>42392547>you experience what it's like to not experienceWrong. There is no experience beyond death. That is why there is no data to collect beyond the truth of that process. True death is true end. Conceptualize it all you want but there is nothing to know, for it is true nothingness. Reincarnation LARPers are coping.
>>42398116You don't need to go through all of them op, just a few will start you down the rabbit hole. I'd recommend the works from Jung, as he's a well respected and noteworthy early psychologist.Anyway I do feel sorry for you having such a short attention span though, but regardless the proof you're looking for is literally right in front of you. It's your choice whether to engage with it or not.
>>42398475Cope works the other way too. Have to convince yourselves there's nothing after death because then you'd actually have to put effort into this life beyond hedonistic pursuit of pleasures. It's very easy to do whatever you want and be so carefree when you've decided your mortal actions will carry no consequences, and that there's nothing to prepare for next.
>>42398475https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uyo6m5gqW0
>>42398495if eternal reincarnation is true, then everything you do is meaningless.
>>42398477>yet another cannot provide an argumentI'm not op, and this is a discussion, not a book club. Perhaps you could make an argument and source Jung, since you like him so much? >>42398526Jew worshipers need not opine.
>>42398462Not either the person you was talking to are the guy giving the sources but i can give you a formulated and advanced point seeing how you are so fucking retarded and not just pick one source>>42398211>No different than a Flat EartherYea you seem like a faggot who debates the shape of the earth XDDDIan Stevenson, then chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Virginia, began in 1961 to investigate cases of young children from various parts of the world who reported memories of a past life, usually a recent one from the same general geographical location. One feature he noted in a number of cases was a birthmark, or birth defect, on the child that matched a wound the child described having suffered in the past life, typically during a violent death. Stevenson summarized his findings in a paper and eventually published a two-volume set of such cases, entitled Reincarnation and Biology: A Contribution to the Etiology of Birthmarks and Birth Defects, along with a synopsis of the larger work. He observed that the children’s birthmarks are often more than the common, small discolorations that many people have; they can be unusual in shape or size, and are often puckered or raised, rather than flat. Other researchers have since documented additional cases.[1/7]
>>42398549Researchers of past life memory cases usually start by interviewing the child and the child’s family. They learn about the statements the children have made about a past life. They also inquire about any possible connection between the child’s family and the deceased individual, whether that person has been identified, and whether the child has had any opportunity to learn about the previous life. In cases that include birthmarks or birth defects additional work is required: the child is examined and the marks or defects are photographed; the family is asked when they were first noticed, whether there are other family members with similar ones, and whether the mother and fetus were exposed to known causes of defects.[2/7]
>>42398462Either your ego is insisting that you keep avoiding the question and hope I don't notice, or you lack the abstract thinking ability needed to understand what I'm asking in the first place. Regardless, I'm done wasting my time trying to teach a brick wall how to think. Believe what you want to I suppose, it's no skin off my back.
>>42398555The researchers then interview the deceased individual’s family. They judge how well the child’s statements match the previous life and whether the family knows of any access the child might have had to the material. In the cases with birthmarks and birth defects, they attempt to determine with as much precision as they can what wounds the previous person suffered, in order to assess how well they correspond to the child’s marks or defects. The researchers obtain autopsy records when possible, though often these are unavailable or non-existent. Stevenson reported that he had obtained an autopsy report in 49 out of 210 cases. When no report is available, researchers interview firsthand eyewitnesses who saw the wounds on the body of the deceased.[3/7]
>>42398565An example is the case of Purnima, which was investigated by Erlendur Haraldsson. Purnima was born with a group of slgihtly light-colored birthmarks over the left side of her chest and lower ribs. When she was around four years old, she saw a television program about the Kelaniya temple some 145 miles away and said she recognized it. When she later visited the temple with her parents and a school group, she said she had lived on the other side of the river that flowed beside it, Eventually made twenty statements about a past life, claiming to have been a male incense maker who was selling nice incense sticks on his bicycle when he was hit by a large vehicle and killed. She named two incense brands she said she sold, ones her parents did not know. An associate of her father who spent weekends in Kelaniya investigated and found that there were three small family incense businesses across the river by the temple. One of them sold the brands Purnima had named. A member of the family had been hit by a bus and killed as he took his incense sticks to the market, two years before Purnima was born.[4/7]
>>42398536And I quote>the proof you're looking for is literally right in front of you. It's your choice whether to engage with it or notI'm not your teacher, and I'm not going to hold your hand and guide you. If you really want to know then put some effort in and do the reading yourself. Otherwise you're clearly just looking to argue and inflate your ego.
>>42398580When Haraldsson investigated the case, he determined that fourteen of Purnima’s statements were correct for the incense maker, three were incorrect, and three were unclear. He obtained the incense maker’s autopsy report, which documented fractured ribs on the left, a ruptured spleen, and abrasions running diagonally from his right shoulder across his chest to his left lower abdomen. These corresponded to the birthmarks Purnima had over her chest and ribs.Stevenson listed eighteen cases in which a child was born with two birthmarks, ones matching both the entrance wound and the exit wound on the body of the identified deceased individual, a gunshot victim. An example is the case of Chanai Choomalaiwong in Thailand. He was born with a small, round birthmark on the back of his head and a larger, more irregularly shaped one above his left eye. When he was three years old, he began saying that he had been a schoolteacher named Bua Kai, and that he had been shot one day while bicycling to school. He gave the names of previous family members and the place where he said his previous parents had lived.[5,6/7]
>>42398495Certainly, and some use the possibility of the absolution of what they do now - nothing off-limits - as a possible excuse. Free will aside, they just know that the creative element will let them go their affliction or whatever. Excuse. That is a way beyonding can implement, leaving an individual free to subjectify as they please with no personal risk. Again. Death equalizes all.
>>42398535Are you new to this whole occult thing? Have you never heard of karma, or manifestation, or astral creation? Reincarnation is not necessarily random, nor is it likely the only option. Spend a bit more time here before saying something stupid, at least then it'll be earnest.
>>42398593Chanai’s grandmother took him to that place when he was still three years old. She reported that he then led the way to the home of an older couple. They had indeed had a son named Bua Kai, and he had been a teacher before being murdered on his way to school five years before Chanai was born. No autopsy was available when Stevenson studied the case, but he talked with several of Bua Kai’s family members, who described two wounds on his head. Bua Kai’s widow remembered that the doctor who examined his body said he must have been shot from behind, because he had a small entrance wound on the back of his head and a larger exit wound on his forehead. Chanai’s birthmarks matched the descriptions of Bua Kai’s wounds, except that by the time Stevenson photographed them when Chanai was eleven years old, the larger one was toward the top of his head on the left rather than on his forehead. His family said it was lower when he was born and had then migrated up as he grew.[7/7]
>>42398116>Yeah, posting a wall of "studies" isn't proof, fagtard.Yes it is nigger, it may not be the type of "proof" you want but its still proof.
>>42398602>karmaThat also-equalizing force manifests during a being's life. Not beyond it, as many seem to believe. For the individual that is. Those that living-or-dead being affects the others they interact with, and that is their reach beyond death. But for the already dead there is nothing to measure. Their associants carry forth the impact that gone individual had on them. Positively as well as negatively.
>>42398616You're wasting your time dude. Op doesn't actually want proof he just wants to argue and circlejerk
>>42398616Those are all objective. Subjective measure of the process to death is what is true, and none of us will ever know what it actually entails until we each die ourselves. Read all the elsedata you like.What if this entire sector of the multiverse was quantummortal? That'd be heavy...
>>42398637>That also-equalizing force manifests during a being's life. Not beyond it,You have never studied Buddhism, clearly. Samsara and reincarnation is entirely dependent on a person's karma. Also you having ignored the other two in addition to not understanding this means I've pegged you right. Like I said spend more time here first, cause you're just flexing your stupidity right now
>>42398060>Group PsychosisNot real btw
>>42392547>which exists in this material reality, the only reality.Hylic cope
>>42398665And you have never studied true death. Neither have I.We will.
>>42398708Wow I don't think I've ever interacted with someone so proud of their own ignorance>And you have never studied true deathQuite the assumption you're making there
>>42392547desu, the brain can only be discovered by external information, so I am not entirely sure if you can count on it, using this sophistic train of thought.I understand if you have normal thoughts , but you are allready making a brain dimention, why do I have to respect the brain dimention.
>>42398557No, you're just a retard. You aren't even on the level of arguing the hard problem of consciousness and asking me to define qualia. You genuinely believe that a gear has all the properties of the machine itself. You think that a cell is the organ, and is capable of doing everything a organ can do. It is laughably pathetic.>>42398621No, you posted a line of text with no argument. And quite funny, how now the basedence just so happens to check out. >>42398588All of you are asserting these wild claims of a disembodied consciousness and a higher metaphysical reality. So, demonstrate it, or at least provide arguments. None of you can do so. Just as I will not read countless articles on the truth of the firmament or the ice wall, so too I will ignore your gish gallop of things none of you have read. >>42398549>>42398555>>42398565>>42398580>>42398593>>42398616Thank fuck, one of you cretins decided to post some form of argument, even if was just a copy and paste. Unfortunately, since we already established that we don't need arguments in this thread and just need to "educate ourselves", go ahead and read Reincarnation: A Critical Examination by Paul Edwards. He explains why the research done by Stevenson is unreliable.
>>42399051And I quote>Otherwise you're clearly just looking to argue and inflate your ego.
>>42399051>It is laughably pathetic>This fucking thread>Op too
>>42399051And a further quote just for good measure>you lack the abstract thinking ability needed to understand what I'm asking in the first placeThe question made sense to me op. Have you perhaps considered that you may not actually be as smart as you think you are?
>>42399051>MEHHH GIVE ME AN ACTRAL PROOF! SOURCES ARE NOT PROOFgives an argument >Oh… well the standard I’m using against you is only applicable to you not to me through, so I’m just going to give you a source because it’s most convenient to meHoly fucking shit you disingenuous nigger. Wouldn’t expect less from a retard who debates about the shape of the earth.If you actually read Paul E (because I know you haven’t you larping faggot) you would understand that lots of his criticisms are actually really faulty.An example of this could be his “the problem of Western children” which got debunked by the presence of reincarnation cases being reported and studied from Europe and the Americas.Additional Pual suggested that Ian was using suggestive questions when talking to the children, the proof for this is demonstrably thin.Furthermore Paul Edwards retardedly puts forth that “Tertullian’s Objection” which also debunked by Robert Almeder as when he points out that it is not really an objection, unless it is an objection to a particular idea of what reincarnation entails and that There is no logical reason that reincarnated persons in new bodies should not have to start anew in those bodies, unless one assumes that reincarnation means the carrying over of one’s entire psychology into one’s new life. Even then, case studies provide numerous examples of children behaving as if they were the adults they recalled having been. Stevenson referred to this as exhibiting an ‘adult attitude’.
>>42399403Pual set up a straw-man version of reincarnation, to which he addressed his questions. As if I remember correctly Almeder observed that, Edwards attacks a conception of reincarnation that does not match any particular belief system, but appears to be constructed solely for the purpose of ridicule. Edwards assumes that karma is an intrinsic part of reincarnation and that some sort of subtle body is required to convey the ‘soul’ from one life to another. He finds logical problems with both and thinks that he has thereby disposed of the possibility of reincarnation. However, neither karma nor subtle bodies are required by reincarnation, as evidenced by the many belief systems that make do with neither. A minimalist concept of reincarnation that does not involve these ideas, moreover, receives good support from the case data.Fuck off you shitface retard, you are so disingenuous it fucking hurts, no more attention for you
>>42392547It does play a part but doesn't explain why the hallucinations during deliriant drug trips are always stuff straight out of hell. Fear of bugs and spiders is common amongst humans but the demons they see line up with the demons in the hell realm
>>42399337I accept your concession. If you genuinely believe that the existence of a study automatically constitutes proof, then I'm here to inform you that cigarettes are healthy (along with sneed oils) and that you should get the Vax + boosters.>>42399337>grandstanding; fails to engage with the substance of the postI accept your concession. The gear, by itself, possesses the capability of producing power from steam. It's not your fault that you are retarded, but I will hate you for it nonetheless.>>42399403>>42399409I am currently bringing myself to the level of you lot.Cute how you don't address the fact that the overwhelming majority of the cases researched by Stevenson fall apart with basic scrutiny; practically all of them coincidentally already had contact with the relatives of the deceased, and let's not get started with the methodology of the cases. All in all, you gorilla niggers are utterly subhuman and incapable of grasping basic concepts. It genuinely is impressive how you lot are even able to function in society. Regardless, all of you would be less of a burden if you contracted a wasting disease of some kind, instead.Enjoy your boosters, because the le hecking study exists, and therefore is le hecking valid and true.
>>42399939Midwit. At best.
>>42392552One of the only things that makes me doubt that we are "more than our brains" is that our personalities can shift hard due to traumatic brain injuries. I want to "believe" and I do in some ways, but certain things lead me to believe that damaging the brain leads to more materialistic results. It could be argued these are just mere shifts though and there is a kernel of who a person really is even in further traumatized actions stemming from brain injury.NDEs are very strange also obviously. Also I have been praying more and my panic has been lessening. I am far too old and tortured for "confirmation bias" to be taking place.
>>42401371The popular counterargument to this that I've seen usually goes something along the lines of>"Well what if the brain is more like a receiver for consciousnesses and if the equipment/'antenna' is damaged, the signal is a mess?"Seeing as to how little we still know about consciousness in general I am kinda inclined to take some copies and believe that
>>42401543>CopiesCopium*Something something phoneposter
>>42401371>our personalities can shift hard due to traumatic brain injuriesthe same could be said about drugs or alcohol or other shitit doesn't mean we aren't more than our brains, it just means we (the true "I" in each one of us) remain the influence of the flesh we've been spiritually shackled to
>>42401563*under the influence
>>42401545Consciousness is literally non-local. Dr. Dean Radin, Donald Hoffman, Dr. Eben Alexander, the list is huge. (((You))) just dont like that materialism doesn't hold water when it comes to Consciousness. You are a retard who didn't solve the age-old "hard problem of consciousness" on a Mongolian basket weaving forum. Christcucks control the science anyway, and the kikes control acedemia.
What about the stomach brain?
>>42399939>I am currently bringing myself to the level of you lot.>t. A shitskin who debates about the shape of the earthI am pulling you up to my level>Cute how you don't address the fact that the overwhelming majority of the cases researched by Stevenson fall apart with basic scrutinyAppeal to authority, such a disingenuous nigger you seriously would do anything; Also such this are to be expected with such a radical claim, especially seeing how a majority of Psychologists are also physicalists/materialists, such developments frighten their world view.>ractically all of them coincidentally already had contact with the relatives of the deceased,Swarnlata Mishra was proven that there was not connections or contactImad Elawar was proven that there was not connections or contactGnanatilleka Baddewithana was proven that there was not connections or contactRuprecht Schulz was proven that there was not connections or contactSukla Gupta was proven that there was not connections or contactMartha Lorenz was proven that there was not connections or contactJasbir Jat was proven that there was not connections or contact>and let's not get started with the methodology of the cases.Sure there was some faults that I'm not dying that but thats expected in all social research studies, furthermore I already told you how the criticisms of the mythology was retarded and their criticisms were unironically assumptions with no validated evidence.>All in all, you gorilla niggers are utterly subhuman and incapable of grasping basic concepts. It genuinely is impressive how you lot are even able to function in society. Regardless, all of you would be less of a burden if you contracted a wasting disease of some kind, instead.Complete ad hominem, nothing of substance was said.
>>42401579Lets recap this shitskin.>someone said that we Reincarnate>You ask for proof>He provide sources>You start aping the fuck out>Start crying for us to spoon feed you>I spoon feed you>As soon as I do the standard you as crying at us to use seemingly disappeared when you are under pressure and just do the same thing (Expected from a disingenuous shitskin)>I call you out on your fucking larp and show you how Paul Edwards is also a disingenuous faggot>You cry, give an Appeal to authority and cry some moreUnironically he was right>>42398639 There is no point in climbing down to your shit spewed level, Have a good day faggot
>>42401579>>42401590What about the fuckin gut brain connection?
>>42401371>I am far too old and torturedGet the fuck over yourself, you're probably like in your 30s and have had to be sad sometimes so that means you're so hard done by right? Genuinely fuck off with this self pity bullshit. Everyone's had a tough go at some point, but the fact that you're so clearly up your own ass throughout the thread means you've never actually faced the abyss. Come back after the long night and then you can speak with weight.
>>42401604Already brought up and OP had to sperg out and backpedal once shown he was wrong.
