One of the best books I've read this year

[ThePresence]

http://www.amazon.com/Consciousness-.../dp/0061777250

Not what one might expect from the title. He's not a religious wacko, he's a world renowned cardiologist, who made this study on his own with his own patients. I felt like this reviewer: Skeptic at first on the subject, I grudgingly gave this one a read and wasn't disappointed. Dr. van Lommel gives a damn good read with accounts both pro and con on the subject. I recommend.

 

[hans030390]

I might have to check this out...NDE's are very fascinating to me, especially when tied together with spirituality (not religion) and/ or psychedelics.

 

[ThePresence]

I think NDE's are fascinating to everyone.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Your having read the book, could you read this review, and the responses,and provide your opinion concerning it? http://www.amazon.com/review/R3S17AFGECT9MN/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg1?ie=UTF8&cdForum=FxN9H1DQSGGY7A&cdPage=1&asin=0061777250&store=books&cdThread=Tx9G0TQSF66U0C#wasThisHelpful


Because reading the responses to it, is serving to convince me I should dismiss the book as nothing more important than fodder for a new X-Files series. "I want to believe!"

 

[ThePresence]

Your having read the book, could you read this review, and the responses,and provide your opinion concerning it? http://www.amazon.com/review/R3S17AFGECT9MN/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg1?ie=UTF8&cdForum=FxN9H1DQSGGY7A&cdPage=1&asin=0061777250&store=books&cdThread=Tx9G0TQSF66U0C#wasThisHelpful


Because reading the responses to it, is serving to convince me I should dismiss the book as nothing more important than fodder for a new X-Files series. "I want to believe!"

I could not disagree more with this review. It's almost as if the reviewer feels compelled to dislike the book and is really searching for why.

Just one example: There's also a good chapter on NDE's throughout history, though when speaking of myth and afterlife rumors the author does tend to assume many elements were inspired by NDEs rather than other religious elements such as lies, financial gain, wish fulfillment and telephone-game style scriptural progression.

That entire statement is untrue. He thoroughly explains why he assumes what he does. A book such as this requires reading it in order, not skimming here and there and grabbing choice excerpts.

 

[hans030390]

Your having read the book, could you read this review, and the responses,and provide your opinion concerning it? http://www.amazon.com/review/R3S17AFGECT9MN/ref=cm_cd_pg_pg1?ie=UTF8&cdForum=FxN9H1DQSGGY7A&cdPage=1&asin=0061777250&store=books&cdThread=Tx9G0TQSF66U0C#wasThisHelpful


Because reading the responses to it, is serving to convince me I should dismiss the book as nothing more important than fodder for a new X-Files series. "I want to believe!"

You could probably sell perfection (abstract concept, I know) on Amazon, and it would still manage to get a few imperfect reviews. When it comes to books like this, it doesn't matter how good or scientific they may be...if you are writing about a "touchy" subject, someone is going to post a lengthy review about how bad the book is.

 

[slayer202]

give us a brief summary of what the book is about. as in, thesis and the main argument to support it. I can't imagine this book has much substance

 

[ThePresence]

give us a brief summary of what the book is about. as in, thesis and the main argument to support it. I can't imagine this book has much substance

I don't really have the time, but in (very) brief, it's the argument that consciousness cannot be directly related to brain function. It exists outside of it, as we can plainly see during a NDE when brain activity is flatlined. You should not waste your money to buy and read the book, because you already formed an opinion without even cracking the binding.

 

[slayer202]

I was asking a serious question. But you just convinced me that it's a bunch of bull if the argument is that consciousness lies outside of the brain. A stupid religious book. What a surprise

 

[ThePresence]

I was asking a serious question. But you just convinced me that it's a bunch of bull if the argument is that consciousness lies outside of the brain. A stupid religious book. What a surprise

You were not asking a serious question. You had already passed judgement on it and you did not even know it's subject matter. That is not a serious question. You were looking for something to jump on to declare it a religious book, and now you got it. Well done. Congrats.

You still don't really know anything about it. I gave you one line and you already decided it's a stupid, religious book. It's not, but it's not for you. Or anyone else silly enough to know all about a book without ever laying eyes on it.

 

[GagHalfrunt]

A bunch of crap. NDE's are purely physiological changes in the brain. Books like this are just the equivalent of ghosthunters and psychics contacting the spirits of the dead, of interest only to weak-minded wannabelievers.

 

[ThePresence]

A bunch of crap. NDE's are purely physiological changes in the brain. Books like this are just the equivalent of ghosthunters and psychics contacting the spirits of the dead, of interest only to weak-minded wannabelievers.

Perhaps read it, and then comment. It's not like he didn't consider your viewpoint.
How can physiological changes in the brain have any effect whatsoever when there is no brain activity?

 

[slayer202]

Stop being a douche. I asked about the main idea of the book to determine whether or not it had any legitimate argument. It does not, sorry. Stop trying to justify this garbage by saying "well you didn't read it." I'm sure you went into the book as a skeptic....what a joke

How exactly does the book explain how they can tell the "NDE" takes place when there is no brain activity?

 

[Albatross]

http://www.amazon.com/Memories-Dream...7845037&sr=1-1

For those who are interested, the autobiography of Jung,touches a bit on NDE and much more.Highly recommended for everybody with an active mind.

 

[ThePresence]

Stop being a douche. I asked about the main idea of the book to determine whether or not it had any legitimate argument. It does not, sorry. Stop trying to justify this garbage by saying "well you didn't read it." I'm sure you went into the book as a skeptic....what a joke

How exactly does the book explain how they can tell the "NDE" takes place when there is no brain activity?

Read it. I'm not about to try explaining a 500-page book in neat little sentences on a message board. You did not ask to determine legitimacy, that's dishonest. You asked to try to find how you can prove illegitimacy. You just said the book does not make any legitimate argument. You cannot possibly know that, no matter your preconceived notions.

 

[ThePresence]

For your viewing pleasure: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOeLJCdHojU

 

[pauldun170]

While I'm sure the book is interesting I would rather have peer reviewed papers (for which there are plenty) shape my opinion on the subject.

Unfortunately they are usually not very entertaining reads.

 

[ThePresence]

While I'm sure the book is interesting I would rather have peer reviewed papers (for which there are plenty) shape my opinion on the subject.

Unfortunately they are usually not very entertaining reads.

Here you go: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(01)07100-8/fulltext

Same author.

 

[slayer202]

Read it. I'm not about to try explaining a 500-page book in neat little sentences on a message board. You did not ask to determine legitimacy, that's dishonest. You asked to try to find how you can prove illegitimacy. You just said the book does not make any legitimate argument. You cannot possibly know that, no matter your preconceived notions.

you're an idiot. I asked for the main argument of the book. The argument you told me has no basis. I don't need to read the book to know that. I'll humor you and watch the video so I can confirm what I already know

 

[ThePresence]

you're an idiot. I asked for the main argument of the book. The argument you told me has no basis. I don't need to read the book to know that. I'll humor you and watch the video so I can confirm what I already know

Again, with the all-knowing attitude. You are again being dishonest. You dismissed it out of hand before knowing the argument if the book. Make an argument instead of "I already know before even reading it". Please don't watch the video, you certainly won't be humoring me.

 

[slayer202]

sorry, but for people to believe something, there must be evidence. this guy certainly doesn't provide any, so you have none to pass on. I hope you didn't pay for that book because you got taken. by the way, your first post in this thread oozes bullshit.

I really hope you don't buy into this garbage

 

[goobernoodles]

Was there a TV (discovery channel or netflix perhaps?) documentary based on this book? If not, it was the same topic... saw it a month or two ago, and it was extremely interesting.

 

[hans030390]

deleted