Orbit Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 This comes up from time to time on the board. The article is here: http://www.salon.com/2012/04/21/near_death_explained/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogueScholar Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 It's a bit misleading as we do not have really good explanations and really do not have a complete understanding of neurological physiology. Unfortunately, with such large gaps in knowledge and reproducibility, people can draw lines and place their beliefs in little boxes that are personally appealing but still based on an incomplete understanding. I wish more people were bold enough to talk about what we don't understand. Instead, this article is another us versus them situation where the word "materialist" is thrown around. Unfortunately, we are not close to having a complete "material" understanding of how the normal brain works. I'd rather admit ignorance and think about ways of trying to fill in the gaps. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted August 16, 2014 Author Share Posted August 16, 2014 I thought the article, though clearly espousing that they believe NDEs exist, was good in that it didn't give a religious explanation for them. There is no talk of God in the article. They do at least give the materialist explanations for NDEs. It doesn't bother me that they label it "materialist". Taken as a whole, it was interesting that being atheist or of a particular religion did NOT change the content of NDEs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogueScholar Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 No disagreement, but I'm not keen on conclusions that draw battle lines and introductions that are misleading. I do appreciate the fact that NMDA receptors were mentioned but this is grossly incomplete. We know that ethanol (drinking alcohol) also works to "block" the function of NMDA receptor subtypes but the experiences of ethanol intoxication and ketamine use are typically very different. We also see highly "spiritual" experiences with substances known to interact with serotonin receptors. Specifically, the 5HT-2A subtype. Unfortunately, contemporary binding assay research shows many of these substances are shall we say, promiscuous in terms of the receptors that they can interact with. The nature (agonist, antagonist, partial antagonist, allosteric binding versus active sites and so on) of these interactions has yet to be determined. There are so many questions that are not being asked. We are arising at conclusions without even acknowledging the questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orbit Posted August 16, 2014 Author Share Posted August 16, 2014 If I put on my religious hat and read the article, it does suggest the notion of a spirit as separate from the body, but doesn't actually say it. If there WERE a non-corporeal amalgam of whatever, that meant consciousness continued, to me that has absolutely nothing to do with the god of the Bible. It would be something science can't explain yet, but I'm sure it will eventually be explained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogueScholar Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 I would love to see the studies quoted and look at the methods that were used and how these conclusions came about. Also, neuroscience is multidisciplinary. However, what do you mean by integrating "quantum physics" into the discussion? Quantum mechanics is how we currently understand the nature of the chemical bond and appreciating its application actually comes up quite early in any undergraduate science curriculum as you will be required to take at least a sequence of general chemistry and nearly everybody going into biological sciences will also have to complete a sequence of organic and possibly biochemistry. I would also point out that the 2012 Nobel Prize in chemistry was awarded to two people who developed methods of combining quantum mechanics and classical molecular models to understand the function of g-protein coupled receptors. This is a massive superfamily of receptors and understanding them is critical for our current view of how multiple neurotransmitter systems work in the brain. Rest assured, quantum mechanics has had a major impact on contemporary neuroscience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted August 18, 2014 Share Posted August 18, 2014 The quantum universe is a strange place, and we are just beginning to explore it. The challenge, I think, is to keep an open mind to it without regressing into superstition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted August 18, 2014 Moderator Share Posted August 18, 2014 Another interesting story worth watching is the story of Jill Bolte Taylor, a brain scientist. She got a research opportunity few brain scientists would wish for: She had a massive stroke, and watched as her brain functions — motion, speech, self-awareness — shut down one by one. An astonishing story. Fascinating. Featured on 'Ted Talks'. It helped give me a bit of peace about how my sister died of a brain aneurysm....http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts